The NY Times Upshot, meant to be their data-crunching replacement for the lost and lamented Nate Silver, delivers a howler of economic innumeracy. The theme is Bill Clinton's attempt to redeem his legacy; his message is that he prioritized prosperity above income inequality; and the laugher is this:
Voters generally have a rosy view of the 1990s: Median family income increased to $48,950 in 1999 from $36,959 in 1993.
Really? Despite all this talk about stagnant middle class incomes we have a Times writer (and editors, maybe) who think that family incomes rose by 32% during the Clinton boom? Without looking I can promise that we are not being presented with inflation adjusted numbers.
With a minor bit of looking I can find that yes, inflation adjusted median household income has in fact been nearly flatlining for decades (unless sensibly adjusted for things like employer-sponsored health insurance).
A bit more poking indicates that Ms. Chozick is presenting the numbers that reconcile to the Census Bureau No. HS-25 as of 2003 with median family income in current, rather than constant, dollars. Adjusting for inflation, median family income grew (in 2001 dollars) from $44,586 to $51,996, or 17%. The current report (H-6) for median family income presents different historical figures for 1993 and 1999 in current dollars
Left unanswered - why did she drop the year 2000, when Wild Bill was still President and unadjusted median income in current dollars was even higher at $50,732? Send better acolytes.
Hillary 2016 makes me think we can't get to 2017 fast enough. Three more years of this BS?
I thought that was Monica's job.
Posted by: henry | May 01, 2014 at 12:56 PM
OK, Carlos Slim is a Clintonista and declares the NYT as her PR office.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | May 01, 2014 at 12:56 PM
In re: The Clintons.
If you have not read this analysis by Mickey Kaus, you must. Do it now! No waiting!
http://dailycaller.com/blog/kausfiles/
Posted by: MarkO | May 01, 2014 at 12:58 PM
Henry-- you naughty boy.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | May 01, 2014 at 01:09 PM
MarkO-
Read the article and Mickey makes undeniable points but I don't believe the Bush family has near the money as the Clintons do. And as Mickey points out no one really knows how the Bushies, et al support themselves.
PS The above was too long for a tweet ;-) It came close though.
Posted by: glasater | May 01, 2014 at 01:14 PM
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=turd%20burnishing
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 01, 2014 at 01:23 PM
OK... looks like Politico is an Obamaniac mouthpiece, this is a real Hillary slam: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/hillary-clinton-media-105901.html#ixzz30SmyWmRo
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | May 01, 2014 at 01:32 PM
NK, any discussion on Clinton's legacy must include his White House actions.
Posted by: henry | May 01, 2014 at 01:34 PM
David Horowitz once a 60s radical himself has this exactly right:
In fact the adherents of the perspectives commonly described as “liberal” and “progressive” – and this includes the entire Democratic Party leadership and its activists – are radicals. They are radicals in a direct line with the misnamed “New Left” of the Sixties and the Communist left before that. The proper term to describe the outlook and agendas of today’s Democratic Party activists is “neo-communist,”
Posted by: GMax | May 01, 2014 at 01:37 PM
they should label this as satire;
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2014/05/01/how-the-tea-party-can-save-itself-and-become-a-force-for-good/
then again he had some ridiculous defense of the 'inequality' gambit,
Posted by: narciso | May 01, 2014 at 01:38 PM
Does anybody remember when Slick was Prez and the economy went in the crapper for about a week of free fall (the first bit of prescient sanity from looking at the dot coms balance sheets iirc). I remember he was in Europe and had a look on his face similar to when Rodham would throw lamps at him after some tart had "victimized" him.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 01, 2014 at 01:39 PM
According to Gallup prog paradise may not be all its cracked up to be:
Roughly half of Illinois and Connecticut residents say that if given the chance, they would like to move to another state.
Posted by: GMax | May 01, 2014 at 01:49 PM
Would any benefit have derived from Speaker Maladroit proposing a Select Committee prior to the outbreak of internecine bloodletting in Progistan? TC and NK have convinced me that progs have formed a circular firing squad and it is my fervent hope that only complete exsanguination will resolve the issue. I just don't see how the appointment of a Select Committee prior to the commencement of prog hostilities would have resulted in anything more than another series of "its just a flesh wound" MFM BS stories like those about the IRS predators.
The growing stench from the carcass of the ACA albatross is going to provide a delightful ambiance to the hearings as well.
Posted by: Rick B | May 01, 2014 at 01:53 PM
Would any benefit have derived from Speaker Maladroit proposing a Select Committee prior to the outbreak of internecine bloodletting in Progistan? TC and NK have convinced me that progs have formed a circular firing squad and it is my fervent hope that only complete exsanguination will resolve the issue. I just don't see how the appointment of a Select Committee prior to the commencement of prog hostilities would have resulted in anything more than another series of "its just a flesh wound" MFM BS stories like those about the IRS predators.
The growing stench from the carcass of the ACA albatross is going to provide a delightful ambiance to the hearings as well.
Posted by: Rick B | May 01, 2014 at 01:53 PM
Gmax-- Blue Hells? Quinn and Drunken Danny Malloy will continue the beatings until morale improves.
PS: the pension tsunami is hitting Ct as we speak. Within 10 years Ct will be Detroit with Trees. Here's a CPA's take: http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20130902/PRINTEDITION/308309968
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | May 01, 2014 at 02:03 PM
From the Times' article on the last thread:
Oh, Judicial Watch is conservative? Well, that's a handy bit of information.
From the Times' article on this thread:
On the outside looking in, right?
Right?
Ah, so the kind of "outside" that for a conservative group is usually followed by words such as, in addition to "conservative" of course, "right-wing" or "extreme" or "shadowy" or "special interest" or "beeeeeeeellionaires". That kind of outside.
I guessed Burns Strider was a fictional character in a early 20th century story about trying to break the four minute mile.
Missed it by that much.
I mean, he's not exactly Karl Rove "insider" material, but surely we can pretend that any group being led by someone in a similar role from the Romney campaign just might be identified with a little more flair than "outside".
I mean maybe it's a longshot, I don't know.
Search results at the NY Times for the term "outside conservative": 284
And . . . search results at the NY Times for the term "outside liberal": 12
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 01, 2014 at 02:11 PM
Nobody cut Dubya any slack for the atrocious economy in free fall he inherited from Billy Jeff. The dot com runup and boom in the late 90's made Billy Jeff look good. But the stock market (and a lot of lump sum pension payouts made in the spring and early summer of 2000) went straight into the crapper starting in about July 2000--still on Billy Jeff's watch.
Same old same old--economy went into the dumper when the "liar loan" fueled housing boom collapsed in July 2008. Except that we've heard for 5 plus years now that the Lightworker has been crippled by the evil Boosh economy. Different strokes for Republican folks as far as the press is concerned.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | May 01, 2014 at 02:31 PM
hit - IMHO, Burns Strider sounds more like a comfort provider than an adviser. Think Grace Jones and not Huma.
Amen, Comanche Voter. Under Dubya, all the new jobs were lousy burger-flipping jobs and didn't count. Now one person working two jobs to make ends meet counts as two jobs created by the Lightworker.
Posted by: Frau Indianerherz | May 01, 2014 at 02:44 PM
Wow, an actual DA investigation of paid voting in Milwaukee. Was the former alderman and interim mayor auditioning to replace Carney?
"The lunches were donated," he said. When asked who paid for them, Pratt said, "If it was donated, no one paid for them, right? I'm not going to say who donated. But they were not paid for by me."
Buying lunch and providing a ride to early voting is a standard Milwaukee scam. I am surprised the DA is involved in this instance.
Posted by: henry | May 01, 2014 at 02:51 PM
"If it was donated, no one paid for them, right?"
I like that quote so much it hurts.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 01, 2014 at 03:02 PM
Issa says he is calling Kerry to testify and explain all this stuff, unless more documents are provided from existing (and so far ignored) subpoenas.
Posted by: Miss Marple | May 01, 2014 at 03:04 PM
hit and run, In Prog World they probably think "donated" means "took what we needed from an unfortunate supporter."
Posted by: Miss Marple | May 01, 2014 at 03:05 PM
back in pre-Knapp Commission days the NYPD cops called that 'honest graft'.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | May 01, 2014 at 03:06 PM
Prediction: Donald Sterling will file a lawsuit seeking to enjoin the NBA from going forward with a forced sale of the Clippers. He will immediately seek (and get) a Temporary Restraining Order, and shortly thereafter will seek (and get) a Preliminary Injuction prohibiting any action by the NBA to effect a sale, pending a trial of the matter. The trial will not occur for at least two years.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | May 01, 2014 at 03:46 PM
After a year or two of NBA fascism, Sterling will seem like a sympathetic person who merely wanted his mistress to stay out of the public eye.
Posted by: MarkO | May 01, 2014 at 03:51 PM
Sterling's got nothing to lose and I'll bet the NBA sure as hell does.
Posted by: lyle | May 01, 2014 at 03:59 PM
Lyle-- bingo. When you play chicken with a madman, you either gobye bye like the madman, or cave. Sterling will be glad to spill about all of the unfortunate private musings of other owners and the prior Commissioner. In the end, if they want Sterling out, the owners will have to pay him a premium and absorb the loss themselves. hey, won't Magic overpay to get the Clips in 'minority' hands.
BTW-- the NBA is like Augusta national, or any other club, they can have whichever members they like, is Augusta 'fascist' because they didn't have women for 80 years? The NBA owners can make whatever rules they want for themselves. Their problem is that the disgusting old lech and bigot Sterling will hold them to their own standards in a lawsuit. Somehow, I don't think they' ll like that.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | May 01, 2014 at 04:20 PM
The NBA can hope that Sterling does not have that much more time on this Earth.
I will say again that if banned for life is the proper punishment for saying something mindnumbingly stupid in a private conversation, can we all line up outside the State Department to waive bye to Lurch?
Posted by: GMax | May 01, 2014 at 04:34 PM
"The NBA owners can make whatever rules they want for themselves."
That's what the NFL owners thought until they tried to use those rules to keep the Raiders from moving to L.A.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | May 01, 2014 at 04:40 PM
Donald Sterling will file a lawsuit seeking to enjoin the NBA from going forward with a forced sale of the Clippers.
I hope he does. And I hope he goes after all the other owners who exercise their freedom of speech.
Posted by: Jane | May 01, 2014 at 04:41 PM
I was sorry to hear Kareem put Misters Bundy and Sterling in the same bag of bigotry. He also said he was *never* exposed to any racist stuff while he worked with Sterling.
Just asking...Who does more damage by living longer, Sterling or Soros?
Posted by: Frau Indianerherz | May 01, 2014 at 04:46 PM
DoT-- well if memory serves one of davis' claims was he was singled out for abuse by Rozell and the other owners, so I'm not sure how that verdict cuts in this case. In any event, I'd never use Davis for an exemplar of... well... anything.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | May 01, 2014 at 04:51 PM
I'd never use Davis for an exemplar of... well... anything.
Not even jogging suits, bling, or stupid eyeglasses?
Posted by: lyle | May 01, 2014 at 05:06 PM
>>>Does anybody remember when Slick was Prez and the economy went in the crapper for about a week of free fall<<<
iirc, the NASDAQ went into free fall in March 2000 and didn't stop bleeding for about 2 years. unsurprisingly, it wasn't labeled a crash at the time.
Posted by: rich@gmu | May 01, 2014 at 05:12 PM
nice write up at Kausfiles on the Clinton mode of production. thanks to whomever linked it.
One thing I think he missed though was how much is the Clinton Foundation siphoning off from the Haiti relief money. iirc the State Department quietly gave the foundation a significant role in Haiti including lots of money.
Posted by: rich@gmu | May 01, 2014 at 05:21 PM
Sterling apparently changed his name. Tokowitz at birth. Personal injury lawyer and slumlord among his many accomplishments.
Posted by: GMax | May 01, 2014 at 05:34 PM
one would think that with as much money as he has he'd:
a. never consent to being taped or getting into a situation where it would be necessary
b. have better taste in mistresses.
Posted by: rich@gmu | May 01, 2014 at 05:41 PM
It depended on where you were when Clinton was president whether you had a job or not. The 90s saw the family dairy farms go into the crapper. And almost every damned dairyman in our county voted democrat and still does.
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2014 at 05:59 PM
The NBA acted hastily in this matter. And all the donkeys who nodded approvingly (including some on this blog) will leave skid marks trying to backtrack.
Sterling looked like an easy target but if he is the litigious curmudgeon he is reputed to be,he will make the NBA and the PC police look pretty silly.
Posted by: middyfeek | May 01, 2014 at 06:04 PM
I agree with DoT's 3:46; Sterling can stick around and make things difficult for a long time.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 01, 2014 at 06:05 PM
rich:
Men can be extroardinarily stupid when it comes to picking mistresses.
Example Clinton, Tiger Woods, General Petraeus etc. Spitzer, Vitter, gay guy from New Jersey now a prison educator,who used to be Governor, Menendez still a US senator,-one would think NJ could do better than him.
Posted by: maryrose | May 01, 2014 at 06:06 PM
What happens if, as seems likely, he dies before any of this is resolved? Would the NBA still try to make his grieving possibly non-racist heirs sell the team?
Posted by: jimmyk | May 01, 2014 at 06:11 PM
maryrose-
>>>Men can be extroardinarily stupid when it comes to picking mistresses.<<<
hahaha ... and girlfriends too.
Posted by: rich@gmu | May 01, 2014 at 06:47 PM
Men can be extroardinarily stupid when it comes to picking mistresses
but not wives?
Posted by: GMax | May 01, 2014 at 06:52 PM
I think oil prices averaged less than $20 per barrel during the whole Clinton Presidency.
Federal Taxes as a percentage of GDP, dropped to less than 18.5% during the balanced budget years.
I wouldn't mind Clinton taking credit for those things, IF someone would suggest doing them again.
Posted by: MaxB | May 01, 2014 at 06:59 PM
>>>I think oil prices averaged less than $20 per barrel during the whole Clinton Presidency.<<<
at one point I think it got less than ten/bbl (late 98 i think). still vividly remember going to a hess station and filling up for .70 a gallon.
Posted by: rich@gmu | May 01, 2014 at 07:03 PM
Rich,
Yep. Oil hit $8.64 in December 1998.
Rose to $30ish in 2000, just before the Clinton recession kicked in.
Posted by: MaxB | May 01, 2014 at 07:17 PM
You do Donald. You're shmuck, but I'd like to see you go all Al Davis on the NBA. Problem is that I don't know if you've got the stones to do it. You sounded like an awful wuss whining to your mistress who'd put the horns on you.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | May 01, 2014 at 09:03 PM
Who didn't think of Monica right off the bat?
What people don't realize is that you don't have to run, to cash in.
It's profitable to say you're running. And, you watch very wealthy people throwing money your way. Pocket change you say?
We could become very wealthy on that "pocket change."
As to Hillary's soon to becoming a grandma, alas Chelsea is not Princess Kate. Oh. And, magazines have lost a lot of their luster. Don't see any of this amounting to a hill of beans.
As to Bill, he'd never have won in 1992, if Ross Perot didnt come out of left field, spending his own money.
Hillary has about as much chance of winning the presidency as does Jeb Bush.
Posted by: Carol Herman | May 02, 2014 at 06:41 PM
I actually feel sorry for Donald Sperling. 80-years-old. And, his equipment still works! He didn't have to swallow a blue pill to "hear" from his mistress.
The conversation you heard is Sperling telling his mistress he doesn't want her to bring even famous black people into his home.
And, this the NBA turned into an agenda? Because they have "rules" that skirt the First Amendment? Consider me surprised.
Not only does Donald Sperling's equipment still work; I'd venture to guess he still an attorney who WINS!
In time? The Old Man will pick up sympathy. And, his mistress can get paid to pose in the centerfold of Playboy Magazine.
And, this story? Cast Woody Allen. Do a sequel to Fading Gigolo."At The Basketball Court." Heck, Blue Jasmine was based on Bernie Madoff's wife, Ruth. He didn't even have to pay her royalties.
Sterling's story has a WOW FACTOR! Bigger than Al Davis.
Posted by: Carol Herman | May 02, 2014 at 07:01 PM