Random Poll Question

I saw this poll that says that 35% of people say they’re better off under Obama, while 51% say they’re worse off. Know what I’d love to see? How many of that 35% are employed, directly or indirectly, by government. My guess? Around 90%.

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

6 Responses to “Random Poll Question”

  1. Adam says:

    Considering government employees have taken the biggest hit from job losses since the recession ended I’d say your theory is a bit flawed.

    This year government has lost a net 220,000 jobs while the private sector has gained a net 1,171,000 jobs.

    I was hoping we’d have a good retail season but if that poll is any indicator then it won’t be good. It shows 46% saying they will spend less, and only 12% saying they’ll spend more than last year.

  2. Adam says:

    A better question would be how many of that 35% are from the 20% that is doing well even now while the bottom 80% are scraping by and some are eating cat food.

    • Blake says:

      Do you know how much cat food costs? They can buy chicken meat in a can for less than cat food nowadays- and people who are that poor need to find a better way to eat.

  3. Ogre says:

    Wow. Total disconnect. Do you suppose that the actual percentage of the 35% that are “better off under Obama” would actually contain 100% of those who are “doing well even now?” Sort of seems obvious that if you’re doing well now, then you’d say you’re better off now. Sure, there’s the logical possibility of that not being the case, but that just shows that, once again, Adam’s primary interest here is to argue, and nothing more.

    I’m quite sure, should I post a picture of a sunrise and comment that it’s nice, that Adam would immediately comment that it wasn’t.

    • Adam says:

      “I’m quite sure, should I post a picture of a sunrise and comment that it’s nice, that Adam would immediately comment that it wasn’t.”

      No, I like sunrises. Wait, by saying no I’m still just arguing, aren’t I? You’ve set me up to fail.

      Don’t get me wrong. I am here to argue. I am just not here to argue counter to anything you say. The difference is I have stances and opinions and evidence to back them up. It just so happens that the evidence disagrees with you most of the time.

      First of all I must note that the poll has nothing to do with Obama. The people were not actually asked if they were worse or better off “under Obama.” It’s just that he’s president now so the article mentioned it that way when they summarized the poll.

      I assumed that your guess that 90% of the 35% are employed by the government was a joke but maybe not? Government employment makes up just about 17% of nonfarm payroll. Of the 1,000 people polled for 31.5% of people to have worked for the government and be part of the 35% who are doing well, the poll methodology would be badly broken and would worthless as a frame of reference.

    • Adam says:

      “Sort of seems obvious that if you’re doing well now, then you’d say you’re better off now.”

      Doing well and thinking you’re doing well are two different things actually. My point was simply that a better correlation is probably the group of people who’s income is still growing and are not out of work right now. Your suggestion it has to do with government employment has no basis in verifiable information.