Obama inherited the worst Recession in U.S. history

[drivebymedia]

I can't find a President who made a faster recovery against the worst Recession in U.S. history.

The one that historians have already labeled the "Great Recession"

Anyone?

 

[Pete7469]

This is not the worst recession in history, and it's only the second worst recovery since FDR fucked around with our economy for over a decade.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can't find a President who made a faster recovery against the worst Recession in U.S. history.

The one that historians have already labeled the "Great Recession"

Anyone?

Record deficits and government takover of healthcare sure hasn't helped.

Maybe we need higher taxes and more regulations.
And more spending!
Yeah, that's the ticket!

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

If the OP didn't have lies, he'd have nothing to say at all.

Obamacare Full Frontal: Of 953,000 Jobs Created In 2013, 77%, Or 731,000 Are Part-Time | Zero Hedge

 

[g5000]

If the OP didn't have lies, he'd have nothing to say at all.

Obamacare Full Frontal: Of 953,000 Jobs Created In 2013, 77%, Or 731,000 Are Part-Time | Zero Hedge

Showing a single snapshot does not indicate anything at all. That's why I don't trust crap like that. How do you know that is not the norm?

Obama took office in January 2009.

Here is the January 2009 Employment Situation Summary: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02062009.pdf

We were bleeding about 600,000 jobs a month when he took office. It would be unrealistic to expect that to stop immediately upon his taking of the oath of office.

Here is the October 2009 Employment Situation Summary: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_11062009.pdf

And here is the July 2013 Employment Situation Summary: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf


We find full time jobs plummeted to about 110 million by October 2009. They now stand at 116 million.

Part time jobs in October 2009 were 27 million. They now stand at 28 million.

Here is something even more interesting:

If you start at one year into each administration (beginning of 2002 for Bush, beginning of 2010 for Obama), and look at the full time job creation rate during Obama's administration and the job creation rate during Bush's Administration, they trend almost identically. Actually, Obama's is steeper, which is better. And Obama was starting from a lower point.

Not only that, full time jobs are now where they were at five years into the Bush Administration! Obama has caught up, even though he started from a much lower point.

If you look at the part time job creation graph and draw a trend line from 2000, the part time job creation rate is rock steady on the trend line, and has been since 2010. It only fell below the trend line during the entire second half of the Bush administration.

That means Obama has actually made up for those part time job losses during Bush.


So how is this a bad thing?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Study: Record Number 21 Million Young Adults Living With Parents « CBS DC

 

[Oldstyle]

I can't find a President who made a faster recovery against the worst Recession in U.S. history.

The one that historians have already labeled the "Great Recession"

Anyone?

Your thinking that we've "recovered" is almost as amusing as your belief that Barack Obama had something to do with what little recovery we HAVE had.

All one has to do is take good hard look at the economic numbers and it's apparent that the "recovery" you've touted is anemic at best. What's frightening is that most of the good economic numbers we do see stem from massive quantitative easing by the FED. What happens to the stock market when they turn off THAT spigot? Just a hint from the head of the FED that he was considering doing just that in the near future was enough to make Wall Street go into a nosedive. What's going to happen when they actually do it?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

And prolonged it for 4 years...... with no end in sight....

 

[Oldstyle]

If the OP didn't have lies, he'd have nothing to say at all.

Obamacare Full Frontal: Of 953,000 Jobs Created In 2013, 77%, Or 731,000 Are Part-Time | Zero Hedge

Showing a single snapshot does not indicate anything at all. That's why I don't trust crap like that. How do you know that is not the norm?

Obama took office in January 2009.

Here is the January 2009 Employment Situation Summary: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02062009.pdf

We were bleeding about 600,000 jobs a month when he took office. It would be unrealistic to expect that to stop immediately upon his taking of the oath of office.

Here is the October 2009 Employment Situation Summary: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_11062009.pdf

And here is the July 2013 Employment Situation Summary: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf


We find full time jobs plummeted to about 110 million by October 2009. They now stand at 116 million.

Part time jobs in October 2009 were 27 million. They now stand at 28 million.

Here is something even more interesting:

If you start at one year into each administration (beginning of 2002 for Bush, beginning of 2010 for Obama), and look at the full time job creation rate during Obama's administration and the job creation rate during Bush's Administration, they trend almost identically. The only difference is that Obama was starting from a lower point.

Not only that, full time jobs are now where they were at five years into the Bush Administration! Obama has caught up, even though he started from a much lower point.

If you look at the part time job creation graph and draw a trend line from 2000, the part time job creation rate is rock steady on the trend line, and has been since 2010. It only fell below the trend line during the entire second half of the Bush administration.

That means Obama has actually made up for those part time job losses during Bush.


So how is this a bad thing?

Because more and more of the jobs created are part time jobs...something that counts as the same thing as a full time job in your graph? We're about to see full time workers replaced with multiple part timers once ObamaCare gets ready to kick in. That will make Barry's unemployment numbers look better but what do you think that's going to do to the lives of the full timers who cut their hours cut back drastically?

 

[g5000]

To summarize, five years into the Obama Administration, full time employment is where it was five years into the Bush Administration, despite having to overcome Bush's gigantic economic crash and coming into office with jobs bleeding away at 600,000 per month.

Part time employment is way, way above where it was five years into the Bush Administration. During the entire second half of Bush, part time jobs were below the trend line. When Obama took office, they returned to the trend line within a year.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Both "sides" of this debate are doing an excellent job of illustrating how lousy the other is at running an economy.

.

 

[g5000]

Because more and more of the jobs created are part time jobs...something that counts as the same thing as a full time job in your graph? We're about to see full time workers replaced with multiple part timers once ObamaCare gets ready to kick in. That will make Barry's unemployment numbers look better but what do you think that's going to do to the lives of the full timers who cut their hours cut back drastically?

Both full time and part time jobs have been created. Look at the data I provided. It's very simple to understand if you want to.

Obama has had a steeper full time job employment creation than Bush did in the same number of years.

Simple fact: Obama has exceeded Bush in full time job creation in his first five years.

And Obama has returned part time employment to where it should be.



The only task remaining is to keep the full time job creation on the same track it has been on since 2010.

 

[Claudette]

I can't find a President who made a faster recovery against the worst Recession in U.S. history.

The one that historians have already labeled the "Great Recession"

Anyone?

Your thinking that we've "recovered" is almost as amusing as your belief that Barack Obama had something to do with what little recovery we HAVE had.

All one has to do is take good hard look at the economic numbers and it's apparent that the "recovery" you've touted is anemic at best. What's frightening is that most of the good economic numbers we do see stem from massive quantitative easing by the FED. What happens to the stock market when they turn off THAT spigot? Just a hint from the head of the FED that he was considering doing just that in the near future was enough to make Wall Street go into a nosedive. What's going to happen when they actually do it?

Yup. The Fed is pumping billions into the economy. Billions of worthless dollars.

It will be interesting to see what happens when they finally turn off the greenback spigot.

 

[g5000]

It's like some people are covering up the blue line, pretending it isn't there. That's because it shows the simple fact that Obama's full time job creation is at a faster pace than Bush's was.

It isn't Obama's fault he started from a low point. That's all on Bush.

You have to give credit where credit is due. If you blame Obama for the economy and every little thing that goes wrong on the entire planet, you have to give him credit for the positives, too.

 

[g5000]

I can't find a President who made a faster recovery against the worst Recession in U.S. history.

The one that historians have already labeled the "Great Recession"

Anyone?

Your thinking that we've "recovered" is almost as amusing as your belief that Barack Obama had something to do with what little recovery we HAVE had.

All one has to do is take good hard look at the economic numbers and it's apparent that the "recovery" you've touted is anemic at best. What's frightening is that most of the good economic numbers we do see stem from massive quantitative easing by the FED. What happens to the stock market when they turn off THAT spigot? Just a hint from the head of the FED that he was considering doing just that in the near future was enough to make Wall Street go into a nosedive. What's going to happen when they actually do it?

If the economy is strong enough, it will be able to absorb the shutting off of QE. It is isn't, we will go back into recession.

To state a crash as a certainty is to be a pessimist, and kind of reminds me of those people who say the end of the world is coming soon. You get a feeling they actually want the end of the world to come.

Conservatives should not be pessimists. Reagan wasn't. Pessimism and whining was a Left thing. Lately, it's been a Right thing.

 

[g5000]

I can't find a President who made a faster recovery against the worst Recession in U.S. history.

The one that historians have already labeled the "Great Recession"

Anyone?

Your thinking that we've "recovered" is almost as amusing as your belief that Barack Obama had something to do with what little recovery we HAVE had.

All one has to do is take good hard look at the economic numbers and it's apparent that the "recovery" you've touted is anemic at best. What's frightening is that most of the good economic numbers we do see stem from massive quantitative easing by the FED. What happens to the stock market when they turn off THAT spigot? Just a hint from the head of the FED that he was considering doing just that in the near future was enough to make Wall Street go into a nosedive. What's going to happen when they actually do it?

Yup. The Fed is pumping billions into the economy. Billions of worthless dollars.

It will be interesting to see what happens when they finally turn off the greenback spigot.

We do have a bond bubble, and I am very concerned about that. The thing about bonds is they do have a price limit. There is a point where yields cannot go any lower.

However, we are starting to see yields starting to climb. The prices of bonds are beginning to drop. So far, it has been slow and manageable. But that can change in a heartbeat.

The Fed will need to start selling its assets before those assets are underwater. However, a massive selloff could actually trigger a sudden collapse. Unfortunately, the Fed now has a massive inventory.

The Fed can allow some of their inventory to just mature. But they will have to sell some inventory to keep inflation down at some point.

Easy does it.

 

[depotoo]

driveby obviously, besides being a troll, has a script he is given each day. I wonder if he's get paid or not?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I can't find a President who made a faster recovery against the worst Recession in U.S. history.

The one that historians have already labeled the "Great Recession"

Anyone?

Obama: Lord, Savior, Daddy and male head of household to all the Good Progressive Boys and Girls

 

[blastoff]

C'mon. Barry spent nearly a trillion dollars on the stimulus. That's what created all those shovel-ready jobs and boosted us along into, what, our 3rd or 4th recovery summer in row!!!

All hail the knowledge, wisdom, and leadership of the Magic Negro.

 

[boedicca]

Obama "inherited" nothing. He's not the HEIR to the Presidency.

He actively campaigned for the job. He wanted it. He got it. And what has he done with it: managed The Worst Recovery Ever.