American Saving Less with Obama as President

[Tertius]

Survey: 40 Percent Of Americans Have $500 Or Less In Savings


PHILADELPHIA (CBS) — A survey of about 1,100 Americans finds that more than 4-in-10 respondents admit they don’t have more than $500 in readily accessible savings.

EDIT:
<SNIP>

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/1 ... n-savings/

[bannination]

Survey: 40 Percent Of Americans Have $500 Or Less In Savings


PHILADELPHIA (CBS) — A survey of about 1,100 Americans finds that more than 4-in-10 respondents admit they don’t have more than $500 in readily accessible savings.

So what are the numbers pre-Obama?

... please don't plagiarizer, post a link, copying an entire article is illegal.

[Stinger]

As with almost every right-wing lie put out there, consumers actually saved less under Bush and have increased their savings under Obama. A depression/ recession will do that for you.



Tertius's claim is a lie. Typical right-wing desperation to make Obama look bad.

An accurate assessment would show that not only was savings as low or lower during the Bush administration, the level of consumer debt rose, thanks in large part to the housing bubble, to levels not seen since just before the Great Depression.

A measure of the burden of U.S. household debt dropped in the second quarter to levels last seen more than 18 years ago, a welcome sign for struggling Americans. It was the lowest level for the ratio since the fourth quarter of 1993.

Those pesky little facts.

[Tertius]

I just posted the CBS report.

The chart posted is meaningless. One cannot tell anything about the amount saved without knowing how much disposable income has changed.

You are absolutely correct most people try to save as much as they can during hard times. Say for example a person has $500 saved under Bush and that is 2% of her disposable income. Then the government finds she still has her $500 savings but lost her job and works two jobs part time. If her disposable income went from $25,000 under Bush to $10,000 under Obama then her same $500 savings would be 5% of her disposable income.

Only you liberals would find that cause to cheer.

[O Really]

OK, here's one based on percent of disposable income. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PSAVERT/
What is the trend line from 2009 - present?

[Bungalow Bill]

I'd take the poll with a grain of salt.

Now, all you need to do is find out how many people with jobs lost 60% of their disposable
income. Good luck with that one.

[Stinger]

I just posted the CBS report.

The chart posted is meaningless.

Really? Data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis is meaningless? Because you say so?

This wouldn't be just another attempt to bluster your way through another embarrassing mistake, would it?

I think you got caught with your hand in the Stupid jar again.

And your other hand was in the Lie jar.

Nothing in your source made any mention of savings under Obama. You just made that up.

Now that you got caught, you're trying to lie your way out of it.



One cannot tell anything about the amount saved without knowing how much disposable income has changed.

Gee, that's funny. There was nothing showing how much disposable income had changed in your source, either, yet you claimed to be able to tell much from that . . . without any data.

You were even able to make comparison with the years before Obama . . . without any data.

You are absolutely correct most people try to save as much as they can during hard times. Say for example a person has $500 saved under Bush and that is 2% of her disposable income. Then the government finds she still has her $500 savings but lost her job and works two jobs part time. If her disposable income went from $25,000 under Bush to $10,000 under Obama then her same $500 savings would be 5% of her disposable income.

Percentage of savings based on disposable income is percentage of savings based on disposable income . . . just like the chart shows.

Only you liberals would find that cause to cheer.

Only you cons would stoop so low as to make up such blatant lies to support your irrational hatred of Obama.

[Stinger]

...Tertius's claim is a lie. Typical right-wing desperation to make Obama look bad.

...Those pesky little facts.

I just posted the CBS report...

Another lie. You titled this thread "Saving Less" even though the CBS report says nothing about less or more.

He titled it "American Saving Less with Obama as President," doubling down on his lie by trying to make it seem like Americans are saving less during Obama's presidency and compared with Bush's.

Tertius isn't real big on honesty.

[Tertius]

OK, here's one based on percent of disposable income. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PSAVERT/
What is the trend line from 2009 - present?

The other chart was based on disposable income?

[bannination]

Myth Busted.

[Tertius]

Myth Busted.

Without the data I cannot say for sure but when match the percentages with the definitions discretionary vs. disposable income the two charts don't seem likely.

[bannination]

Myth Busted.

Without the data I cannot say for sure but when match the percentages with the definitions discretionary vs. disposable income the two charts don't seem likely.

American Saving Less with Obama as President

Myth Busted. K---B

[neoplacebo]

I still have my diamond mine and two oil companies left, but if Romney wins I'll probably sell the diamond mine.