WARNING THIS POST MIGHT GIVE SOME MASSIVE HEADACHES!

Cross posted at www.tmcpac.com/forum

The best way to prove the lie about Trickle Down Economics is to look at median household incomes. In 1980 when Ronald Reagan was sworn in, the median household income in the U.S. was just under $49,000.

By 2006, the most recent year info is available from the US Census Bureau, it was just under $58,000, growth of about $9,000 ( adjusted to 2006 dollars). 

Of that growth, 83% came under a Democratic President (Clinton 1993-2000)  While Republican Presidents averaged Less than 1%  per year during the 18 years of Republican Presidents (1980-1992 Regan & Bush 1, and 2000-2006 of Bush 2)

The policies of Bush 2, have actually caused median income to FALL by about $2,500 per year.

An explanation of how McCain/Bush are manipulating the "median/mean/average" talking points. The best discussion I could find is by Jeff Alworth. (Highlights are my own).

When Median is "Average"
In any discussion about "average" anything, it's important to know what you're measuring.  The statistics for means and medians are regularly used interchangeably in the media, but they're not the same.  The mean statistic is the average of the total.  The median statistic is the number that divides the population in half (the number at which half make more, half make less).  When we talk about the "average" American, people understand this to indicate the person who makes an average amount of money, not the average of all Americans. 
One of Bush's and the GOP's sneakiest techniques has been to use the mean to describe the "average American" when he is trying to fudge reality.  As in: the "average American will enjoy a $2,000 reduction in taxes thanks to this tax cut measure." 

Here's why it matters.  Let's say you've got about 100 loggers in a bar in Roseburg.  Their salaries range from $20,000 to $80,000.  If you add up all their salaries and divide by the total, you get $50k (the mean).  If you put the 50 lowest-paid on one side of the room and the 50 of the highest on the other, and see which number would be right in the middle, you also come up with $50k (the median).  In this group, average doesn't tell us much.

But as it happens, Steve Rogel, CEO of Weyerhauser, is in town and he steps into the bar.  That shouldn't change the average, right?  Depends on how you measure.  Rogel makes just a bit more per year ($5.3 million) than everyone else in the bar put together.  If you use the mean, then the "average" guy in the bar now makes $100k.  But if he goes and sits with the loggers on the higher-paid side, moving the median up just a tick (the median), now  "average" earns about $51,000.  That's why we always use the median to see how Americans are doing, because we know that obscene wealth creation at the top won't conceal how people at the middle are doing.

A rising tide does not lift all boats it only enables the Trickle Down con men to manipulate the numbers to their benefit.

Hope I haven't driven anyone into a severe depression, but if I have you can always make a trip to your tanning bed.