Thirty-eight percent of Connecticut residents said their households are financially better off now than they were four years ago, compared with 51 percent who said they’re worse off, a new poll from Siena College shows.
That result is more negative than a recent University of Connecticut/Hartford Courant poll, which showed 43 percent of respondents better off and 34 percent worse off.
Two big differences in the polls: The Siena Poll, by the Siena Research Institute at the Loudonville, N.Y. college, released Monday, queried a cross section of all adults and asked specifically about whether households were better off financially. The UConn/Courant poll, done last month, asked likely voters if they were “generally” better or worse off.
In both polls, Democrats were far more likely to say they were better off than Republicans — 54 percent of Democrats in the Siena poll, compared with 22 percent of Republicans.
Twenty percent of respondents of the Siena poll, which was sponsored by First Niagara Bank, said they and their families were better off financially in the last year, compared with 37 percent who said they were worse off.
When asked to look ahead five years, Siena respondents were split evenly on whether Connecticut will see “continuous good times” or “periods of widespread unemployment or depression,” with Fairfield County residents showing the most optimism on that question, 42 percent good, 29 percent bad.
As we’d expect, 75 percent said gasoline prices are having a very serious or somewhat serious effect on their family’s finances.
The poll queried 633 state residents by phone from October 4 to 14, and weighted some answers differently by age, gender and political party, to “enhance representativeness,” for a margin of error of plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
24 Responses to Better Off Or Worse Off in CT? A New Poll Is Negative
- -- ADVERTISEMENT --
- -- ADVERTISEMENT --
Having lived in my town for 34 yrs(Milford) with 3 kids one grown,in college, and one in hi school I have seen a lot of changes. It used to be the large defense and telecom and financial services industry(tons of banks and insurance hq in Hartford) we were all in the same boat. However if you dont have one household member on the public payroll you are struggling now..many men Iknow were the “breadwinner” 25 yrs ago with the teacher as second inc, now it has reversed. Esp. in the Hartford area you need a stable income with pension to have peace of mind as so many businesses gone. In Fairfield a little better.
Well I’m a better off now since I don’t need to wake up every dang day and stare at myself in the mirror and ask, ‘What y’all think I did now?”
I made a few missteps but now I can go riding with my devoted one-legged former soldier buddies (yep. I’m still their commander-in-chief) who really do like me for what I really am; a shallow jerk with a conscience.
I can turn around 360 degrees around my house and EVERYONE is a government employee – it scares me. No one is employed by the private sector.
I lost track of how many typos there were in this article. Can everyone chip in to buy Dan a copy of The Elements of Style?
Elements of Style doesn’t get into typos are far as I know. All fixed. Thanks for the concern.
Each situation is different, but for me, there is no doubt that we are worse off financially. In our two income household, neither of us has had a raise in 4 years and our employers are both struggling. Meanwhile, costs continue to rise so things we used to do get cut. We are grateful however to have jobs in this awful economy as many others are not so fortunate.
Anyone who votes for four more years of the status quo should have his/her head examined.
But what is the status quo? Obama or Romney? That’s not at all clear. Health care reform goes into effect in 2014. Is keeping that reform on the books the status quo? No, it isn’t. Dodd-Frank financial reform is still taking effect and has not been tested yet. What’s the status quo, repealing that or keeping it? The list goes on.
Let me be clear: the status quo is Obama. Four more years of him and we’ll be Greece.
How can anyone be better off, with the exception of political cronies and insiders, under the regimes of Obama and Malloy? For CT residents, that is a toxic combination!
Health “reform”? You must be joking – the inefficient U.S. government taking over health care. Dan, if you like your post office, you will love Obamacare!
The question is easy to answer for me and I would think for all of us honest enough to comment.
So let’s reflect; October, 2008. Major corporations were failing, the banking system was falling into deep freeze, small businesses like the one I own slowed down to a crawl. ( I had a joke going at the time that I allowed myself extravagant spending each week buy purchasing one coffee a week out.)Any one who had a pension or other type of investment was watching the value diminish. We tittered on the brink of a real depression. We stayed glued to our newscasts sometimes all night long trying to make sense of this major disaster unfolding in front of us. Neighbors would come out of their homes and just look at each other forlornly. I’ll even bet that homeless beggers could tell you that we are doing better now then before. And that says it for 100% of the population.
Dan, I think one can reasonably suggest that everyone is doing a whole might better these days. Including you.
I purposely restricted my comments to non political ones.
I don’t know anyone who is better off – Obama has ruined the economy – the time to stop blaming others was when the stimulus got passed.
Also, the media needs to stop protecting him.
I have a quick and easy question on this topic: If Obama ruined the economy, how did he do it? Did he spend too much money, or too little? If it was too much, how exactly has that ruined the economy? Taxes are down under Obama, not up. A rising deficit only ruins an economy when the currency collapses, and obviously that hasn’t happened under Obama. As for regulations, there’s absolutely no increase in federal regulation, and if there was, there’s no evidence that increased regulation slows the economy; it tends to be neutral over time. It’s true we have a future problem, but how has that caused any of the ills that we’re feeling now?
I was unemployed for 2 years then, took a job out of state in Western MA at a grade 3 levels lower than what I should have taken based on my education, experience and training. I’ve liquidated my 401(k) from approximately 30k dow to 10k! Think I’m feeling like I’m doing better! At lease I have one saving grace my earned military pension that I will start collecting on in 9 months! I’m living hand to mouth until that time! Atatus quo? Why don’t you publish John Kennedy’s campaign speech when he was running for President in 1962. He sounds more like your today Republican than a Democrat! The democratic party has shifted to far left! It doesn’t represent the average Middle Class indiviual anymore! In a nut shell, Obama lacks the business acument to turn this sluggish economy around and his “Leadership” traits are disgusting! He needs to stop playing the blame game, just like in Benghazi and start being trthful with the American public. Why has the Press been so easy on him, especially with “Fast and Furious” and the Benghazi revelations!
Bill:
I discern from your statement that you blame the President for your own shortcomings. Instead of depending on companies to guarantee you a certain “grade 3 levels” for life, you should have struck out on your own and become responsible for your own independent progress in life. Perhaps you should direct your anger at the corporate special interests who bought themselves free passes to cheap off-shore labor and while both parties are at fault, the corporate community is made up mostly of conservative republicans.
Try directing your anger in the right direction. Stop being their patsy.
JFK lowered the top marginal rate on personal income taxes from 93 percent to 70 percent. The top rate under Obama has been 35 percent — not exactly communism. The last time income taxes on the highest brackets were this low was in the ’30s. What is this ‘business acumen’ you’re talking about? Romney’s ‘business acumen’ consisted of leveraging companies to the hilt, and that’s the part on which everyone agrees — whether he moved jobs offshore is another question. The Bain business model called for extremely high debt, paid back from presumed cash flow, and if the cash didn’t flow, the company was shut down. That, my friend, is not the sort of ‘business acumen’ that would be well suited for the job of overseeing $3 trillion a year of social services, military procurement, regulatory activity and global diplomacy. The government is a demand-side animal and people who bring supply-side thinking usually fail in government, as we saw with a hapless pair of Bushes. Reagan, for all his bluster about supply-side economics, increased spending massively.
Dan wrote:
“Taxes are down under Obama, not up.”
Hi Dan – what about inflation? Inflation is a hidden tax that no one wants to talk about. The government keeps reporting that inflation is running 1-2% a year. I find that hard to believe when healthcare costs have been rising 10% per year, give or take, and healthcare spending is roughly 1/6th of the economy. Gas, and heating oil prices are at their highest levels ever at this time of year. If you look closely, product sizes for various consumer goods have been shrinking. Sure, we may be paying the same price, or just slightly more for things, but we’re getting a lot less for our money!
“A rising deficit only ruins an economy when the currency collapses, and obviously that hasn’t happened under Obama.”
You may want to read John Mauldin’s book Endgame. Or This time is Different, by Roghoff and Reinhardt. They will show you how countries that are deep in debt, such as Greece, Spain, Japan(20 years and counting) and yes, the US, cannot possibly grow their economies when debt levels are so high. While no one’s currency has collapsed yet, stay tuned!
As for me, sure, I’m better off financially than 4 years ago. I’m one of the fortunate to have had a job for the past 4 years and I save my money and choose to spend money wisely. But honestly, if it wasn’t for my family, I would have already left this state. Better than half my income goes to the government at all 3 levels, and I’m middle class, thank you. Just look at all of the corporations and people who have moved South where taxes and the cost of living are lower.
Dan – you sound like a complete Democratic hack. Barry’s lack of belief in the business community as a solution instead of viewing it as a problem creates massive uncertainty, hence massive apprehension to invest. Profit is not a dirty word – its what drives the dream. Don’t lump all business in with what happened on Wall Street – its unfair and it makes you look foolish. You can be a supporter if you choose, but Barry O has been a disaster for the private sector.
I read John Mauldin every week. John Mauldin is a bright guy with powerful friends that he likes to talk about. John Mauldin predicted the world would come to an end in Y2K, remember that calamity? He’s been predicting the collapse of the stock market since the 90s.
I guess since we must pick a president from the two candidates, I doubt if you will find either has all the answers. I think that Obama has had 4 years and we’re still in bad straits! Change is what we need now! Politics aside based on my experience in dealing with “Leadership” after spending 22+ years as a Commissioned officer all I can say if Obama was in my OCS class he would wind up in the bottom 5 peer ratings! I’ve never seen a person look to blame others for what he has failed to do! own up to it! Do you really think that Obama has been truthful about the Benghazi terroristy attack? Please try and put your Liberals bias aside!
Kurt, that’s the most cohesive remark I’ve seen all day. We are asking a simple question here — how has Barry O’Bomber (his basketball nickname) hurt the economy of the last four years — NOT how has he created programs and policies such as health reform and the stimulus that may or may not blow up in the future. So, if there’s less investment because of uncertainty arising from his leadership, that is an answer. But I still disagree, since Obama argues, and I agree, that broader health coverage, sound financial regulation and so forth are factors that will increase stability, not hurt it.
Here here…
Benghazi is a tough one for Obama. You want a guy who didn’t take consulate security seriously enough or a guy who insults our allies on their soil? Tonight’s contest should be great — either the Debate or the NLCS Game 7, or the Bears-Lions. Spectators can’t lose this one.
“He’s been predicting the collapse of the stock market since the 90s.”
And it did – twice in fact, once being the internet bubble and the other being the housing bubble. Look at the stock market of Japan, since I believe that is where the US is headed. It’s had a lot of major ups and downs…and after 20 years, it is down some 75% off of it’s peak. The rule of holes is that when you are in a hole to stop digging…Between O’Bummer’s and Congress’ deficit spending and Bernanke’s money printing, we’re on our way to Japan!