Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
For Obama it was straight path downward from 10 percent to 4.6 percent. There were no up or down fluctuationsThe 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%
The Average means nothing... What did he get at and where was it going and what did he give it back at and where is it going....
Obama started at the bottom and got to the top... Just compare to say Bush who started at the top and ended up at the bottom...
This is a joke statistic...
No it is a statistic that takes into account EVERY monthly unemployment figure during a Presidents time in office. Do you evaluate a worker or a student by only their first month and their last month in that position? What sense would it make to simply evaluate a President by the first month in office and the last month when there are 94 other months to look at. 8 years is a long time. Would you liked to be judge on simply just two months on the past 8 years of your life. Just last November and that month of December from nearly 8 years ago? Why do you think students have their grades averaged? Why would you just look at a students grades from his first 30 days in class and the last 30 days in class. Does that really tell you how competent the student was, or show how much they learned. Obviously not. To say that only 2 months out of a Presidents 96 months in office matter is just plain absurd!
It is a laughable statistic that treats a President who went from 5% unemployment up to 10% the same as a President who went from 10% unemployment down to 5%
That is why nobody but partisan nutjobs who thought they could use it against Obama use this statistic to measure employment
A better measure is total jobs created or lost
96 months is a long time and its not straight path from month one to month 96. For most of the time Bush was in office unemployment was very low and near full employment. That is the condition that most of main street experience while he was in office. What were conditions like for the MAJORITY OF THE TIME the person was in office. You don't evaluate a persons time on just one or two months but every month they served. The only way you get that is if you look at every month and take the average. YOU WON'T SEE HOW MOST PEOPLE LIVED UNDER A CERTAIN PRESIDENT IF YOU ONLY LOOK AT JANUARY WHEN THEY START AND THAT MONTH 96 MONTHS LATER. ONLY A FOOL WOULD JUDGE TRUMP SIMPLY ON JANUARY 2017 and DECEMBER 2020.
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%
The Average means nothing... What did he get at and where was it going and what did he give it back at and where is it going....
Obama started at the bottom and got to the top... Just compare to say Bush who started at the top and ended up at the bottom...
This is a joke statistic...
No it is a statistic that takes into account EVERY monthly unemployment figure during a Presidents time in office. Do you evaluate a worker or a student by only their first month and their last month in that position? What sense would it make to simply evaluate a President by the first month in office and the last month when there are 94 other months to look at. 8 years is a long time. Would you liked to be judge on simply just two months on the past 8 years of your life. Just last November and that month of December from nearly 8 years ago? Why do you think students have their grades averaged? Why would you just look at a students grades from his first 30 days in class and the last 30 days in class. Does that really tell you how competent the student was, or show how much they learned. Obviously not. To say that only 2 months out of a Presidents 96 months in office matter is just plain absurd!
It is a laughable statistic that treats a President who went from 5% unemployment up to 10% the same as a President who went from 10% unemployment down to 5%
That is why nobody but partisan nutjobs who thought they could use it against Obama use this statistic to measure employment
A better measure is total jobs created or lost
I better not see you commenting on how Trump is doing after February 20, 2017. You'll need to wait until December 20, 2020 before you can say anything of if he gets re-elected you'll have to wait until December 20, 2024. According to you, only the first month and the last month matter, period. So I'll be looking at your postings in the coming months to see if you really believe that.
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%
We will soon have an orange man on the listThe 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%
You are SUCH a 'Racist'! Why is Barak Obama the only black man on that list - you tell me why!
Well, one could make that same argument about Bush's average UE rate. Was it due to Clinton's steady 4% UE rate that he passed on to Bush who skyrocketed it to 7.4% and rising when he left?Was it really Bush's fault that the crash happened, or was it deregulation prior to Bush ever coming into office. Thats another debate. What is beyond dispute though, is what the job market was like for the man on the street while each President was in office. Bush had an average unemployment rate of 5.27% while he was in office
Bush also doubled the unemployed from 6 million to 12 million.The only things I saw Bush do was cut tax rates for his rich buds twice and start two wars! Oh wait.....I forgot that he doubled the national debt from $5.7 trillion to $12 trillion. That's what the modern Republican party does, borrows from foreign banks to cover it's spending.
Obama might not be winning this dubious distinction anymore.
No, it's not a mistake. As has been brought to your attention numerous times, a president starting with a high unemployment rate and ending with a low unemployment rate has done a better job than one doing the reverse, going from a low unemployment rate to a high unemployment rate. Even though thet could have the same average.And the average unemployment rate is so meaningless, that Obama's average is lower than Reagan's; and many on the right consider Reagan a deity when it comes to creating jobs. Even worse, by averaging out the unemployment rate, you can't tell the difference between one president who starts with an unemployment rate of 12% and lowers it 1 point every year and leaves office 8 years later with an unemployment rate of 4% -- with a president who starts with an unemployment rate of 4% and leaves office 4 years later with an unemployment rate of 12%, increasing it by 2 points every year.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%
Maybe it had something to do with inheriting a godam crash next to the worst one in the nation's history. Have you conveniently forgotten Bush and the absolute crash he had a few weeks before he left office in January?
Well, any President can blame all their problems on the previous President. Was it really Bush's fault that the crash happened, or was it deregulation prior to Bush ever coming into office. Thats another debate. What is beyond dispute though, is what the job market was like for the man on the street while each President was in office. Bush had an average unemployment rate of 5.27% while he was in office which means on average he was close to full employment nearly every month of his time in office and also with an average above 66% in the labor force participation rate. On average it was much easier to get a job or hold job while Bush was in office then it was while Obama was in office. Obama averaged 7.48% Unemployment throughout his time in office(one month left so the figure is not complete).
Statistically, they would have identical unemployment rate averages; only the former would be considered a jobs czar while the latter would be thrown out of office after 1 term.
8 years is a long time during which unemployment will rise and fall many times. Its a mistake to cherry pick two points in time so far away from each other and declare success or failure just based on that. Are the only important months of your life over the last 96 months, last November and that December from 8 years ago. Are you saying that your success's or failures in anything from 2015 don't matter?
No one cherry picks a students grades his first month in High School and his last month in High School to evaluate how they did. Every month in school or on the job matters and only fool would completely ignore 94 months out of a 96 month Presidency. A 96 month Presidency is enough time for both many economic success's and failures which heavily impact peoples lives but could totally be left out if you only look at month one and month 96.
Would you evaluate Lincolns performance as Commander and Chief or that of his Generals simply by the first month of the war and the last. You would actually completely ignore a battle like Gettysburg. Not a single mention of it, not even a footnote. I suppose World War II should be just about Pearl Harbor and the dropping of the Atomic Bombs on Japan. The fact that the United States fought and defeated Germany in between those two points is not relevant right?
The fact is, if you want to accurately look and evaluate anything, you have to consider ALL THE DATA. Simply looking at the first month of an administration and the last month of an administration does not do that!
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%
Maybe it had something to do with inheriting a godam crash next to the worst one in the nation's history. Have you conveniently forgotten Bush and the absolute crash he had in December before he left office in January?
Another debunked far left drone post using far left religious dogma not supported in reality!
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet
OK... then with GWB we had a recession that officially began 3/1/01... let's blame Clinton if that's how you want to play it!Who cares? Presidents don't decide who works or who doesn't.
I'm just curious. Why would you average in the first month or 3 months or 6 months of a president's term implying that he had anything to do with that unemployment rate?
Who cares? Presidents don't decide who works or who doesn't.
I'm just curious. Why would you average in the first month or 3 months or 6 months of a president's term implying that he had anything to do with that unemployment rate?
OK... then with GWB we had a recession that officially began 3/1/01... let's blame Clinton if that's how you want to play it!Who cares? Presidents don't decide who works or who doesn't.
I'm just curious. Why would you average in the first month or 3 months or 6 months of a president's term implying that he had anything to do with that unemployment rate?
The difference is ... when an employee's performance is measured, they are not judged by the performance of others. If your company sets a goal for you, you are judged solely on your own performance of getting that job done.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%
The Average means nothing... What did he get at and where was it going and what did he give it back at and where is it going....
Obama started at the bottom and got to the top... Just compare to say Bush who started at the top and ended up at the bottom...
This is a joke statistic...
No it is a statistic that takes into account EVERY monthly unemployment figure during a Presidents time in office. Do you evaluate a worker or a student by only their first month and their last month in that position? What sense would it make to simply evaluate a President by the first month in office and the last month when there are 94 other months to look at. 8 years is a long time. Would you liked to be judge on simply just two months on the past 8 years of your life. Just last November and that month of December from nearly 8 years ago? Why do you think students have their grades averaged? Why would you just look at a students grades from his first 30 days in class and the last 30 days in class. Does that really tell you how competent the student was, or show how much they learned. Obviously not. To say that only 2 months out of a Presidents 96 months in office matter is just plain absurd!
It is a laughable statistic that treats a President who went from 5% unemployment up to 10% the same as a President who went from 10% unemployment down to 5%
That is why nobody but partisan nutjobs who thought they could use it against Obama use this statistic to measure employment
A better measure is total jobs created or lost
96 months is a long time and its not straight path from month one to month 96. For most of the time Bush was in office unemployment was very low and near full employment. That is the condition that most of main street experience while he was in office. What were conditions like for the MAJORITY OF THE TIME the person was in office. You don't evaluate a persons time on just one or two months but every month they served. The only way you get that is if you look at every month and take the average. YOU WON'T SEE HOW MOST PEOPLE LIVED UNDER A CERTAIN PRESIDENT IF YOU ONLY LOOK AT JANUARY WHEN THEY START AND THAT MONTH 96 MONTHS LATER. ONLY A FOOL WOULD JUDGE TRUMP SIMPLY ON JANUARY 2017 and DECEMBER 2020.
That was a mild recession which started after Clinton left office and was only a recession because of 9/11.OK... then with GWB we had a recession that officially began 3/1/01... let's blame Clinton if that's how you want to play it!Who cares? Presidents don't decide who works or who doesn't.
I'm just curious. Why would you average in the first month or 3 months or 6 months of a president's term implying that he had anything to do with that unemployment rate?
You've never stopped blaming Clinton for the March 2001 First Bush Recession to start blaming him now, and you have been blaming Carter and Clinton for the Great Bush Recession that began Dec, 2007. Nothing that happened while Bush was president was his fault, apparently!OK... then with GWB we had a recession that officially began 3/1/01... let's blame Clinton if that's how you want to play it!
Who cares? Presidents don't decide who works or who doesn't.
I'm just curious. Why would you average in the first month or 3 months or 6 months of a president's term implying that he had anything to do with that unemployment rate?
Dancing on the head of a pin .... trying to avoid getting pricked.
The difference is ... when an employee's performance is measured, they are not judged by the performance of others. If your company sets a goal for you, you are judged solely on your own performance of getting that job done.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%
The Average means nothing... What did he get at and where was it going and what did he give it back at and where is it going....
Obama started at the bottom and got to the top... Just compare to say Bush who started at the top and ended up at the bottom...
This is a joke statistic...
No it is a statistic that takes into account EVERY monthly unemployment figure during a Presidents time in office. Do you evaluate a worker or a student by only their first month and their last month in that position? What sense would it make to simply evaluate a President by the first month in office and the last month when there are 94 other months to look at. 8 years is a long time. Would you liked to be judge on simply just two months on the past 8 years of your life. Just last November and that month of December from nearly 8 years ago? Why do you think students have their grades averaged? Why would you just look at a students grades from his first 30 days in class and the last 30 days in class. Does that really tell you how competent the student was, or show how much they learned. Obviously not. To say that only 2 months out of a Presidents 96 months in office matter is just plain absurd!
It is a laughable statistic that treats a President who went from 5% unemployment up to 10% the same as a President who went from 10% unemployment down to 5%
That is why nobody but partisan nutjobs who thought they could use it against Obama use this statistic to measure employment
A better measure is total jobs created or lost
96 months is a long time and its not straight path from month one to month 96. For most of the time Bush was in office unemployment was very low and near full employment. That is the condition that most of main street experience while he was in office. What were conditions like for the MAJORITY OF THE TIME the person was in office. You don't evaluate a persons time on just one or two months but every month they served. The only way you get that is if you look at every month and take the average. YOU WON'T SEE HOW MOST PEOPLE LIVED UNDER A CERTAIN PRESIDENT IF YOU ONLY LOOK AT JANUARY WHEN THEY START AND THAT MONTH 96 MONTHS LATER. ONLY A FOOL WOULD JUDGE TRUMP SIMPLY ON JANUARY 2017 and DECEMBER 2020.
Whereas Bush benefited from being handed a low unemployment rate from his predecessor -- which is the reason his average is as low as it is.
My performance was based on me meeting my goals. Nothing more, nothing less. It had nothing to do with me assuming someone else's goals.The difference is ... when an employee's performance is measured, they are not judged by the performance of others. If your company sets a goal for you, you are judged solely on your own performance of getting that job done.The Average means nothing... What did he get at and where was it going and what did he give it back at and where is it going....
Obama started at the bottom and got to the top... Just compare to say Bush who started at the top and ended up at the bottom...
This is a joke statistic...
No it is a statistic that takes into account EVERY monthly unemployment figure during a Presidents time in office. Do you evaluate a worker or a student by only their first month and their last month in that position? What sense would it make to simply evaluate a President by the first month in office and the last month when there are 94 other months to look at. 8 years is a long time. Would you liked to be judge on simply just two months on the past 8 years of your life. Just last November and that month of December from nearly 8 years ago? Why do you think students have their grades averaged? Why would you just look at a students grades from his first 30 days in class and the last 30 days in class. Does that really tell you how competent the student was, or show how much they learned. Obviously not. To say that only 2 months out of a Presidents 96 months in office matter is just plain absurd!
It is a laughable statistic that treats a President who went from 5% unemployment up to 10% the same as a President who went from 10% unemployment down to 5%
That is why nobody but partisan nutjobs who thought they could use it against Obama use this statistic to measure employment
A better measure is total jobs created or lost
96 months is a long time and its not straight path from month one to month 96. For most of the time Bush was in office unemployment was very low and near full employment. That is the condition that most of main street experience while he was in office. What were conditions like for the MAJORITY OF THE TIME the person was in office. You don't evaluate a persons time on just one or two months but every month they served. The only way you get that is if you look at every month and take the average. YOU WON'T SEE HOW MOST PEOPLE LIVED UNDER A CERTAIN PRESIDENT IF YOU ONLY LOOK AT JANUARY WHEN THEY START AND THAT MONTH 96 MONTHS LATER. ONLY A FOOL WOULD JUDGE TRUMP SIMPLY ON JANUARY 2017 and DECEMBER 2020.
Whereas Bush benefited from being handed a low unemployment rate from his predecessor -- which is the reason his average is as low as it is.
You seriously believe that an employee's performance is not judged by the performance of others? Good thing you didn't work for me. If your performance is significantly lower than your equally paid counterpart, guess who goes first? Guess who gets promoted first.
Your fantasy obviously is tainted by being a low level worker who is measured by count, rather than by quality. Just keep flippin' dem burgers.
My performance was based on me meeting my goals. Nothing more, nothing less. It had nothing to do with me assuming someone else's goals.The difference is ... when an employee's performance is measured, they are not judged by the performance of others. If your company sets a goal for you, you are judged solely on your own performance of getting that job done.No it is a statistic that takes into account EVERY monthly unemployment figure during a Presidents time in office. Do you evaluate a worker or a student by only their first month and their last month in that position? What sense would it make to simply evaluate a President by the first month in office and the last month when there are 94 other months to look at. 8 years is a long time. Would you liked to be judge on simply just two months on the past 8 years of your life. Just last November and that month of December from nearly 8 years ago? Why do you think students have their grades averaged? Why would you just look at a students grades from his first 30 days in class and the last 30 days in class. Does that really tell you how competent the student was, or show how much they learned. Obviously not. To say that only 2 months out of a Presidents 96 months in office matter is just plain absurd!
It is a laughable statistic that treats a President who went from 5% unemployment up to 10% the same as a President who went from 10% unemployment down to 5%
That is why nobody but partisan nutjobs who thought they could use it against Obama use this statistic to measure employment
A better measure is total jobs created or lost
96 months is a long time and its not straight path from month one to month 96. For most of the time Bush was in office unemployment was very low and near full employment. That is the condition that most of main street experience while he was in office. What were conditions like for the MAJORITY OF THE TIME the person was in office. You don't evaluate a persons time on just one or two months but every month they served. The only way you get that is if you look at every month and take the average. YOU WON'T SEE HOW MOST PEOPLE LIVED UNDER A CERTAIN PRESIDENT IF YOU ONLY LOOK AT JANUARY WHEN THEY START AND THAT MONTH 96 MONTHS LATER. ONLY A FOOL WOULD JUDGE TRUMP SIMPLY ON JANUARY 2017 and DECEMBER 2020.
Whereas Bush benefited from being handed a low unemployment rate from his predecessor -- which is the reason his average is as low as it is.
You seriously believe that an employee's performance is not judged by the performance of others? Good thing you didn't work for me. If your performance is significantly lower than your equally paid counterpart, guess who goes first? Guess who gets promoted first.
Your fantasy obviously is tainted by being a low level worker who is measured by count, rather than by quality. Just keep flippin' dem burgers.
