Why America is much worse off than we were four years ago | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: This article originally appeared in the Beaufort Observer.

    History, and apparently the current polls and focus groups, are telling both presidential campaigns that the hot topic among voters right now is: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" Paul Ryan hit that issue hard when in Greenville Monday. Obama's picked it up, albeit from a defensive perspective.

    It's a valid question and an important issue because it is a perspective many voters take when deciding who to vote for. But it should not be. Here's why:

    "Are you better off now than four years ago?" is not nearly as important as "are you going to be better off four years from now? And we would extend that to say "how much better off are you going to be four years from now." To make the point we would suggest that it is rather like a NASCAR race. To really win much money you must finish in the top 4-5 positions. Below that it probably costs you more to run than you make.

    So imagine that you own a race car that is running 40th in a pack of 50th. And suppose you are talking on the radio with the Crew Chief. You express your concern about whether we can't do better. He replies (as does Obama), "we ran the last lap .003 mph faster than we've averaged all day." How are you going to feel?

    Now imagine the same scenario with this response. "Just be patient. We're going to win this thing. We will make our move on the last tank of gas."

    Part of that analogy is to say "there is a lot of time left in this presidential race." There will likely be one or even more October surprises. But at this point to ask if we are better off than four years ago is a good question.

    But here's the problem with the idea. Many people in this country would answer that question: "yes I am. My government benefits are more than they've ever been." And a huge portion of those people would look at you with a blank look if you responded: "but what about the 16 Trillion dollars we owe? Do you think we can sustain borrowing 40 cents of every dollar in your check?"

    Michelle Obama, at the Democrat Convention, appealed to the delegates to give her husband four more years because "change is hard and it takes a long time sometimes."

    But that's really not the issue either. The question is: Could Barack Obama do any better with four more years than he has done with the last four? Or more to the point, "how much better could we expect him to do."

    We would suggest that is you are going to vote based on whether you're better off you need to figure out what evidence there is that would suggest that you'll be significantly better off if Obama stays in office four more years than you will if he does not.

    We will agree that if he gets re-elected that Michelle Obama will make significantly more trips and take more vacations than she has already.

    But if you want to look at it simply, we would be willing to suggest that while many Americans are better off, not many will be as well off in four years as they could be if there was a change in economic policies in Washington.

    And don't bet that the NASCAR running 40th will be able to win the race.