The purpose of this blog is to serve as a quick reference to political and economic data presented primarily in graphical format, with tables and other charts where appropriate. Use the search box to quickly locate the data you are seeking. Go Dems!
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Breaking the Filibuster
Link to this graph: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/12/we_dont_need_to_fix_partisansh.html
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
An Ominous Rise -- Global Warming -- CO2 Level
Link to this graph: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2010/12/22/science/earth/22carbon-graphic.html?ref=earth
Note: Charles David Keeling was a registered Republican! A quote from the article:
In an interview in La Jolla, Dr. Keeling’s widow, Louise, said that if her husband had lived to see the hardening of the political battle lines over climate change, he would have been dismayed.
“He was a registered Republican,” she said. “He just didn’t think of it as a political issue at all.”
Link to above quote: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/22/science/earth/22carbon.html
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Congressional Seats -- 2010 Census
Link to this map: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/apportionment-data.php
Interactive map is here: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/index.php
Monday, December 20, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
What the President Got and What Republicans Will Get. . .
. . .if/when tax cuts for the rich are extended (over the next 10 years).
Link to this graph: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/will_obama_make_good_on_vow_to.html
. . .but if the tax cuts are not extended, the situation is as follows:
Link to this graph: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/12/the_white_houses_case_for_the.html
Note the scaling of the y-axis is different in the above graphs -- however, in both cases the cuts in blue total $238 billion.
Link to this graph: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/will_obama_make_good_on_vow_to.html
. . .but if the tax cuts are not extended, the situation is as follows:
Link to this graph: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/12/the_white_houses_case_for_the.html
Note the scaling of the y-axis is different in the above graphs -- however, in both cases the cuts in blue total $238 billion.
Number of Lobbyists per Member of Congress
How many lobbyists are there per congressman?
25.8.
The rate of lobbyists per congressman is currently 25.8, considering there are 432 congressmen (data provided by the Office of the Clerk website) and 11,140 lobbyists in Washington (data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics). In addition, the US House of Representatives is the top lobbying agency, with 10,833 reports filed in 2010 – against 10,727 by the US Senate.
The rate of lobbyists per congressman is currently 25.8, considering there are 432 congressmen (data provided by the Office of the Clerk website) and 11,140 lobbyists in Washington (data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics). In addition, the US House of Representatives is the top lobbying agency, with 10,833 reports filed in 2010 – against 10,727 by the US Senate.
__________________________
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Friday, December 3, 2010
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Monday, November 29, 2010
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Union Membership: Percent of Nonagricultural Workforce 1930-2004
Link to above graph: http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2007/3/2/132821/5800/12#c12
Tags: Union Membership: Percent of Nonagricultural Workforce 1930-2004
Tags: Union Membership: Percent of Nonagricultural Workforce 1930-2004
Friday, November 26, 2010
Average Cost Per Hospital Stay (US$)
Link to this graph: http://www.staffingrobot.com/staffingrobot/2009/11/ezra-klein---an-insurance-industry-ceo-explains-why-american-health-care-costs-so-much.html
Link to IFHP Comparative Price Report (click on PDF file at bottom of page): http://www.ifhp.com/news56.html
Thursday, November 25, 2010
The Great Compression
From Paul Krugman's blog:
The chart shows the share of the richest 10 percent of the American population in total income – an indicator that closely tracks many other measures of economic inequality – over the past 90 years, as estimated by the economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez.
The great divergence: Since the late 1970s the America I knew has unraveled. We’re no longer a middle-class society, in which the benefits of economic growth are widely shared: between 1979 and 2005 the real income of the median household rose only 13 percent, but the income of the richest 0.1% of Americans rose 296 percent.
Most people assume that this rise in inequality was the result of impersonal forces, like technological change and globalization. But the great reduction of inequality that created middle-class America between 1935 and 1945 was driven by political change; I believe that politics has also played an important role in rising inequality since the 1970s. It’s important to know that no other advanced economy has seen a comparable surge in inequality – even the rising inequality of Thatcherite Britain was a faint echo of trends here.
On the political side, you might have expected rising inequality to produce a populist backlash. Instead, however, the era of rising inequality has also been the era of “movement conservatism,” the term both supporters and opponents use for the highly cohesive set of interlocking institutions that brought Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich to power, and reached its culmination, taking control of all three branches of the federal government, under George W. Bush. (Yes, Virginia, there is a vast right-wing conspiracy.)
Because of movement conservative political dominance, taxes on the rich have fallen, and the holes in the safety net have gotten bigger, even as inequality has soared. And the rise of movement conservatism is also at the heart of the bitter partisanship that characterizes politics today.
Why did this happen? Well, that’s a long story – in fact, I’ve written a whole book about it, and also about why I believe America is ready for a big change in direction.
For now, though, the important thing is to realize that the story of modern America is, in large part, the story of the fall and rise of inequality.
Link to quoted text and graph: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/introducing-this-blog/
The chart shows the share of the richest 10 percent of the American population in total income – an indicator that closely tracks many other measures of economic inequality – over the past 90 years, as estimated by the economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez.
The great divergence: Since the late 1970s the America I knew has unraveled. We’re no longer a middle-class society, in which the benefits of economic growth are widely shared: between 1979 and 2005 the real income of the median household rose only 13 percent, but the income of the richest 0.1% of Americans rose 296 percent.
Most people assume that this rise in inequality was the result of impersonal forces, like technological change and globalization. But the great reduction of inequality that created middle-class America between 1935 and 1945 was driven by political change; I believe that politics has also played an important role in rising inequality since the 1970s. It’s important to know that no other advanced economy has seen a comparable surge in inequality – even the rising inequality of Thatcherite Britain was a faint echo of trends here.
On the political side, you might have expected rising inequality to produce a populist backlash. Instead, however, the era of rising inequality has also been the era of “movement conservatism,” the term both supporters and opponents use for the highly cohesive set of interlocking institutions that brought Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich to power, and reached its culmination, taking control of all three branches of the federal government, under George W. Bush. (Yes, Virginia, there is a vast right-wing conspiracy.)
Because of movement conservative political dominance, taxes on the rich have fallen, and the holes in the safety net have gotten bigger, even as inequality has soared. And the rise of movement conservatism is also at the heart of the bitter partisanship that characterizes politics today.
Why did this happen? Well, that’s a long story – in fact, I’ve written a whole book about it, and also about why I believe America is ready for a big change in direction.
For now, though, the important thing is to realize that the story of modern America is, in large part, the story of the fall and rise of inequality.
Link to quoted text and graph: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/introducing-this-blog/
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Effect of Policy Options on Employment in 2010 and 2011
"Policies that could be implemented relatively quickly or targeted toward people whose consumption tends to be restricted by their income, such as reducing payroll taxes for firms that increase payroll or boosting aid to the unemployed, would have the largest effects on output and employment per dollar of budgetary cost in 2010 and 2011. By contrast, policies that temporarily increased the after-tax income of people with relatively high income, such as an across-the-board reduction in income taxes or an increase in the exemption amount for the alternative minimum tax (AMT), would have smaller effects because such tax cuts would probably not affect the recipients’ spending significantly."
Link for above graph and quoted text: http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/govt_reports/
Data Source: Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
Deficit Projections 2009-2019 (in trillions of dollars)
Link to this graph: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036
Tags: Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush era tax cuts, TARP, Fannie, Freddie, Economic downturn, Recovery measures.
Tags: Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush era tax cuts, TARP, Fannie, Freddie, Economic downturn, Recovery measures.
National Debt as Percentage of Gross National Product
Link to this graph: http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html
National Debt in Trillions of Dollars
Link to this graph: http://zfacts.com/p/1170.html
Link to this graph: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x695559
Link to this graph: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x695559
U.S. Corporate Profits (after tax) -- 2010
Link to the graph: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CP
"American businesses earned profits at an annual rate of $1.659 trillion in the third quarter, according to a Commerce Department report released Tuesday. That is the highest figure recorded since the government began keeping track over 60 years ago, at least in nominal or noninflation-adjusted terms.
Corporate profits have been doing extremely well for a while. Since their cyclical low in the fourth quarter of 2008, profits have grown for seven consecutive quarters, at some of the fastest rates in history."
Link to above quote: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/business/economy/24econ.html?_r=1&hp
Five year view of above graph:
Tags: Corporate profits
Private Payroll Employment: January 2008 -- October 2010
Link to this graph: http://whitehouse-org.blogspot.com/2010/11/president-obama-on-october-jobs-report.html
Tags: Job losses and gains, Unemployment
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)