Judging Obama's Handling of the Budget and the Economy Fairly

[mikegriffith1]

Obama's handling of the budget and the economy was not as bad as most conservatives believe it was, and it is not as good as most liberals claim it was. Some points:

* True, Obama jacked up spending in his first year, but he actually imposed a net cut on spending the following year (2010), before sequestration was even debated, and he held spending to virtually flat-lined levels through 2015 (US Federal Spending Analysis - Charts Tables History). Yes, the spending restraint from 2012 through 2015 was because of the sequester, but Obama agreed to the sequester--he could have vetoed it, but he did not.

* In connection with the above, Obama increased the national debt by a much smaller percentage than Bush did. Bush increased the debt by 101%. Obama increased it by 68%, one-third less than Bush.

* During Obama's 8 years, 17 million new jobs were created, a 12.8% increase, which far surpasses Bush's record on job creation (Which President Created the Most Jobs?).

* Under Obama, we had 74 consecutive months of job growth, from October 2010 to December 2016 (Bureau of Labor Statistics Data).

* The biggest chunk of Obama's much-maligned stimulus packet was devoted to tax cuts. Of the $787 billion, $288 billion was for tax cuts. Another $275 billion was for job creation via federal contracts, grants, and loans.

* Obama signed numerous tax-cut measures, both for individuals and for small businesses. He also made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent, against the advice of many liberal economists. Some of his other tax cuts included the following:

In 2010, President Obama signed an $858 billion tax cut deal. It extended the Bush tax cuts through 2012 and unemployment benefits through 2011. It cut payroll taxes by 2 percent, adding $120 million to workers' spendable income. It extended a college tuition tax credit. It also included $55 billion in industry-specific tax cuts. (https://www.thebalance.com/obama-tax-cuts-3306330; see also https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/taxes;
(https://www.cnbc.com/id/49261153; Obama Proposes Extending Small Business Tax Cuts Permanently | Andersen CPA Firm)​

* A typical family making $50,000 a year received tax cuts totaling $3,600 in President Obama’s first term, more if they were putting a child through college.

* Improvements to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC), enacted in 2009 under Obama and later made permanent provided roughly 16 million working families a year with a tax cut of about $900 on average.

* The 2015 budget deal lifted the sequester's caps but it also contained well over $600 billion in tax cuts/tax breaks and lifted the ban on oil exports.

Of course, there were some black marks. We actually lost manufacturing jobs under Obama, although the loss was relatively small--we went from 12,561,000 manufacturing jobs in January 2009 to 12,369,000 in January 2017. Another problem was that the stock market's growth was somewhat weak. Over-regulation was a drag on many business sectors. A sizable number of the new jobs that were created were modest-income jobs and part-time jobs, but the majority were good jobs. The U-6 rate, aka the "real unemployment rate," stayed unusually high for most of Obama's presidency. Obamacare caused many companies to change full-time positions to part-time positions to avoid having to offer health insurance.

On balance, Obama did a better of dealing with the budget and the economy than most conservatives give him credit for.

 

[BluesLegend]

Obama funneled taxpayer money off to his pals in the Dem party who then donated some of it back to their campaigns. His corruption is a stain on our great country.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Well, if that were true, yabut . . .

 

[whitehall]

It could be said that the economy had nowhere to go but up after the debacle of 2008 when democrat Barney Frank who had oversight responsibility for Fannie Mae let it collapse on his watch. Obama's micro managing of the economy and silly programs like "cash for clunkers" elicited little confidence from the public sector and when Obama came out and claimed that "corporations were the enemy" it was met with stagnation. The GDP never even came close to 3% during Hussein's 8 years while the administration bragged about how many people applied for food stamps and Black employment sank to dismal levels. Meanwhile the administration seemed to encourage Black violence against the government and the Police as a relief for unemployment. If you wanted to play poker with a high roller, Obama would be the perfect patsy. So many foreign governments conned him out of resources that the Iran deal has become the symbol of corruption.

 

[beagle9]

Yes, what is missing is his leanings in it all, and who actually benefitted from his actions and who didn't. It's very clear what Obama's vision was, and he proved it in so many ways.

The nation on whole rejected Obama's agenda, and it did so because it left to many out. Hillary paid for this when she was rejected in the election because mainstream America had gotten it's belly full of the bullcrap.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Obama's handling of the budget and the economy was not as bad as most conservatives believe it was, and it is not as good as most liberals claim it was. Some points:

* True, Obama jacked up spending in his first year, but he actually imposed a net cut on spending the following year (2010), before sequestration was even debated, and he held spending to virtually flat-lined levels through 2015 (US Federal Spending Analysis - Charts Tables History). Yes, the spending restraint from 2012 through 2015 was because of the sequester, but Obama agreed to the sequester--he could have vetoed it, but he did not.

* In connection with the above, Obama increased the national debt by a much smaller percentage than Bush did. Bush increased the debt by 101%. Obama increased it by 68%, one-third less than Bush.

* During Obama's 8 years, 17 million new jobs were created, a 12.8% increase, which far surpasses Bush's record on job creation (Which President Created the Most Jobs?).

* Under Obama, we had 74 consecutive months of job growth, from October 2010 to December 2016 (Bureau of Labor Statistics Data).

* The biggest chunk of Obama's much-maligned stimulus packet was devoted to tax cuts. Of the $787 billion, $288 billion was for tax cuts. Another $275 billion was for job creation via federal contracts, grants, and loans.

* Obama signed numerous tax-cut measures, both for individuals and for small businesses. He also made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent, against the advice of many liberal economists. Some of his other tax cuts included the following:

In 2010, President Obama signed an $858 billion tax cut deal. It extended the Bush tax cuts through 2012 and unemployment benefits through 2011. It cut payroll taxes by 2 percent, adding $120 million to workers' spendable income. It extended a college tuition tax credit. It also included $55 billion in industry-specific tax cuts. (https://www.thebalance.com/obama-tax-cuts-3306330; see also https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/taxes;
(https://www.cnbc.com/id/49261153; Obama Proposes Extending Small Business Tax Cuts Permanently | Andersen CPA Firm)​

* A typical family making $50,000 a year received tax cuts totaling $3,600 in President Obama’s first term, more if they were putting a child through college.

* Improvements to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC), enacted in 2009 under Obama and later made permanent provided roughly 16 million working families a year with a tax cut of about $900 on average.

* The 2015 budget deal lifted the sequester's caps but it also contained well over $600 billion in tax cuts/tax breaks and lifted the ban on oil exports.

Of course, there were some black marks. We actually lost manufacturing jobs under Obama, although the loss was relatively small--we went from 12,561,000 manufacturing jobs in January 2009 to 12,369,000 in January 2017. Another problem was that the stock market's growth was somewhat weak. Over-regulation was a drag on many business sectors. A sizable number of the new jobs that were created were modest-income jobs and part-time jobs, but the majority were good jobs. The U-6 rate, aka the "real unemployment rate," stayed unusually high for most of Obama's presidency. Obamacare caused many companies to change full-time positions to part-time positions to avoid having to offer health insurance.

On balance, Obama did a better of dealing with the budget and the economy than most conservatives give him credit for.

Fair analysis, not a huge O fan he was to much of a corporate where for me. But the guy was dropped into a bad situation that was deteriorating quickly and he made moves to make things prolong. Yes he could have done a sight better but imagine if Booooosh had inherited that mess?

 

[mikegriffith1]

It could be said that the economy had nowhere to go but up after the debacle of 2008 when democrat Barney Frank who had oversight responsibility for Fannie Mae let it collapse on his watch. Obama's micro managing of the economy and silly programs like "cash for clunkers" elicited little confidence from the public sector and when Obama came out and claimed that "corporations were the enemy" it was met with stagnation. The GDP never even came close to 3% during Hussein's 8 years while the administration bragged about how many people applied for food stamps and Black employment sank to dismal levels. Meanwhile the administration seemed to encourage Black violence against the government and the Police as a relief for unemployment. If you wanted to play poker with a high roller, Obama would be the perfect patsy. So many foreign governments conned him out of resources that the Iran deal has become the symbol of corruption.

I agree with most of what you say. However, I would note that Obama quietly allowed the suicidal Sarbanes-Oxley mark-to-market regulation, which played a major role in causing the 2008 recession, to be gutted.

The modest GDP growth was a symptom of the over-regulation that characterized Obama's presidency.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If one is to credit any politician, one must point to actions taken to achieve such results. I didn't see that under DumBama.

For most of it, he happened to be at the right place at the right time. Spending? That's a congressional issue more than a presidential one. Economy? That had to do with the fed reserve pumping fake money into the market. I don't know if I can credit Obama with that one. And if the economy was doing so great, why did the interest rate remain 0% or near 0% throughout most of his two terms? That didn't start going up until after the lowering price of fuel which again, DumBama had nothing to do with. Lower cost fuel was the result of our success in Fracking which Obama and the Democrats have always hated. Everybody in America got a raise because of it. More money in our pockets means more spending.

Yes, I am a bias blogger, but I'll give anybody credit when credit is deserved. Somebody show me direct actions that caused direct results under DumBama. For instance now the left is claiming our economical success is because of Obama. What? It's a year and a half later. I can point to actions taken by Trump and the Republicans to give them credit today. Lowering taxes, rescinding regulations on businesses, getting rid of Commie Care are just a few things that encouraged growth in corporations and industry.

 

[mikegriffith1]

If one is to credit any politician, one must point to actions taken to achieve such results. I didn't see that under DumBama.

For most of it, he happened to be at the right place at the right time. Spending? That's a congressional issue more than a presidential one. Economy? That had to do with the fed reserve pumping fake money into the market. I don't know if I can credit Obama with that one. And if the economy was doing so great, why did the interest rate remain 0% or near 0% throughout most of his two terms? That didn't start going up until after the lowering price of fuel which again, DumBama had nothing to do with. Lower cost fuel was the result of our success in Fracking which Obama and the Democrats have always hated. Everybody in America got a raise because of it. More money in our pockets means more spending.

Yes, I am a bias blogger, but I'll give anybody credit when credit is deserved. Somebody show me direct actions that caused direct results under DumBama. For instance now the left is claiming our economical success is because of Obama. What? It's a year and a half later. I can point to actions taken by Trump and the Republicans to give them credit today. Lowering taxes, rescinding regulations on businesses, getting rid of Commie Care are just a few things that encouraged growth in corporations and industry.

I can't go along with much of this. Obama imposed a net cut in federal spending in 2010, before sequestration was even discussed. He increased the debt by 33% less than Bush did. He signed a number of tax cuts, including $288 billion in tax cuts as part of the stimulus. Furthermore, against the advice of most liberal economists, he extended and then made permanent nearly all of the Bush tax cuts. And, he agreed to the 2015 budget deal, which protected $680 billion in tax cuts/breaks, ended the ban on oil exports, and increased the number of enterprise zones around the country.

 

[Nova78]

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If one is to credit any politician, one must point to actions taken to achieve such results. I didn't see that under DumBama.

For most of it, he happened to be at the right place at the right time. Spending? That's a congressional issue more than a presidential one. Economy? That had to do with the fed reserve pumping fake money into the market. I don't know if I can credit Obama with that one. And if the economy was doing so great, why did the interest rate remain 0% or near 0% throughout most of his two terms? That didn't start going up until after the lowering price of fuel which again, DumBama had nothing to do with. Lower cost fuel was the result of our success in Fracking which Obama and the Democrats have always hated. Everybody in America got a raise because of it. More money in our pockets means more spending.

Yes, I am a bias blogger, but I'll give anybody credit when credit is deserved. Somebody show me direct actions that caused direct results under DumBama. For instance now the left is claiming our economical success is because of Obama. What? It's a year and a half later. I can point to actions taken by Trump and the Republicans to give them credit today. Lowering taxes, rescinding regulations on businesses, getting rid of Commie Care are just a few things that encouraged growth in corporations and industry.

I can't go along with much of this. Obama imposed a net cut in federal spending in 2010, before sequestration was even discussed. He increased the debt by 33% less than Bush did. He signed a number of tax cuts, including $288 billion in tax cuts as part of the stimulus. Furthermore, against the advice of most liberal economists, he extended and then made permanent nearly all of the Bush tax cuts. And, he agreed to the 2015 budget deal, which protected $680 billion in tax cuts/breaks, ended the ban on oil exports, and increased the number of enterprise zones around the country.

By his own choice or the Republicans?

And let's not forget the taxes he increased as well. He forced a corporate tax increase, a wealth tax increase (higher taxes for those making over 450K a year) and he actually wanted that increase on those making over 250K a year. One of the first things he did after invading the White House was a huge sin tax which directly affected lower and middle-class citizens. And then there are Commie Care fines which thanks to the Supreme Court, were labeled taxes that netted the federal government billions each year.

The biggest dispute between Obama and the Republicans was spending. It resulted in the sequester, the lowering of our three star credit rating for the first time in history, and the short government shutdown.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Obama's handling of the budget and the economy was not as bad as most conservatives believe it was, and it is not as good as most liberals claim it was. Some points:

* True, Obama jacked up spending in his first year, but he actually imposed a net cut on spending the following year (2010), before sequestration was even debated, and he held spending to virtually flat-lined levels through 2015 (US Federal Spending Analysis - Charts Tables History). Yes, the spending restraint from 2012 through 2015 was because of the sequester, but Obama agreed to the sequester--he could have vetoed it, but he did not.

* In connection with the above, Obama increased the national debt by a much smaller percentage than Bush did. Bush increased the debt by 101%. Obama increased it by 68%, one-third less than Bush.

* During Obama's 8 years, 17 million new jobs were created, a 12.8% increase, which far surpasses Bush's record on job creation (Which President Created the Most Jobs?).

* Under Obama, we had 74 consecutive months of job growth, from October 2010 to December 2016 (Bureau of Labor Statistics Data).

* The biggest chunk of Obama's much-maligned stimulus packet was devoted to tax cuts. Of the $787 billion, $288 billion was for tax cuts. Another $275 billion was for job creation via federal contracts, grants, and loans.

* Obama signed numerous tax-cut measures, both for individuals and for small businesses. He also made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent, against the advice of many liberal economists. Some of his other tax cuts included the following:

In 2010, President Obama signed an $858 billion tax cut deal. It extended the Bush tax cuts through 2012 and unemployment benefits through 2011. It cut payroll taxes by 2 percent, adding $120 million to workers' spendable income. It extended a college tuition tax credit. It also included $55 billion in industry-specific tax cuts. (https://www.thebalance.com/obama-tax-cuts-3306330; see also https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/taxes;
(https://www.cnbc.com/id/49261153; Obama Proposes Extending Small Business Tax Cuts Permanently | Andersen CPA Firm)​

* A typical family making $50,000 a year received tax cuts totaling $3,600 in President Obama’s first term, more if they were putting a child through college.

* Improvements to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC), enacted in 2009 under Obama and later made permanent provided roughly 16 million working families a year with a tax cut of about $900 on average.

* The 2015 budget deal lifted the sequester's caps but it also contained well over $600 billion in tax cuts/tax breaks and lifted the ban on oil exports.

Of course, there were some black marks. We actually lost manufacturing jobs under Obama, although the loss was relatively small--we went from 12,561,000 manufacturing jobs in January 2009 to 12,369,000 in January 2017. Another problem was that the stock market's growth was somewhat weak. Over-regulation was a drag on many business sectors. A sizable number of the new jobs that were created were modest-income jobs and part-time jobs, but the majority were good jobs. The U-6 rate, aka the "real unemployment rate," stayed unusually high for most of Obama's presidency. Obamacare caused many companies to change full-time positions to part-time positions to avoid having to offer health insurance.

On balance, Obama did a better of dealing with the budget and the economy than most conservatives give him credit for.

In connection with the above, Obama increased the national debt by a much smaller percentage than Bush did. Bush increased the debt by 101%. Obama increased it by 68%, one-third less than Bush.

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

$5.7 trillion to $10.6 trillion, 86%.
$10.6 trillion to $19.9 trillion, 87.7%

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

 

[Bleipriester]

Obama's handling of the budget and the economy was not as bad as most conservatives believe it was, and it is not as good as most liberals claim it was. Some points:

* True, Obama jacked up spending in his first year, but he actually imposed a net cut on spending the following year (2010), before sequestration was even debated, and he held spending to virtually flat-lined levels through 2015 (US Federal Spending Analysis - Charts Tables History). Yes, the spending restraint from 2012 through 2015 was because of the sequester, but Obama agreed to the sequester--he could have vetoed it, but he did not.

* In connection with the above, Obama increased the national debt by a much smaller percentage than Bush did. Bush increased the debt by 101%. Obama increased it by 68%, one-third less than Bush.

* During Obama's 8 years, 17 million new jobs were created, a 12.8% increase, which far surpasses Bush's record on job creation (Which President Created the Most Jobs?).

* Under Obama, we had 74 consecutive months of job growth, from October 2010 to December 2016 (Bureau of Labor Statistics Data).

* The biggest chunk of Obama's much-maligned stimulus packet was devoted to tax cuts. Of the $787 billion, $288 billion was for tax cuts. Another $275 billion was for job creation via federal contracts, grants, and loans.

* Obama signed numerous tax-cut measures, both for individuals and for small businesses. He also made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent, against the advice of many liberal economists. Some of his other tax cuts included the following:

In 2010, President Obama signed an $858 billion tax cut deal. It extended the Bush tax cuts through 2012 and unemployment benefits through 2011. It cut payroll taxes by 2 percent, adding $120 million to workers' spendable income. It extended a college tuition tax credit. It also included $55 billion in industry-specific tax cuts. (https://www.thebalance.com/obama-tax-cuts-3306330; see also https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/taxes;
(https://www.cnbc.com/id/49261153; Obama Proposes Extending Small Business Tax Cuts Permanently | Andersen CPA Firm)​

* A typical family making $50,000 a year received tax cuts totaling $3,600 in President Obama’s first term, more if they were putting a child through college.

* Improvements to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC), enacted in 2009 under Obama and later made permanent provided roughly 16 million working families a year with a tax cut of about $900 on average.

* The 2015 budget deal lifted the sequester's caps but it also contained well over $600 billion in tax cuts/tax breaks and lifted the ban on oil exports.

Of course, there were some black marks. We actually lost manufacturing jobs under Obama, although the loss was relatively small--we went from 12,561,000 manufacturing jobs in January 2009 to 12,369,000 in January 2017. Another problem was that the stock market's growth was somewhat weak. Over-regulation was a drag on many business sectors. A sizable number of the new jobs that were created were modest-income jobs and part-time jobs, but the majority were good jobs. The U-6 rate, aka the "real unemployment rate," stayed unusually high for most of Obama's presidency. Obamacare caused many companies to change full-time positions to part-time positions to avoid having to offer health insurance.

On balance, Obama did a better of dealing with the budget and the economy than most conservatives give him credit for.

In connection with the above, Obama increased the national debt by a much smaller percentage than Bush did. Bush increased the debt by 101%. Obama increased it by 68%, one-third less than Bush.

View attachment 203381

View attachment 203382

View attachment 203384
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

$5.7 trillion to $10.6 trillion, 86%.
$10.6 trillion to $19.9 trillion, 87.7%

Sounds increasingly expensive to keep it running. Will Trump add even more?

 

[mikegriffith1]

The bottom line is that Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy and a poor job on the budget. That said, Obama did a better job on the economy and on the budget than Bush did. Obama increased the national debt by 68%, way too much, but Bush jacked up the debt by 101%.

Unfortunately, Obama's recovery included historically long stretches of high U-6 unemployment and weak or tepid GDP growth. Why? Because he over-regulated, because he imposed Obamacare, and because he did virtually nothing to help big business. Helping small businesses is all fine and dandy, and increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit is also a smart move, but big businesses employ tens of millions of Americans and have the capacity to do a great deal of good for the economy when their tax and regulatory burdens are lightened, a fact that Obama did not grasp. But, again, overall, Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy, and he did a better job on the budget than Bush did.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The bottom line is that Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy and a poor job on the budget. That said, Obama did a better job on the economy and on the budget than Bush did. Obama increased the national debt by 68%, way too much, but Bush jacked up the debt by 101%.

Unfortunately, Obama's recovery included historically long stretches of high U-6 unemployment and weak or tepid GDP growth. Why? Because he over-regulated, because he imposed Obamacare, and because he did virtually nothing to help big business. Helping small businesses is all fine and dandy, and increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit is also a smart move, but big businesses employ tens of millions of Americans and have the capacity to do a great deal of good for the economy when their tax and regulatory burdens are lightened, a fact that Obama did not grasp. But, again, overall, Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy, and he did a better job on the budget than Bush did.

Obama increased the national debt by 68%, way too much, but Bush jacked up the debt by 101%.

You're mistaken.

 

[mikegriffith1]

The bottom line is that Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy and a poor job on the budget. That said, Obama did a better job on the economy and on the budget than Bush did. Obama increased the national debt by 68%, way too much, but Bush jacked up the debt by 101%.

Unfortunately, Obama's recovery included historically long stretches of high U-6 unemployment and weak or tepid GDP growth. Why? Because he over-regulated, because he imposed Obamacare, and because he did virtually nothing to help big business. Helping small businesses is all fine and dandy, and increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit is also a smart move, but big businesses employ tens of millions of Americans and have the capacity to do a great deal of good for the economy when their tax and regulatory burdens are lightened, a fact that Obama did not grasp. But, again, overall, Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy, and he did a better job on the budget than Bush did.

Obama increased the national debt by 68%, way too much, but Bush jacked up the debt by 101%.

You're mistaken.

No, those numbers are accurate.

Which President Increased U.S. Debt the Most?

You can't use just gross dollar amounts, because they are misleading. The key measurement is the percentage by which the debt increased.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The bottom line is that Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy and a poor job on the budget. That said, Obama did a better job on the economy and on the budget than Bush did. Obama increased the national debt by 68%, way too much, but Bush jacked up the debt by 101%.

Unfortunately, Obama's recovery included historically long stretches of high U-6 unemployment and weak or tepid GDP growth. Why? Because he over-regulated, because he imposed Obamacare, and because he did virtually nothing to help big business. Helping small businesses is all fine and dandy, and increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit is also a smart move, but big businesses employ tens of millions of Americans and have the capacity to do a great deal of good for the economy when their tax and regulatory burdens are lightened, a fact that Obama did not grasp. But, again, overall, Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy, and he did a better job on the budget than Bush did.

Obama increased the national debt by 68%, way too much, but Bush jacked up the debt by 101%.

You're mistaken.

No, those numbers are accurate.

Which President Increased U.S. Debt the Most?

You can't use just gross dollar amounts, because they are misleading. The key measurement is the percentage by which the debt increased.

I think factcheck would argue that one. Mind you this is at the end of 2016.

Debt – The U.S. government’s debt owed to the public has more than doubled. It is now more than $13.6 trillion, an increase of 116 percent since Obama first took office.

And the debt also has grown dramatically even when measured as a percentage of the growing economy, from 52 percent of gross domestic product at the end of fiscal year 2009 to just under 74 percent at the end of fiscal 2015, according to the most recent estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Obama's Numbers (January 2016 Update) - FactCheck.org

 

[edthecynic]

Another problem was that the stock market's growth was somewhat weak.

That's a lie!

 

[edthecynic]

Obamacare caused many companies to change full-time positions to part-time positions to avoid having to offer health insurance.

Yet another lie!