• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Unemployment rate for first 4 years by president

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Dulanic

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
9,813
410
136
Obama could have done a hell of a lot more to help small businesses and promote a stable business environment....but he had other priorities.

Do you want to talk about the abject failure of his $787B stimulus package (Porkulus I)?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904716604576544500632493510.html

Or do you want to talk about his attempt to double-down on his Porkulus I failure ala American Jobs Act (Porkulus II)?
http://taxfoundation.org/article/academic-research-suggests-american-jobs-act-will-produce-few-jobs

http://www.openmarket.org/2011/09/12/obamas-job-creation-proposal-will-be-ineffective-critics-say/

Or perhaps, you want to talk about how effective "his" Jobs Act was. He called it a "game-changer"...what a laugh.

http://emergingcorruption.com/2011/09/incompetence-obama-even-loses-the-name-of-his-jobs-bill/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304072004577325883892874036.html

Tell me, what has he done to significantly affect real job creation?
For every article posted that says the stimulus failed we can find one that says it worked, at least partially. Notice the graph shows job growth not all that long after it was passed? Our economy was BLEEDING jobs like crazy, anyone who expected the economy to be back to 90's job growth is on crack. That economy was boosted by a .com bubble followed by a housing bubble. All of you crazy fucking republicans covered the country in gas, threw a match on it then ran away laughing going HE CAN'T FIX IT FAST ENOUGH!

That is not to say that it was perfect, it wasn't by any means. But to say it didn't help is laughable. Of course, neither of us have any proof until we can somehow see alternate realities.... repubs may live in one, but you can't see what would have or could have happened if different actions are taken.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
Nothing... because there is very little the federal government can do to create or help create jobs. If you didn't indict other presidents for their lackluster performance on job creation, don't start doing so with Obama.

Government doesn't create jobs, businesses do. All the incentives and promotion in the world won't force businesses to start hiring and expanding. There's nothing to prevent them from simply extracting more work out of their existing employees.

The only thing that truly drives business expansion/hiring is consumer demand and consumer spending... and there's very little the federal government can do to increase consumer demand/spending, too.
That's bullshit...our Government exerts a huge influence over our economy. http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/11/how-governments-influence-markets.asp#axzz26AkhocqK
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,941
126
Increasing government hiring would create a larger pool of consumers, increasing demand, and spurring growth.

But we can't have that because of Grover.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
No, it's not bullshit... at all.

Yes, the government "exerts influence over our economy", but most of those things in your linked article have been made very favorable to businesses yet hiring has not been enough to make a dent in unemployment. Why? Because it still is up to businesses to decide to hire/expand. That decision is more, for them, about consumer spending/demand than it is about anything the government does.

The bottom line is this: if consumers aren't spending, businesses won't be hiring or expanding. Nothing the government does matters if consumers aren't spending.
 
Last edited:

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
No, it's not bullshit... at all.

Yes, the government "exerts influence over our economy", but most of those things in your linked article have been made very favorable to businesses yet hiring has not been enough to make a dent in unemployment. Why? Because it still is up to businesses to decide to hire/expand. That decision is more, for them, about consumer spending/demand than it is about anything the government does.
A President waging war against the upper class, business owners and corporations sure doesn't help things.
 

Dulanic

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
9,813
410
136
A President waging war against the upper class, business owners and corporations sure doesn't help things.
Trickle down voodoo. The upper class and corporations are still paying among the lowest rates in history.
 

diesbudt

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2012
3,393
0
0
The bottom line is this: if consumers aren't spending, businesses won't be hiring or expanding. Nothing the government does matters if consumers aren't spending.

1) Consumers need to spend money for businesses to grow.
2) Consumers need money to spend money.
3) Consumers need jobs to earn money.
4) Businesses need money and a good outlook in a field to open job positions.

1 --> 2 --> 3 --> 4 --> 1 --> 2 --> 3 --> 4
(And the wheel keeps on turning...:whiste:)
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
No, it's not bullshit... at all.

Yes, the government "exerts influence over our economy", but most of those things in your linked article have been made very favorable to businesses yet hiring has not been enough to make a dent in unemployment. Why? Because it still is up to businesses to decide to hire/expand. That decision is more, for them, about consumer spending/demand than it is about anything the government does.
We'll just have to disagree on how well Obama has handled our economic problems. Vote for him...it will probably take another 4 years for it to finally sink in just how little he has done. If Romney wins, you'll immediately start seeing what Obama should have done when he took office in 2009. The economy should have been Obama's #1 priority...but instead...he had an agenda with much bigger fish to fry.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
We'll just have to disagree on how well Obama has handled our economic problems. Vote for him...it will probably take another 4 years for it to finally sink in just how little he has done. If Romney wins, you'll immediately start seeing what Obama should have done when he took office in 2009. The economy should have been Obama's #1 priority...but instead...he had an agenda with much bigger fish to fry.
I don't really disagree with you... I'm just telling you how little influence any president and the federal government has on job creation.

I am curious how you're so certain the economy will be Romney's #1 priority... because he said so? We've been down that road before. Remember Obama's "hope and change"? We all know how that turned out.
 

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,518
1
81
I don't really disagree with you... I'm just telling you how little influence any president and the federal government has on job creation.

I am curious how you're so certain the economy will be Romney's #1 priority... because he said so? We've been down that road before. Remember Obama's "hope and change"? We all know how that turned out.
No doubt. I don't see how he can have so much faith that Romney will do what he says. I mean, he has literally changed his position on literally EVERY issue that exists.

Romney has no record to back up the assertion that he would do anything that he says - he's a fucking sock puppet who says only what he thinks people want to hear.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
I don't really disagree with you... I'm just telling you how little influence any president and the federal government has on job creation.

I am curious how you're so certain the economy will be Romney's #1 priority... because he said so? We've been down that road before. Remember Obama's "hope and change"? We all know how that turned out.
Obama has shown us what he can do...and I'm disappointed. I'd like to see what Romney can do, and yes, I "hope" he does better. I was actually considering voting for Obama believe it or not. But the more I thought about his piss poor leadership...the better Romney looked to me.

If one's wedge issue is the economy, I really don't see any other alternative.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
I'd like to see what Romney can do, and yes, I "hope" he does better.
That's quite a bit more realistic than what you said initially:

Doc Savage Fan said:
If Romney wins, you'll immediately start seeing what Obama should have done when he took office in 2009
I understand hoping Romney does better, but I don't understand the assertion that he will do better.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
That's quite a bit more realistic than what you said initially:



I understand hoping Romney does better, but I don't understand the assertion that he will do better.
I "believe" Romney will make the economy his top priority and his actions will reflect this. And I "hope" it works. Does that help you?
 

mshan

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2004
7,869
0
71
"WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Small-business optimism rose in August as owners become more optimistic on the economy and future sales and increased their plans to hire, according to an index released Tuesday. The National Federation of Independent Business said its small-business optimism index rose 1.7 points to 92.9. It's the first rise in three months. Since the recession has ended, the index has veered between a low of 86.5 in July 2009 and a high of 94.5 in February 2012. Before the most recent recession, the index was 94.4 in November 2007."
http://news.morningstar.com/all/market-watch/0F6777E0-1726-4E82-8CEB-0FAA1EB02317/pulse-small-business-index-climbs-in-august-nfib-says.aspx







"Notice that hires (dark blue) and total separations (red and light blue columns stacked) are pretty close each month. When the blue line is above the two stacked columns, the economy is adding net jobs - when it is below the columns, the economy is losing jobs.

Jobs openings decreased in July to 3.664 million, down from 3.722 million in June. The number of job openings (yellow) has generally been trending up, and openings are up about 9% year-over-year compared to July 2011.

Quits increased slightly in July, and quits are up about 8% year-over-year. These are voluntary separations and more quits might indicate some improvement in the labor market. (see light blue columns at bottom of graph for trend for "quits").

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2012/09/bls-job-openings-little-changed-in-july.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+CalculatedRisk+(Calculated+Risk)
 
Last edited:

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,844
1,327
126
8% plus unemployment rate since 02/2009 or over 40 CONSECUTIVE months.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

Whatever happens to "it's the economy, stupid" chant from the Democrats?

Whatever happens to "summer of recovery"? or those (note the plural) "shovel ready jobs"?
 
Last edited:

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
I "believe" Romney will make the economy his top priority and his actions will reflect this. And I "hope" it works. Does that help you?
I'm not the one who needs help. Those who "believe" in politicians these days are the ones who need help.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,812
192
106
What we are forgetting, is that obama is reaping what bill clinton sewed. Didn't clinton sign a bunch of laws deregulating the financial markets?

The markets crashed at the same time as bush left and obama took office.
 

mshan

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2004
7,869
0
71









Molly's Middle America: http://mollysmiddleamerica.blogspot.com/2012/09/how-many-jobs-has-obama-created-or-lost.html
Since the "trough" of the recession in late 2009/early 2010:
4,056,000 MORE jobs in total
4,628,000 MORE private sector jobs
4,133,000 MORE people working

Since Bush left office & Obama took office (January 2009):
261,000 FEWER jobs in total
86,000 FEWER people working
But:
415,000 MORE private sector jobs


Since the stimulus was passed (# as of March 12, 2009):
1,262,000 MORE jobs in total
1,927,000 MORE private sector jobs
1,347,000 MORE people working


Since the beginning of Obama's first Fiscal Year (October 2009):
3,566,000 MORE jobs in total
4,166,000 MORE private sector jobs
3,326,000 MORE people working


Have any private jobs been lost (net) over the past 30 months?
NO!
30 months of consecutive private-sector job growth.


Have any jobs been lost (net) over the past 23 months?
NO!

23 months of consecutive over all job growth.





2 hour increase in average workweek from Bush to Obama years is equivalent to another 2 million jobs created




how many of the jobs "lost" were transient illusory bubble years jobs (e. g. building 1 million more homes per year than needed, stealing jobs and demand from future)




Secular decline in manufacturing jobs has been taking place for over a decade, and is just now turning around (http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2012/09/07/1151091/us-payrolls-and-past-as-predictor-for-construction-and-manufacturing-employment/)







 
Last edited:
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
I'm not the one who needs help. Those who "believe" in politicians these days are the ones who need help.
Oh brother. You start with parsing my words to the point of being embarassingly trite...and then double down by twisting a word into a backhanded personal insult.

zsdersw, I'm hurt. Have I offended you in some way?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY