Economically, Could Obama Be America's Worst President?

Stephanie

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
70,230
10,864
2,040
SNIP:





23 comments, 1 called-out
Comment Now


Follow Comments














US President Barack Obama speaks about the dea...
(Image credit: AFP/Getty Images via @daylife)

The recession ended four years ago, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. So Obamanomics has had plenty of time to produce a solid recovery. In fact, since the American historical record is the worse the recession, the stronger the recovery, Obama should have had an easy time producing a booming recovery by now.

Obama likes to tout that we are doing better now than at the worst of the recession. But every recovery is better than the recession, by definition. So that doesn’t mean much.



To The Horror Of Global Warming Alarmists, Global Cooling Is Here Peter FerraraPeter Ferrara Contributor

Ken Cuccinelli Emerges As One Of The Nation's Most Innovative Policy Makers Peter FerraraPeter Ferrara Contributor

House Republicans Prove Effective At Restraining Runaway Democrat Spending Peter FerraraPeter Ferrara Contributor

Overreaching Internet Sales Tax Is Obama's Calculated Deception Of Gullible Voters Peter FerraraPeter Ferrara Contributor

The right measure and comparison for Obama’s record is not to compare the recovery to the recession, but to compare Obama’s recovery with other recoveries from other recessions since the Great Depression. By that measure, what is clear is that Obamanomics has produced the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression, worse than what every other President who has faced a recession has achieved since the Great Depression.

In the 10 previous recessions since the Great Depression, prior to this last recession, the economy recovered all jobs lost during the recession after an average of 25 months after the prior jobs peak (when the recession began), according to the records kept by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. So the job effects of prior post Depression recessions have lasted an average of about 2 years. But under President Obama, by April, 2013, 64 months after the prior jobs peak, almost 5½ years, we still have not recovered all of the recession’s job losses. In April, 2013, there were an estimated 135.474 million American workers employed, still down about 2.6 million jobs from the prior peak of 138.056 million in January, 2008.

Ronald Reagan suffered a severe recession starting in 1981, which resulted from the monetary policy that broke the back of the roaring 1970s inflation. But all the job losses of that recession were recovered after 28 months, with the recovery fueled by traditional pro-growth policies. By this point in the Reagan recovery, 64 months after the recession started, jobs had grown 9.5% higher than where they were when the recession started, representing an increase of about 10 million more jobs. By contrast, in April, 2013, jobs in the Obama recovery were still about 2% below where they were when the recession started, about 2 ½ million less, or a shortfall of about 10 million jobs if you count population growth since the recession started, as discussed below.

Obama’s so-called recovery included the longest period since the Great Depression with unemployment above 8%, 43 months, from February, 2009, when Obama’s so-called stimulus costing nearly $1 trillion was passed, until August, 2012. It also included the longest period since the Great Depression with unemployment at 9.0% or above, 30 months, from April, 2009, until September, 2011. In fact, during the entire 65 years from January, 1948 to January, 2013, there were no months with unemployment over 8%, except for 26 months during the bitter 1981 – 1982 recession, which slayed the historic inflation of the 1970s. That is how inconsistent with the prior history of the American economy President Obama’s extended unemployment has been. That is some fundamental transformation of America.

Moreover, that U3 unemployment rate does not count the millions who have dropped out of the labor force during the recession and President Obama’s worst recovery since the Great Depression, who are not counted as unemployed because they are not considered in the work force. Even though the employment age population has increased by 12 million since the recession began, only 1 million more Americans are counted as in the labor force. With normal labor force participation rates, that implies another 7.3 million missing U.S. jobs, on top of the 2 ½ million missing jobs we are still short from when the recession began, for a total of about 10 million missing jobs.

all of it here
Economically, Could Obama Be America's Worst President? - Forbes
 
Hands down, for just about any reason you can imagine, Owe Bama, is in fact the worst President America has ever had. All politicians lie but this ass clown has that trait mastered to the greatest art form.
 
You can not compare 1981 to 2008 a different world. Thats like trying to compare the 85 bears to the 2006? Pat's.
 
Last edited:
In 2010 238 noted historians and presidential experts were asked to rate the presidents as they have done since 1948. The presidents were rated on 20 presidential traits, one being economics. In that rating, Bush was rated fifth overall worst president, but in economics Bush was rated second worst president.
Though Obama had only been in for two years the 238 historians rated Obama on those two years. They rated Obama 15th best president overall. Of course a considerable time period has now passed since that rating and we don't know if Obama has gained or lost ground, be interesting to see where he ends up at the end of both terms. I would suspect someplace between 10th and 16th best president. But we'll see. Bush may hold on to his fifth worst position.
 
In 2010 238 noted historians and presidential experts were asked to rate the presidents as they have done since 1948. The presidents were rated on 20 presidential traits, one being economics. In that rating, Bush was rated fifth overall worst president, but in economics Bush was rated second worst president.
Though Obama had only been in for two years the 238 historians rated Obama on those two years. They rated Obama 15th best president overall. Of course a considerable time period has now passed since that rating and we don't know if Obama has gained or lost ground, be interesting to see where he ends up at the end of both terms. I would suspect someplace between 10th and 16th best president. But we'll see. Bush may hold on to his fifth worst position.

Yeah. Probably somewhere in there. He's about average. Not surprising considering his overall lack of experience when he got the job.
 
In 2010 238 noted historians and presidential experts were asked to rate the presidents as they have done since 1948. The presidents were rated on 20 presidential traits, one being economics. In that rating, Bush was rated fifth overall worst president, but in economics Bush was rated second worst president.
Though Obama had only been in for two years the 238 historians rated Obama on those two years. They rated Obama 15th best president overall. Of course a considerable time period has now passed since that rating and we don't know if Obama has gained or lost ground, be interesting to see where he ends up at the end of both terms. I would suspect someplace between 10th and 16th best president. But we'll see. Bush may hold on to his fifth worst position.

The same experts routinely rate Abraham "What's Habeas Corpus?" Lincoln and Franklin "Intern the Japs" Roosevelt among the two best presidents.
 
Obama does rate high on the FDR scale of Greatness, but you have to remember that FDR gave us 7 years of 20% unemployment, the Tuskegee Experiments, and then goaded the Japanese into attacking us.
 
"Economically, Could Obama Be America's Worst President?"

Not to 47% of the folks.....
 

Forum List

Back
Top