Under Obama, the Middle Class is poorer than in 1984. Since 2008, the Middle Class has lost $32,000 in net worth per working family.

22 share

good interest rating

Understand that the “95 percentile” is the top 5% of this nation.  With the recession of 2008 and before,  every class of “wage earner/investor” in America lost money.  Only the top 25% of this nation's wealthy  stayed above the charted baseline of “zero,” but,  continued to lose money through most of 2013.  The bottom 74% of the nation,  the Middle Class and working poor,  have not recovered back to the baseline.  And we were told,  just this past week,  that we are living through a remarkable recovery period,  or so goes the blow from Obama and his minions  (and his minions,  only,   btw).  

The average household in the United States lost about one third of its net worth between 2003 and 2013, a period that traverses the economic swells of the recession. Those findings were collected in a recent study, conducted by Russell Sage Foundation, which also found that the net worth of very wealthy families gained while the net worth of very poor families fell much deeper into debt.

The study surveyed families at every level of income and found:

• Very poor families, at the 5^th percentile of net worth, almost tripled their debt. Their net worth dropped from $9,700 in debt in 2003 to $27,400 in debt in 2013.
• Average families, at the 50^th percentile of net worth, were worth $88,000 in 2003 but $56,300 in 2013, about one third less.
• Wealthy families, at the 95^th percentile of net worth, gained over the same period. Families worth $1.2 million in 2003 were worth almost $1.4 million in 2013.  (read more on these numbers at Nola.com, here).  

National debt totals with and without the Iraqi - It is not what the Left has been telling you.

Editor's notes: there is no greater lie told by the Lefties than the one that blames our national economic woes on the Iraqi war. Absolute nonsense !!

Here is why:

(From The American Thinker):

The sum of all the deficits from 2003 through 2010 is $4.73 trillion. Subtract the entire Iraq War cost and you still have a sum of $4.02 trillion.

No one will say that $709 billion is not a lot of money. But first, that was spread over eight years. Secondly, let's put that in some perspective. Below are some figures for those eight years, 2003 through 2010.

• Total federal outlays: $22,296 billion.
• Cumulative deficit: $4,731 billion.
• Medicare spending: $2,932 billion.
• Iraq War spending: $709 billion.
• The Obama stimulus: $572 billion.

There is an important note to go along with that Obama stimulus number: the stimulus did not even start until 2009. By 2019, the CBO estimates the stimulus will have cost $814 billion.

If we look only at the Iraq War years in which Bush was President (2003-2008), spending on the war was $554B. Federal spending on education over that same time period was $574B.

So the following are facts, based on the government's own figures.

• Obama's stimulus, passed in his first month in office, will cost more than the entire Iraq War -- more than $100 billion (15%) more.
• Just the first two years of Obama's stimulus cost more than the entire cost of the Iraq War under President Bush, or six years of that war.
• Iraq War spending accounted for just 3.2% of all federal spending while it lasted.
• Iraq War spending was not even one quarter of what we spent on Medicare in the same time frame.
• Iraq War spending was not even 15% of the total deficit spending in that time frame. The cumulative deficit, 2003-2010, would have been four-point-something trillion dollars with or without the Iraq War.
• The Iraq War accounts for less than 8% of the federal debt held by the public at the end of 2010 ($9.031 trillion).
• During Bush's Iraq years, 2003-2008, the federal government spent more on education that it did on the Iraq War. (State and local governments spent about ten times more.)
  

I've written elsewhere that the Iraq War was totally justified and even executed reasonably well. But even if you believe otherwise, there is no reasonable case that can be made to say it caused grave economic woes then or now . . . . READ MORE >>>>