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.
The housing bubble, which was highly leveraged, was bigger than the 1990s stock bubble. You can't make excuses for Bush's mediocre job gains. You're just being an apologist for conservative policies that history concludes do not work.
Wrong, as 9/11 was the worst thing we went through, and 2003-mid 2007 were super job creation years. Obama will go down amongst the all time worst net job losses of any admin.
Wrong, as 9/11 was the worst thing we went through, and 2003-mid 2007 were super job creation years. Obama will go down amongst the all time worst net job losses of any admin.
BS, there was barely a month between bush's TWO RECESSIONS that the were more than 300,000 jobs created. I suspect the average for the time period was less than the months jobs report.
BS, there was barely a month between bush's TWO RECESSIONS that the were more than 300,000 jobs created. I suspect the average for the time period was less than the months jobs report.
THIS is super job creation?
I'll take the 4-5.5 percent unemployment we enjoyed under Bush for several years.
As opposed to theis admins' lowest rate exceeding 7.5 percent.
I'll take the 4-5.5 percent unemployment we enjoyed under Bush for several years.
As opposed to theis admins' lowest rate exceeding 7.5 percent.
Explain how we got from that 5% or 6% (you being inventive?) and where we are today. See anything in that chart up there that says the collapsed happened LONG before obama?
Location: planet octupulous is nearing earths atmosphere
13,621 posts, read 12,733,455 times
Reputation: 20050
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn
Wrong, as 9/11 was the worst thing we went through, and 2003-mid 2007 were super job creation years. Obama will go down amongst the all time worst net job losses of any admin.
Explain how we got from that 5% or 6% (you being inventive?) and where we are today. See anything in that chart up there that says the collapsed happened LONG before obama?
I only fault Obama for his record from 1/20/09...which is putrid, as in all past recoveries, we've added several million per year, instead of relying on 4 mill to quit trying since 1/20/09.
"Americans are working, inflation is under control and wages are increasing with December unemployment rate at 4.5%, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.
The wages surge was 4.2% in 2006 and the annual unemployment rate came in at 4.6%."
Wrong, as 9/11 was the worst thing we went through, and 2003-mid 2007 were super job creation years. Obama will go down amongst the all time worst net job losses of any admin.
From an economic standpoint, 9/11 was minor. On the jobs, the evidence is clear:
As soon as Obama's policies started, the job losses inherited from Bush reversed.
We lost 8 million jobs. 4 million jobs is only half of that. PLUS...the population that would - under normal circumstances - be a part of the labor force has grown by ~6 million or so I believe since Obama has taken office. So, that's 4 million jobs out of 14 million or so that need to be created.
PLUS...that's only private sector jobs and you didn't take into account all the state and local government jobs that have been lost. So now you have about 15 million or so that need to be created.
As I explained in several earlier posts, any job creation number under about 150,000 in a month (and under about 200,000 a month in 2009/2010...the number is lower now because baby boomers are starting to retire more) is actually effectively a loss in jobs because of population growth.
And wages are down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
(Bush had a net loss of jobs.)
So? This isn't about Bush's record. Bush was not a very good president, but that's beside the point.
And - BTW - if Bush deserves to be blamed for the job losses in the early 2000's recession, then Obama deserves to be blamed for the job losses in this one that took place right after he took office. The early 2000's recession was getting under way right as Bush was elected, but I bet you would never blame Clinton for any role in it (though he is actually partially responsible for not only that recession, but also the recent one).
And - Obama still has a net loss of jobs even before you consider the new jobs that needed to be created just to account for population growth.
I don't blame Obama for all this, just as I don't blame GWB or Clinton or Congress for all this. I blame them all. They've all played a role in this mess. That said, I see no evidence that Obama will get us out of it.
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 05-07-2012 at 09:23 AM..
The idea that there’s been a net loss of jobs since Obama took office is fallacious. You are taking into account the fact that the economy continued hemorraghing jobs at a furious rate after Obama took office — before Obama’s stimulus passed. But the figures show that once it became law, monthly job loss declined within the next quarter, and turned around in the spring of 2010, after which the private sector added jobs for over 26 straight months, totaling around 2.5 million of them.
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.
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.
