Sharing the pain—politically

pic here

Bloomberg BusinessWeek piece that makes the compelling point that income growth—or the lack thereof—is the best predictor of change in looming elections.  On a longer-term scale, this is Benjamin Friedman’s argument in his book, “The Moral Consequences of Economic Growth”:  rising income makes a happy polity and a happy polity tends to beget a generous legislature (i.e., more Dem).

The bad news for Obama:  disposable income has remained stagnant since Jan 09, so the underlying sense of his administration for most people is, no progress in their lives but rather treading water at best. 

I would argue the same thing could be said in foreign policy:  balls kept juggled all right, but no obvious sense of progress.

So you get the same effect in both realms:  people’s sense of anxiety is no longer rising, but it’s not falling either.

One might call it a malaise.

For the record, average per capita disposable income today is roughly what it was in mid-2007 ($32,600), with a drop-spike-drop-spike-drop-inching up pattern since then.

Comments

[Jimmy J.]

"One might call it a malaise."

Hmm, kinda reminds me of the 70s and Jimmy Carter. Not fondly remembered by most.