Obama or Romney: Who's better for your finances?
One economist says it's pretty simple: Richer folks will likely benefit more from Romney's policies, while lower-income Americans will benefit more from Obama's.
When it comes to deciding which candidate is better for your financial life, the answer isn't entirely obvious. In fact, voters hold widely varying views on how the two candidates will likely influence the economy, often depending on their own income levels and financial situations.
Here's where Americans stand:
Voters believe presidents have a big impact on their money—to a degree.
"The economy is really on people's minds at this point, even more so than in past years just because it has been such a tough last couple years for Americans' finances," says Claes Bell, senior banking analyst at Bankrate.com, although he adds that "pocketbook issues" often play a major role in elections.
A Bankrate.com survey taken in June found that almost six in 10 Americans say their personal finance situation is either the most important factor or one of the most important factors in determining which candidate they'll vote for.
Still, Americans are skeptical that either candidate will actually be able to substantially improve their financial lives. Half of the survey respondents said that when it comes to affecting their own finances, it doesn't matter which president ends up getting elected. "It seems like people are thinking, 'We're stuck in the economic rut, and they doubt that specific policies will help us out,'" says Bell. Among those who thought that the president would impact their personal finances, they were equally divided on selecting the better candidate.
Americans are faced with two candidates who offer sharply different views on economic policy.
"The Romney crowd would say, 'If we have low taxes, and we get rid of regulation and reduce public spending, the economy will grow at a faster rate.' They're being guided by the (Paul) Ryan budget, (which includes) significant cuts in taxes and cutting back the size of the state," says resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute Desmond Lachman. Much of that is designed to stimulate business, he adds, "so you'd think it would be beneficial to people owning stocks, people in the upper-income brackets."
Lachman adds, though, that the Federal Reserve's policies under President Barack Obama have helped to buoy equity prices, and Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney would likely take a different approach. (Romney has said that he would replace Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.)
Obama, meanwhile, has focused more on economic policies that affect the middle and lower classes, including health insurance coverage, student loan support, social services, and extending the payroll tax cut. "At the high-end of the income scale, he'd be raising taxes, whereas the Ryan budget cuts taxes across the board," says Lachman. Obama has also supported the extension of benefits for the unemployed as well as other social services, from food stamps to Medicaid.
Of course, presidents don't make policies unilaterally, and each candidate would have to work with Congress to pass legislation. For Obama, that could mean working again with a Republican-dominated Congress. "Tea party members are not prepared to compromise, so I'd expect you'll get more of the same in terms of economic performance," Lachman says.
In general, Lachman says, people in the upper-income brackets will likely benefit more from Romney's policies, while lower-income Americans will benefit more from Obama's.
Republicans and Democrats feel differently about their own financial situations and the financial health of the country.
"Partisanship seems to be having a pretty intense effect on how people view their personal finances," says Bell. A recent Bankrate.com survey found that a third of Republicans feel "more comfortable with their debt now versus one year ago," while just one-quarter of Democrats said the same. Possible reasons include that Republicans might fall into the higher-income bracket and have lower debt levels, or that Republicans tend to be more fiscally conservative in both their private lives and political beliefs, says Bell.
Bell believes respondents who support Obama also tend to feel more optimistic about the economy, and to "feel things are going better than they are," while Romney supporters tend to "feel things are going worse than they actually are." The intense emotions surrounding the election, he says, appear to be affecting perceptions of the economy.
Age and income level have an influence on how voters perceive the election.
Age also has an impact on voters' views. Bankrate.com found that among voters under age 30, 10 percent said their personal financial situation will be better under Romney, while 29 percent said it will be better under Obama.
A recent Pew report found that 63 percent of Americans say Republicans "favor the rich over the middle class and poor," and seven in 10 "believe the policies of a President Mitt Romney would be good for wealthy people." Meanwhile, six in 10 respondents said Obama's policies will help the poor, and half said they will help the middle class. Pew concludes that among middle-class adults, "neither candidate has sealed the deal."
As both candidates make their case to voters in the final months leading up to the election, each will try to do just that.
More from US News & World Report
- American dream alive and well -- just not in America
- Who's better off under President Barack Obama
- Romney to Voters: You Can't Handle the Truth
As I see it, this election is not about the failed policies and programs of the Obama Administration or about what Mitt Romney can do, this election is about whether we continue down the path of Socialism, towards Communism or do we return to a Democracy.
We should be getting our fiscal house in order. You can't continue to borrow money you can't pay back. The only candidates which can help us are Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.
To flood the market with printed money as this administration is allowing, the only thing President Obama will be noted for is the man who allowed America's wealth in commodities to be sold at a yard sale for pennies on the dollar to the rest of the world while Americans have to pay $7.50 for a gallon of gas due to the devaluing of our dollar.
We have to vote this administration out of office. President Obama is such an Amateur.
I voted for Obama in 2008. I believed his speeches and his promises. He's been a major disappointment. He has created a major divide in the country and didn't keep his promises. I will NOT be voting for him again. He's turning the country from a democracy into a socialistic country. Too many are now dependent upon the government. The tax base is smaller and there are more people living off the taxpayer.
Obama wants to increase taxes on the wealthy without doing anything to eliminate the waste and fraud of the welfare programs he has supported. You have to pass a drug test to get a job, but not to get welfare or any other government assistance. There is too many receiving aid that are just lazy and work other jobs for cash... and still collect welfare. Too many unwed mothers having litters of children with taxpayers money. It's ridiculous. Government needs to stop being a charity. The federal government can't effectively manage squat.
america is in debt. the president has no clue of where he took this country to. at his most recent tv appearance, said, he believed that our problem is temporary. Temporary? they are operating this country with borrowed money at 4BILLIONS $$$$ A DAY. we are 16 trillions in debts and counting and in his mind, it is a short term problem? he is so out of touch and you guys are going to re-elect him?
**LIBERAL BIAS ALLERT** The liberal spin in this article is unbelievable. And, bankrate.com is cited as a source, as if it is neutral. Rather, bankrate.com routinely puts out articles published on this site which have tremendous liberal bias. While the article is correct that Obama focus on lower income voters, or the "taker class" whose votes he tries to buy with redistributed wealth--Socialism--Romney's policies are not designed to benefit the rich. Rather, Romney and Republicans want to grow the economy so it's better, and so there's more for everyone. Isn't the idea for the economy to improve and for everyone to have opportunity, to have jobs, and to prosper, not for the government to support people.
If you ever wondered which side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
If a Freedom Loving American doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a Leftist doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a Freedom Loving American is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a Leftist is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a Freedom Loving American is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Leftist is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a Freedom Loving American is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A Leftist wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a Freedom Loving American doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Democrats demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a Freedom Loving American is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A Leftist non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
If a Freedom Loving American decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A Leftist demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a Freedom Loving American reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A Leftist will read this and report it as spam because the truth about the way they think is not suppose to be made public and it is offensive to them !!
Which candidate is better for the country, if the country is healthy our wallets should be too. So, I'll take the business guy!!
idiots- he is destroying liberty, freedom and the USA
When people feed animals in a park they become dependent. That is what is happening. Soon enough if you do not look out the gov will be big enough to feed you what they want and when they want and will regulate you taking sh_ts. Dont you see the lies?
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
Breaking up big banks is an untested solution to the too big to fail problem that attempts to isolate and dismantle large, troubled institutions while protecting the rest of the economy.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
[BRIEFING.COM] The afternoon session wears on and there hasn't been a lot of change in today's tone. Things are mixed with blue-chip averages underperforming, although the small-cap Russell 2000 (-0.1%) has been unable to hold an earlier gain that had it up as much as 0.6%.
Every sector is in the red at the moment, implying that relative strength at this point is couched more in terms of which sectors are down the least rather than which sectors are up the most.
The ... More
More Market News
|There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.|
MUST-SEE ON MSN
- Video: Easy DIY smoked meats at home
A charcuterie master shares his process for cold-smoking meat at home.
- Jetpacks about to go mainstream
- Weird things covered by home insurance
- Bing: 70 percent of adults report 'digital eye strain'