Obama 2012?

I do think it's true that Obama needs an overall narrative, but Romney has no more of one than Obama does. He has goals, but no details.

Income Inequality May Take Toll on Economic Growth

Spencer Platt/Getty Images
A soup kitchen in Camden, New Jersey. Economists’ thinking on income inequality has changed sharply in recent years.
By ANNIE LOWREY
Published: October 16, 2012 48 Comments

WASHINGTON — Income inequality has soared to the highest levels since the Great Depression and the recession has done little to reverse the trend, with the top 1 percent of earners taking 93 percent of the income gains in the first full year of the recovery.

The yawning gap between the haves and the have-nots — and the political questions that gap has raised about the plight of the middle class — has given rise to anti-Wall Street sentiment and animated the presidential campaign. Now, a growing body of economic research suggests that it might mean lower levels of economic growth and slower job creation in the years ahead, as well.

“Growth becomes more fragile” in countries with high levels of inequality like the United States, said Jonathan D. Ostry of the International Monetary Fund, whose research suggests that the widening disparity since the 1980s might shorten the nation’s economic expansions by as much as a third.

Reducing inequality and bolstering growth, in the long run, might be “two sides of the same coin,” research published last year by the I.M.F. concluded.

In the United States, since the 1980s, rich households have earned a larger and larger share of overall income. The 1 percent earns about one-sixth of all income and the top 10 percent about half, according to statistics compiled by the respected economists Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, and Thomas Piketty of the Paris School of Economics.

Cycle wrote:

I do think it's true that Obama needs an overall narrative, but Romney has no more of one than Obama does. He has goals, but no details.

Details are not important as was amply proven in 2008 by Obama who won the presidency on vague promises of hope and change. It's who has a better argument for the NEXT four years. If Obama can't persuade an undecided that the last four years warrant another four then the best Obama can hope for is a tie. He will not stop Romney's momentum with a tie.

Oh, god. Our village idiot has found his way home.

Details are not important as was amply proven in 2008 by Obama who won the presidency on vague promises of hope and change.

CI,
Try to keep up with the discussion ... we're talking about Obama's narrative for the debates tonight. If he's wise, he'll try to use some of these kept promises to build the case that he's a better bet for the next four years. I don't think he will though because it exposes him to the unkept promises on the list.

Therefore, instead of building a strong case to vote FOR him, he'll instead try to get folks to vote AGAINST Romney by repeating time and time again that Romney is lying. And if he does follow that strategy, he will at best tie Romney in tonight's debate.

Romney's momentum will continue to build ... Then four years from today you and I can talk about the top ten promises President Romney kept and didn't keep ...

Obama had ten times the details for his proposals than Romney does currently. His health care plan in particular was quite detailed.

Oh, god. Our village idiot has found his way home.

DrewDad wrote:

Oh, god. Our village idiot has found his way home.

You have to give him a little credit. It only took him eight months to figure out his computer wasn’t connected to the internet.

Cyclo wrote:

Obama had ten times the details for his proposals than Romney does currently. His health care plan in particular was quite detailed.

BS ... The only specifics in Obama's health care plan were in his goals