On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 09:14:41PM -0600, Dan Minette wrote: > OK, first analysis of income by 20% grouping and top 5%. > > RR + GB^2 Clinton > 1st 20% 7.6% 15.9% > 2nd 20% 8.9% 15.5% > 3rd 20% 11.2% 14.6% > 4th 20% 14.0% 15.8% > 5th 20% 24.8% 28.8% > top 5% 40.7% 43.4% >
> The numbers don't exactly match with the GDP numbers for a couple of > reasons. > > There was approximately 2%-3% greater growth in the numbers of > households under RR + GB^2 than under Clinton. > > The share of the GDP growth that went to household income was greater > under Clinton. That is fairly strong evidence in support of your contention that Democrats are better for the poor than Republicans. Under Clinton, the bottom 40% had approximately DOUBLE the rate of growth as under the best 8 years of RR + GB^2, as you said. I wonder why JDG hasn't commented. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
