Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As of December, roughly two thirds of the jobs lost during Obama's presidency have been recovered.
That leaves a hole of slightly more than 1.6 million jobs for him to fill by the end of 2012.
It's a tall order. But it might just happen.
Economists surveyed by CNNMoney are predicting that American employers will add exactly that many jobs this year.
The economic out look is bleak. That is what I feel. I live in a very prosperous area of California and there is depression everywhere. Families are losing their homes.. No jobs.. It's depressing. Even I who make good money feel the tightening of the belt. I no longer spend the way I used to. I think before I spend.. Something I did not do before... Reverse Phone Numbers Look Up
If we are indeed in a recovery, its the weakest one in American history. Given the severity of the recession, we should be experiencing a much stronger bounce back. There really isn't any excuse with all the government intervention and money printing we have had. Instead, we are all but flatlining. Jobs have been created but barely enough to keep up with population growth and new grads entering the workforce. Even in the Great Depression, which the current recession is most similar to, saw a stronger recovery from '34-'36 than we are experiencing now. Why Obama used all his political capital on that unconstitutional, job killing health care bill instead of something that would actually help the economy is beyond me.
I agree that it doesn't feel like a recovery. More than anything, it feels like a govt fabrication. The statistics are not trustworthy, and nobody knows what to believe. A lot of businesses are having a hard time gauging the market. Some will take on risk, and others will sit back and play it safe. In the mean time, a lot of Americans are either sitting idle or settling for what they can find.
].....no president since Franklin D. Roosevelt has [/color]been elected for a second term with an unemployment rate over 7.2%.
Ronald Reagan was re-elected in November 1984 when the October 1984 unemployment rate was 7.3%.
The factoid that you should have used was "no president since Franklin D. Roosevelt has been elected for a second term with an unemployment rate over 7.4%".
It's always amazed me how that 1% difference between 7.3% and 7.4% makes all the difference in the world.
Besides, even if the unemployment rate does drop to 7.3% by October 2012 I'd still be told by some that the number was false and that the true unemployment rate was closer to 20% or 25%.
The economy was SO bad along with the real estate crash--what, realistically, did anyone THINK was going to happen? Did you really think it was going to turn around in 4 years. In 8 years? I think 8 years is a better guess to see recovery and, even then, I don't think we will see what we are accustomed to. There are so many compounding issues on *this* recovery. We don't have the manufacturing base that we did 50 years ago. We don't have the service base that we did. Much of our "work" is overseas. How can you have a robust recovery when that is now in the mix.
Being truly non-partisan here--there was no administration that could have turned us around. The question is, which one makes is worse and how do you even objectively judge that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.