The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

[U2Edge]

Its the only accurate way to asses how things went of the course of 96 months. Your GPA is an average because its the most accurate way to assess how you did as far as your grades in school. Understand?

Actually, colleges and graduate schools value where you started and where you ended over the average, putting finishing with a higher GPA on top and finishing with a lower GPA at the bottom. Bush started at around 4% UE and nearly doubled it. Obama started at nearly 8% UE and may well halve it by the time he leavers.

The only reason Obama might half it is because the babyboom generation is leaving the workforce. The economy is not performing well enough to support a labor force participation rate of 66% at below 6% unemployment. Finally, GPA is still calculated by averaging ones grades because its the only way to take a look at everything. Having one steller semester or one last poor semester is not going to radically change the result of the prior 7 or so semesters in school. Employers primarily look at the GPA, not individual grades and in what semester you got those grades.

So the average for the Presidents is important and reported here. Its a fact, and obviously many in politics don't like facts that make the people they support look weak relative to others. But these are simply the facts.

 

[edthecynic]

It started in the Clinton years no doubt when legislation was passed that promoted home ownership by people that couldn't afford it. The inevitable was set in those years.

Sorry, but that was Bush! Under Clinton buyers had to be qualified for the loan with good credit. It was Bush who started making no down payment loans to buyers with bad credit.

You might start here..but, I doubt you will.

Clinton s Legacy The Financial and Housing Meltdown - Reason.com

That is hardly a credible source.
Try again.

..and just waste my time, I don't think so...

[/QUOTE]
You wasted your time on that worthless source, why is your time now so suddenly valuable?

The fact remains that Bush and the GOP lowered the standards to try to steal minority voters away from the Dems in the upcoming 2004 election because they had convinced themselves all you have to do to get minority votes is give them free stuff, and what could be better than a house with no money down that you can't afford.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

 

[Lumpy 1]

It started in the Clinton years no doubt when legislation was passed that promoted home ownership by people that couldn't afford it. The inevitable was set in those years.

Sorry, but that was Bush! Under Clinton buyers had to be qualified for the loan with good credit. It was Bush who started making no down payment loans to buyers with bad credit.

You might start here..but, I doubt you will.

Clinton s Legacy The Financial and Housing Meltdown - Reason.com

That is hardly a credible source.
Try again.

..and just waste my time, I don't think so...

You wasted your time on that worthless source, why is your time now so suddenly valuable?

The fact remains that Bush and the GOP lowered the standards to try to steal minority voters away from the Dems in the upcoming 2004 election because they had convinced themselves all you have to do to get minority votes is give them free stuff, and what could be better than a house with no money down that you can't afford.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.[/QUOTE]
Dinner is on the plate and this subject leads to nowhere land.

There's plenty of blame to go around, it's not exclusive to Bush and when the dust settles the government doesn't belong in the loan business. The government is far to easily corrupted.

 

[kaz]

Your hallucinations grow increasingly bizarre. In reality, there are 6.4 million more people working today than there were when Obama became president. If 6.4 million in little more than 6 years (about 1 million per year) is your idea of "barely" growing, who knows what you think of Bush41's 4 years in office, which produced only 592K jobs per year. The second lowest growth. His son, Bush43, was the only one worse producing only 547K per year.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

These numbers are from the BLS Data link.

You cherry pick 4 years of Bush against 6 years and 4 months of Obama, so I will use 8 years of Bush against 6 years and 4 months of Obama.

Number employed
142,152,000 Jan 2009
148,523,000 Apr 2015
Increase 6,371,000

136,559,000 Jan 2000
143,369,000 Dec 2008
Increase 6,810,000

You will say the baby boomers just started retiring in 2009 and I will say he population growth has added more people to the work force.

All it proves is that numbers can be manipulated to satisfy one's agenda.

Increasing the number employed from 143 million in December 2008 to 148 million in April 2015, is a small increase, not on track with population growth or historical trends.

Bullshit. You're factoring in the negative impact from a massive recession and then concluding that over the last 6.5 years, the increase doesn't keep up with historical trends. The reality is over the last 5 years, it has. Once we got past the recession plus the lag time which follows, employment growth has been back on track. In fact, we're currently into the 62 consecutive month of the longest streak of job growth in the private sector recorded in U.S. history.

And yet that long streak has created way fewer actual jobs than previous recoveries because the recovery has been so endlessly soft. If you think our economy is as good now as before the recession then you are at most 14 years old

Why would anyone compare the economy now with an economy artificially inflated by the real estate bubble??

So you can make an argument to "compare the economy now with an economy artificially inflated by the real estate bubble" and if I respond to it you ask me why I would "the economy now with an economy artificially inflated by the real estate bubble."

Yeah.

BTW, the 90s was the Internet and productivity boom, the 60s was the Vietnam war economy, the 70s was the oil bubble. There are always factors in comparisons. Doesn't stop you though, does it? Well, unless you want it to...

 

[kaz]

You're fucking insane. I said nothing hypocritical.

Obama is not responsible for the first year of his Presidency, W's budget

Reagan is responsible for a recession that started 5 months into his Presidency

You are a flaming hypocrite, own it.

 

[kaz]

Nope, they spoke out before then as they pointed out Iraq was not a threat. Furthermore ... nine years, 5000 American lives, and trillions of dollars later they proved to be correct.

Perhaps you should read what they all stated very carefully and then tell me they were correct.

Really? Hillary said, "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program."

Show where Hussein worked to rebuild his WMD during those 4 years.......

Why don't you ask Hillary Clinton since she is the one who made the statement? That is why her statement is in quotation marks.

I think Obama has now passed Reagan, or is very close to it.

I saw that coming too. Hilarious.

Average Unemployment Rates For US Presidents since World War II:

01. Lyndon Johnson: 4.19%
02. Harry Truman: 4.26%
03. Dwight Eisenhower: 4.89%
04. Richard Nixon: 5.00%
05. Bill Clinton: 5.20%
06. George W. Bush: 5.27%
07. John Kennedy: 5.98%
08. George H.W. Bush: 6.30%
09. Jimmy Carter: 6.54%
10. Ronald Reagan: 7.54%
11. Gerald Ford: 7.77%
12. Barack Obama: 8.09%

Obama is still in last past and although it appears he will past Ford unless the unemployment rate goes up, its far from certain that he will pass Reagan and he will NEVER be able to beat BUSH!

Obama is already at 7.25% and still has another 18 months to drop it lower

Considering where he started, it is miraculous

7.25% after almost 6 1/2 years is "miraculous?" Your incredible standards for Republicans just disappear with Democrats...

No President since FDR has been given a gloomier employment figure
Obama has it down to 5.3%

What made it miraculous was Obama did it with Republicans insisting on austerity and reducing government employment at all levels

Sorry, all I heard was gurgling kool-aid, can you say that again?

 

[kaz]

Perhaps you should read what they all stated very carefully and then tell me they were correct.

Really? Hillary said, "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program."

Show where Hussein worked to rebuild his WMD during those 4 years.......

Why don't you ask Hillary Clinton since she is the one who made the statement? That is why her statement is in quotation marks.

I think Obama has now passed Reagan, or is very close to it.

I saw that coming too. Hilarious.

Average Unemployment Rates For US Presidents since World War II:

01. Lyndon Johnson: 4.19%
02. Harry Truman: 4.26%
03. Dwight Eisenhower: 4.89%
04. Richard Nixon: 5.00%
05. Bill Clinton: 5.20%
06. George W. Bush: 5.27%
07. John Kennedy: 5.98%
08. George H.W. Bush: 6.30%
09. Jimmy Carter: 6.54%
10. Ronald Reagan: 7.54%
11. Gerald Ford: 7.77%
12. Barack Obama: 8.09%

Obama is still in last past and although it appears he will past Ford unless the unemployment rate goes up, its far from certain that he will pass Reagan and he will NEVER be able to beat BUSH!

Obama is already at 7.25% and still has another 18 months to drop it lower

Considering where he started, it is miraculous

7.25% after almost 6 1/2 years is "miraculous?" Your incredible standards for Republicans just disappear with Democrats...

No President since FDR has been given a gloomier employment figure
Obama has it down to 5.3%

What made it miraculous was Obama did it with Republicans insisting on austerity and reducing government employment at all levels

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

Right, when Tip promised $3 tax cuts for every $1 in tax increases and reneged, that was Reagan spending money.

Up is down, night is day, you're a cynic. Actually you're a lemur

 

[kaz]

Really? Hillary said, "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program."

Show where Hussein worked to rebuild his WMD during those 4 years.......

Why don't you ask Hillary Clinton since she is the one who made the statement? That is why her statement is in quotation marks.

Average Unemployment Rates For US Presidents since World War II:

01. Lyndon Johnson: 4.19%
02. Harry Truman: 4.26%
03. Dwight Eisenhower: 4.89%
04. Richard Nixon: 5.00%
05. Bill Clinton: 5.20%
06. George W. Bush: 5.27%
07. John Kennedy: 5.98%
08. George H.W. Bush: 6.30%
09. Jimmy Carter: 6.54%
10. Ronald Reagan: 7.54%
11. Gerald Ford: 7.77%
12. Barack Obama: 8.09%

Obama is still in last past and although it appears he will past Ford unless the unemployment rate goes up, its far from certain that he will pass Reagan and he will NEVER be able to beat BUSH!

Obama is already at 7.25% and still has another 18 months to drop it lower

Considering where he started, it is miraculous

7.25% after almost 6 1/2 years is "miraculous?" Your incredible standards for Republicans just disappear with Democrats...

No President since FDR has been given a gloomier employment figure
Obama has it down to 5.3%

What made it miraculous was Obama did it with Republicans insisting on austerity and reducing government employment at all levels

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

The "Reagan miracle" was a result of massively increased defense spending and borrowing

Did you know that tax revenues doubled from the start of Reagan's presidency to the end? Facts are not a leftist's friend, are they, big guy?

 

[edthecynic]

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

Right, when Tip promised $3 tax cuts for every $1 in tax increases and reneged, that was Reagan spending money.

Up is down, night is day, you're a cynic. Actually you're a lemur

Exactly, it was St Ronnie the big spender who rejected the deal you mention because the bipartisan spending cuts agreed to in Congress were from Reagan's Star Wars pork barrel boondoggle!

 

[edthecynic]

Why don't you ask Hillary Clinton since she is the one who made the statement? That is why her statement is in quotation marks.

Obama is already at 7.25% and still has another 18 months to drop it lower

Considering where he started, it is miraculous

7.25% after almost 6 1/2 years is "miraculous?" Your incredible standards for Republicans just disappear with Democrats...

No President since FDR has been given a gloomier employment figure
Obama has it down to 5.3%

What made it miraculous was Obama did it with Republicans insisting on austerity and reducing government employment at all levels

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

The "Reagan miracle" was a result of massively increased defense spending and borrowing

Did you know that tax revenues doubled from the start of Reagan's presidency to the end? Facts are not a leftist's friend, are they, big guy?

Did you know that is a Limbaugh lie!. Tax revenues DROPPED the first 2 years of Reagan's tax cuts and only went up after Reagan's largest peacetime tax increase in history.
Facts do not exist in the Right's fantasyland.

 

[kaz]

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

Right, when Tip promised $3 tax cuts for every $1 in tax increases and reneged, that was Reagan spending money.

Up is down, night is day, you're a cynic. Actually you're a lemur

Exactly, it was St Ronnie the big spender who rejected the deal you mention because the bipartisan spending cuts agreed to in Congress were from Reagan's Star Wars pork barrel boondoggle!

You made that up, and you're wrong. The deal was for domestic spending cuts.

 

[kaz]

7.25% after almost 6 1/2 years is "miraculous?" Your incredible standards for Republicans just disappear with Democrats...

No President since FDR has been given a gloomier employment figure
Obama has it down to 5.3%

What made it miraculous was Obama did it with Republicans insisting on austerity and reducing government employment at all levels

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

The "Reagan miracle" was a result of massively increased defense spending and borrowing

Did you know that tax revenues doubled from the start of Reagan's presidency to the end? Facts are not a leftist's friend, are they, big guy?

Did you know that is a Limbaugh lie!. Tax revenues DROPPED the first 2 years of Reagan's tax cuts and only went up after Reagan's largest peacetime tax increase in history.
Facts do not exist in the Right's fantasyland.

Hey bitch. I'm a libertarian, if what you want it to argue with Republicans, they are all over the board I'm not interested in arguing for them. If you do want to debate a libertarian I'm here though. Since all you have are memorized Democratic talking points, that probably isn't going to work though, is it?

 

[edthecynic]

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

Right, when Tip promised $3 tax cuts for every $1 in tax increases and reneged, that was Reagan spending money.

Up is down, night is day, you're a cynic. Actually you're a lemur

Exactly, it was St Ronnie the big spender who rejected the deal you mention because the bipartisan spending cuts agreed to in Congress were from Reagan's Star Wars pork barrel boondoggle!

You made that up, and you're wrong. The deal was for domestic spending cuts.

History News Network Rosy Scenarios and Red Realities Ronald Reagan George W. Bush and the Deficit

Reagan continued to rail against deficits while doing everything he could to protect his tax and defense programs that were their primary cause. In 1985 he adroitly outmaneuvered GOP Senate leader Bob Dole’s efforts to cut a deficit-reduction deal with House Democratic Speaker Tip O’Neill that included tax increases and defense cuts in return for entitlement economies.

Reconcilable Differences d0e4234

Dole accused Reagan of "surrendering to the deficit." "If the President can't support us, he ought to keep his mouth shut,"

 

[kaz]

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

Right, when Tip promised $3 tax cuts for every $1 in tax increases and reneged, that was Reagan spending money.

Up is down, night is day, you're a cynic. Actually you're a lemur

Exactly, it was St Ronnie the big spender who rejected the deal you mention because the bipartisan spending cuts agreed to in Congress were from Reagan's Star Wars pork barrel boondoggle!

You made that up, and you're wrong. The deal was for domestic spending cuts.

History News Network Rosy Scenarios and Red Realities Ronald Reagan George W. Bush and the Deficit

Reagan continued to rail against deficits while doing everything he could to protect his tax and defense programs that were their primary cause. In 1985 he adroitly outmaneuvered GOP Senate leader Bob Dole’s efforts to cut a deficit-reduction deal with House Democratic Speaker Tip O’Neill that included tax increases and defense cuts in return for entitlement economies.

Reconcilable Differences d0e4234

Dole accused Reagan of "surrendering to the deficit." "If the President can't support us, he ought to keep his mouth shut,"

Tax cuts reduce deficits, particularly as a percent of GDP.

His defense spending blew the tires off the Soviet economy.

All that while, Tip was tipping the scales on domestic spending.

The deficit was far more Tip than Reagan

 

[edthecynic]

That's right, Big Government Reagan brought UE down by growing the government while preaching smaller government.
Go figure!

Right, when Tip promised $3 tax cuts for every $1 in tax increases and reneged, that was Reagan spending money.

Up is down, night is day, you're a cynic. Actually you're a lemur

Exactly, it was St Ronnie the big spender who rejected the deal you mention because the bipartisan spending cuts agreed to in Congress were from Reagan's Star Wars pork barrel boondoggle!

You made that up, and you're wrong. The deal was for domestic spending cuts.

History News Network Rosy Scenarios and Red Realities Ronald Reagan George W. Bush and the Deficit

Reagan continued to rail against deficits while doing everything he could to protect his tax and defense programs that were their primary cause. In 1985 he adroitly outmaneuvered GOP Senate leader Bob Dole’s efforts to cut a deficit-reduction deal with House Democratic Speaker Tip O’Neill that included tax increases and defense cuts in return for entitlement economies.

Reconcilable Differences d0e4234

Dole accused Reagan of "surrendering to the deficit." "If the President can't support us, he ought to keep his mouth shut,"

Tax cuts reduce deficits, particularly as a percent of GDP.

His defense spending blew the tires off the Soviet economy.

All that while, Tip was tipping the scales on domestic spending.

The deficit was far more Tip than Reagan

Tax cuts reduce revenue which increases deficits.

St Ronnie's defense pork spending turned this country from a creditor nation to a debtor nation that we have not recovered from to this day.

Domestic spending did not even keep up with inflation.

Reagan owns the GOP national debt and the interest on the debt.

 

[kaz]

Tax cuts reduce revenue which increases deficits

1) Tax cuts reduce the drain on the economy and stimulate growth which increases taxes
2) That growth reduces the debt in the most important aspect, as a percent of GDP

When you can explain how you know more than the field of economics, get back to me

St Ronnie's defense pork spending turned this country from a creditor nation to a debtor nation that we have not recovered from to this day.

You are an idiot. When you want to deal with reality, get back to me

Domestic spending did not even keep up with inflation.

You're delusional

Reagan owns the GOP national debt and the interest on the debt.

But Obama doesn't, does he liar?

 

[edthecynic]

Tax cuts reduce revenue which increases deficits

1) Tax cuts reduce the drain on the economy and stimulate growth which increases taxes
2) That growth reduces the debt in the most important aspect, as a percent of GDP

When you can explain how you know more than the field of economics, get back to me

When you can explain why revenue went down for the first 2 years after Reagan's massive tax cuts and revenue went up after Reagan's massive tax increase you can speak for the "field of economics."

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

Barrack Obama: 8.86%

Average Unemployment Rates For US Presidents since World War II:

01. Lyndon Johnson: 4.19%
02. Harry Truman: 4.26%
03. Dwight Eisenhower: 4.89%
04. Richard Nixon: 5.00%
05. Bill Clinton: 5.20%
06. George W. Bush: 5.27%
07. John Kennedy: 5.98%
08. George H.W. Bush: 6.30%
09. Jimmy Carter: 6.54%
10. Ronald Reagan: 7.54%
11. Gerald Ford: 7.77%
12. Barack Obama: 8.86%

And that's even with cooking the books....

I heard Obama was doing an interview with an economics magazine in which he bragged how the economy was better by nearly every metric. Pretty sure the journalist didn't call him out. Everyone knows that Obama couldn't begin to explain economics.....

 

[XploreR]

The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

Barrack Obama: 8.86%

Average Unemployment Rates For US Presidents since World War II:

01. Lyndon Johnson: 4.19%
02. Harry Truman: 4.26%
03. Dwight Eisenhower: 4.89%
04. Richard Nixon: 5.00%
05. Bill Clinton: 5.20%
06. George W. Bush: 5.27%
07. John Kennedy: 5.98%
08. George H.W. Bush: 6.30%
09. Jimmy Carter: 6.54%
10. Ronald Reagan: 7.54%
11. Gerald Ford: 7.77%
12. Barack Obama: 8.86%

What you're forgetting or selectively ignoring is the fact that during the last year of GW Bush's administration, the economic bubble burst and the country entered the worst recession since the Great Depression. GW Bush escaped the worst of it since he was on his way out of the White House just as it really began to have an impact. Obama, who had nothing to do with its cause, inherited it full blast upon his inauguration, and has been forced to spend most of his energy through much of his time in office trying to deal with that disaster while a totally non-cooperative, dis-functional and rabidly hostile Congress fought him at every turn. Considering the environment he had to contend with, Obama has achieved remarkable results, and deserves credit. Last figures I saw reported in the media, unemployment was down to the lowest levels it's been for many years, and Obama's policies and efforts are greatly responsible for that.

 

[Faun]

S

Obama is already at 7.25% and still has another 18 months to drop it lower

Considering where he started, it is miraculous

Wrong! His average for the first 76 months in office is 8.09%. Even by the end of this year and current rates, he will still be behind Gerald Ford!

So? He also inherited the highest unemployment rate of any president along with an economy in recession. And as has been pointed out, averaging out the unemployment rate is quite useless.

Its the only accurate way to asses how things went of the course of 96 months. Your GPA is an average because its the most accurate way to assess how you did as far as your grades in school. Understand?

And if you flunk your senior year, you don't graduate. Yet other students with lower GPA's do. One look no further than Bush and Carter having lower UE averages than Reagan to know how stupid it is to average them. Averaging them hides the fact that Reagan lowered the UE rate on his watch while Bush nearly doubled it.

Maybe in high school but not in college. In college all that matters is that you have a high enough GPA with enough credits. Again, averages take in all the data and give a true overall grade of ones performance. The average man on the street had an easier time finding employment while Carter sat in the oval office than he did while Reagan was there.

Again, you can't take the last few months of an administration and use that in place of the previous 90 months of data. That 90 months counts and will only get reflected and properly credited when you average the data. Part of you agrees with this otherwise you would have stop participating in this thread long ago.

Complete nonsense. It's nonsense that to say overall GPA keeps you in college even with failing grades towards the end. It's nonsense to suggest I agree with any part of your nonsense. And it's nonsense to think I would have stopped participating in this discussion if I disagree with you.

Again, your logic makes Carter look better than Reagan. Your logic makes Bush look better than Reagan. That makes sense to you? Your logic hides the fact that Bush has the worst employment growth record in the history of BLS statistics. Your logic hides the fact that he's the only president in BLS stats dating back to the 1930's to leave office with fewer private sector jobs than when he started. Your logic hides the fact that Reagan created jobs and lowered the unemployment rate while Bush created almost no jobs and nearly doubled the unemployment rate. That makes sense to you?