What the Hell is Bidenomics?

The Term "Bidenomics" Spontaneously Appeared in June 2023

“Bidenomics is working”, says a press release from the White House from June 2023. “Bidenomics is Real Economics”, says Time Magazine in a highly defensive article in December 2023.

What exactly is Bidenomics? And how did it suddenly appear out of thin air? Don’t economic plans get discussed during a State of the Union address or at least at a press conference? Surely, there has to be some unveiling of an economic plan before it suddenly appears, or can an economic plan go from nonexistence to a success?

There is a consistent definition of Bidenomics. One definition is “Bidenomics sums up President Biden’s economic gains, policies and plans”. The rest of the definitions I’ve seen are variations on a theme of “Bidenomics is about growing the economy from the middle out and the bottom up, not the top down”. If this definition sounds opaque, it’s because it is. The phrase can be seen as too important to ignore, yet vague enough to avoid any scrutiny. It’s hard to disagree with a phrase like that, because it doesn’t have a specific meaning to disagree with.

Bidenomics sounds like it has been conspicuously framed as the opposite of Reagenomics, which was a top-down economic strategy. In the language of logic, we would call it “not Reagenomics”. With a sleight of hand, it can be erroneously perceived as new economic system that will replace supply side economics. For the many who are suffering economically, the idea of “not top-down” can sound like a godsend. The question is whether it is actual policy or just another illusion.

Reagenomics was horrible policy. It was sold as a way to improve the economy for all classes. It was one of the biggest lines of bullshit ever sold to this country. It cut taxes for the rich so that the wealth would “trickle down to everyone else”. The result was a wealthier upper class and deficit borrowing to foot the bill for the lost tax revenue. The plan was doomed for Americans from the start, since it was never intended to help the middle class or the poor. Those in power still benefit from supply side economics and cling to it for dear life.

With Reagenomics, it’s possible to tie it to specific policy. Not good policy, but actual policy. Tax cuts were given to the upper class, deregulation was put in place for numerous industries, the administration fought inflation and the domestic budget suffered cuts.

What policies have been enacted by Bidenomics? Some will argue the infrastructure bill was the main catalyst. It did add construction jobs, but a moderate increase in one sector is not nearly enough to make or break an economy. What about clean energy tax credits? They have been around for a while and have historically gone to the rich. There is no evidence to the contrary that these credits have been more equitably distributed. What words can describe an economic plan that takes one of the biggest threats to our existence (climate change) and uses it to benefit the wealthy?

A key aspect often attributed to Bidenomics is the initiative to reduce inflation. The administration is attempting to reduce inflation by raising interest rates. That’s right out of Reagan’s playbook. It’s a conservative measure meant to squeeze money out of the economy. Who suffers most from interest rate hikes? The middle and lower classes who can no longer afford mortgages and car loans, exactly the people who were supposed to benefit from Bidenomics in the first place.

The Inflation Reduction Act was mostly about energy credits. I am not sure how energy credits could possibly fight inflation. Inflation has many causes, mostly from inherent problems within our socio-political system, such as the United States’ addiction to printing money.

“Middle-out” economics is an ambiguous term that just states the necessity for policy that benefits the middle class. It does not specify any type of policy, how to achieve that policy or how the middle-class benefits. This label was coined by Bill Clinton’s speech writer Eric Lui, not by economists or policy experts. Bottom-up is a bit more concrete. It’s about supporting and investing in local entrepreneurs. The closest match I can find for “bottom-up” is the Child Tax Credit. for 2024, this is set to be $2000 per child. It is credit, not a refund. Taxable income is reduced by this amount. While this helps families a bit, it is a far cry from a “bottom up” investment.

This leads to the next point. What is perhaps most misleading about Bidenomics is the disingenuous presentation that it’s an overhaul to our political-economic system designed to benefit the middle class and poor. That type of change would never happen with a long time Neoliberal like Biden at the helm. His staff and his Wall Street/corporate donors would never entertain that for a moment. An equality based economic system would negatively affect the donor class, which is why the political system refuses to reform itself.

As Americans, we have recently been told that we are just ungrateful children who don’t appreciate what Bidenomics has done for us. Or more likely the abusive partner in a relationship yelling “I do everything for you, you just don’t appreciate it”.

What are the supporting claims by the Biden administration that the economy is heating up? CNN ran an article titled “The US economy is doing well. President Biden wants to know why so many Americans are still feeling bad”.

“By many metrics, the US economy is humming along. The jobs market is robust; consumers are spending again; and inflation has eased to a three-year low.”

Even if inflation has eased (it is now creeping back up again), it is still rampant and hurting Americans. Food prices are extraordinarily high, the poverty level in this country has gone from 8% to 12% since Biden has been in office. Real wages are down between 4.1% and 5% (depending on the source). Overall cost of living us up by 20%. Has the deficit been reduced as claimed by Bidenomics? Hardly. The debt ceiling is at 35 trillion now, up from 28 trillion in 2020. Federal spending went from 4.1 trillion in 2022 to 6.1 trillion in 2023.

The recent job reports show a rosy picture, but the reality is much harsher. There are about 700,000 people who left the work force that are no longer counted as unemployed. With those included, unemployment would be around 5.5% rather than the reported 3.7%. Many of the jobs included in the report are part time jobs where people have no benefits, savings or sick time. Part time jobs have been on the rise for years. Further, the number of people who are taking second jobs has been increasing. There is also the “seasonal adjustment” factor listed in job reports which is mostly based on estimates and relatively easy to manipulate. These tricks are not confined to the Biden administration. Manipulating the job report is unfortunately an old story.

The latest economic report from the Commerce Department showed the GDP for the first quarter of 2024 at a 1.6% increase, below the projection of 2.4%. Previous quarters had shown 3.4% and 4.9% increase respectively. If the economy tanks, what will happen to Bidenomics? Will the term disappear, and blame turned on America’s Scapegoat, Putin?

So, forgive Americans for their lack of enthusiasm and belief in Bidenomics.

What’s the truth about Bidenomics? The term was created by selecting certain positive statistics and ignoring major ones that didn’t fit the narrative. Liberal elites are well aware of the election time maxim “it’s about the economy, stupid” so they built a unique narrative to create the image of a red-hot economy. It’s brilliant propaganda that leverages the popularity of the term “Reagenomics” and turns it on its head. For those who are suffering economic woes, they are brow beaten about how strong the economy is, but told they are just too dumb to understand it. Bidenomics is part of a broken system, a plan that keeps the existing economic system in place. It’s the same Neoliberal/Conservative economics as always. The Biden administration leveraged a few good financial quarters to create a fantasy.

Biden was willing to fight for more money for a lost war in the Ukraine and the Gaza massacre. He fought tooth and nail to get $95 billion approved. He fought very little to get anything passed that wasn’t war related. On some of the domestic issues like minimum wage increase or enhanced support during the Covid era he quickly folded. We are left only to wonder how that $95 billion could have helped inner cities in crisis in the US. It shows where Biden’s priorities are, and they clearly don’t match his Bidenomics narrative.

What going on in our chat?

John Mearsheimer discusses the true origins of the Ukrainian War: Feel free to contribute.