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
Frank Nelson I could not have said it any better, you are absolutely correct, but I will be voting for OBAMA.....
Romney will get my vote.
We have seen what Obama can do. Obama has devalued the dollar, caused inflation, kept us in a recession, doubled gas prices which kills a personal budget, increased the cost of living, killed the economy, increased taxes and kept millions of Americans unemployed.
Obama talks a good story, but there is no follow up or action to correct anything.
Obama is a disaster! $1 Trillion to his banker friends. Please he's still torturing the prisoners. When the court rules that those prisoners can sue for damages, we'll be out $billions more.
Prolonging a war for four years, oh I mean six years. Oh that was really good for the wallet.
Oh, and he's a tax and spend democrat.
Please don't re-elect this crumb! Unless you want slavery reinstated and want to be poor the rest of your life.
Oh, and Romney put together a successful Olympic games that was profitable.
No -one knows where Obama made his money.....and every one knows where Romney made his! This is a no-brainer folks!
PS Would any one of you dare tell me where Obama made his moneyconsidering all the thumbs down???????.........ObamaBots need not reply!
Who is better for your finances? HaHaHa! That's a good one! The short answer, NEITHER of them! Are you kidding? Stop and think about it. Where do politicians and governments get money? By just simply taking it from the working people. By taking money in exchange for which they give virtually nothing in return. Who is better for your finances, Obama or Romney, is like asking which is better; to have parasites living on your blood or not... No politician and by extension no gov't is good for your finances. All governments are parasitic, they live off your finances and there is no return on your time or money. Gov'ts have no source of income except what they can force or extort out of the hands of the people. Isn't it about time to wake up?
Romney would be better for my personal finances, but Obama is better for the country as a whole, and here are some reasons why.
Obama's approach to deficits is closer to Bill Clinton's, which includes spending cuts and targeted tax increases. Romney's approach calls for spending cuts only, and he leaves defense spending alone.
Romney would leave the "death tax" at zero. One of the ways we have avoided becoming a plutocracy is through a progressive tax system and an estate tax (death tax). If we eliminate either of these, the divide between the super rich and the rest of us will look like the Grand Canyon.
Romney plans to make major cuts to programs such as Medicaid by transferring the burden from the federal government to the states. At the same time, he wants to eliminate the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). This creates a false savings, because there will be less emphasis on preventive care and more reliance on emergency rooms, costing taxpayers much more in the long run.
Romney will attempt to eliminate most banking regulations. If anything, banking laws need to go further to protect taxpayers and shareholders from high risk activities. It was the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999 that led to the 2007-8 financial meltdown.
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.
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 stock market ended the holiday-shortened week on a mixed note as the Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 0.1%, while the S&P 500 added 0.1% with seven sectors posting gains.
Equity indices faced an uphill climb from the opening bell after disappointing quarterly results from Google (GOOG 536.10, -20.44) and IBM (IBM 190.04, -6.36) weighed on the early sentiment. Google reported earnings $0.15 below the Capital IQ consensus estimate on revenue of $15.42 ... 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'