Barack Obama: 'by every metric, economy is better' - False

[007]

Barack Obama tells Jon Stewart the economy by every metric is better than when he took office PolitiFact
The economy is better for the rich..
Relevant:
"That unemployment rate is complete hogwash and everyone knows it. Many Americans are unemployed or underemployed. Do you understand that the unemployment rate only counts those who are currently receiving unemployment benefits? The labor participation rate is 62.9% at present, which means nearly 38% of working adults are not working in the legal market. I would also like to add that many new jobs are low quality, part-time service and retail industry jobs with low wages and minimal economic opportunity. The middle class is still in the process of being taken apart."

During his farewell visit to Jon Stewart’sDaily Show, President Barack Obama took a bit of a victory lap.

At one point in the extended interview posted online, Obama said, "Here's the thing I can say, Jon. I can say this unequivocally: The VA is better now than when I came into office; government works better than when I came into office; the economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office."

It was the last of those claims -- that "the economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office" -- that caught our attention. That’s a pretty strong statement. Is it correct?

Statistics that support Obama’s claim

Three common economic statistics that are widely considered important are gross domestic product, unemployment rate and employment level. And looking just at these three measurements, Obama has a strong record in office.

• Gross domestic product per capita. Inflation adjusted GDP per capita -- that is, all economic activity in the United States divided by the number of U.S. residents -- has increased from $47,002 in 2009 to $54,630 in 2014, an increase of 16 percent since Obama took office.

• Unemployment rate. In January 2009, the unemployment rate was 7.8 percent. After peaking at 10 percent in October 2009, the rate fell to 5.3 percent by June 2015. That’s a drop in unemployment of almost one-third since Obama’s inauguration, and it’s been mirrored in drops among African-Americans and Latinos.

• Employment level. In January 2009, total nonfarm employment in the United States stood just shy of 134 million. By February 2010, employment had fallen to 129.6 million, but by June 2015 it had rebounded to 141.8 million. That’s an increase in jobs of almost 6 percent from the start of Obama’s term.

Where things haven’t gone so well for Obama

While Obama has some statistics to point to, it is wrong to say that "the economy, by every metric, is better than when I came into office."

We found several important measurements that went in the wrong direction during Obama’s tenure.

• Real median weekly earnings. Between the first quarter of 2009 and the first quarter of 2015, inflation-adjusted weekly earnings for full-time wage and salary workers fell from $348 to $344, a decline of about 1 percent. Comparing the second quarter of 2009 and the second quarter of 2015, weekly earnings fell from $342 to $337, a decline of about 1.4 percent.

• Median income. Inflation-adjusted median household income, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, fell from $54,059 in 2009 to $51,939 in 2013 -- a decline of about 4 percent. (Depending on how you adjust these raw numbers for taxes and in-kind income, inflation-adjusted income per person may have gone up a bit rather than shrinking.)

• Percent of people in poverty. The data show that 13.2 percent of Americans were living in poverty in March 2009. By March 2014, that percentage had risen to 14.5 percent. That was down slightly from what it was in the previous three years, but not enough to match the 2009 level.

• Median weeks unemployed. In January 2009, the median number of weeks an unemployed person was unemployed was 10.7. By June 2015, that number had risen to 11.3 weeks. (The peak of 25.2 weeks came in June 2010.)

• Civilian labor force participation rate. This is the percentage of people either working or looking for work, divided by the civilian, noninstitutionalized population. In January 2009, this stood at 65.7 percent, but by June 2015, it had fallen to 62.6 percent. The caution here is that this statistic has been affected by the increasing rate of retirements due to the aging of the Baby Boomers. However, most economists say that the weak recovery has played at least some role in this decline.

• Number of people on food stamps. The number of recipients has risen from 33.5 million in 2009 to 46.5 million in 2014, an increase of 39 percent. What is hard to say is how much comes from expanded accessibility rules and how much comes from rising economic need.

Yes... doubling the national debt with 93,000,000+ people seemingly permanently unemployed is BETTER... pfft...

Only in the mind of a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR.

 

[nuhuh]

Well its already reduced the deficit so that isn't going to be an argument. Rates are important and are rising, but everything else goes up why not health care?

How has the ACA reduced the deficit when the costs haven't even kicked in yet? That would be like saying the thousand dollars you took out of the ATM from your high interest credit card made you richer than you were before you took it out. You got something that you haven't had to pay for yet! It's the same thing with the ACA.

I stated it because it is fact. CBO Confirms Obamacare Reduces Deficits - US News

Do you understand the difference between reducing an increase in a deficit and actually reducing a deficit?

There is no bill before congress to fix any part of the ACA. When a bill is introduced you can follow it through committee and even input your own personal feelings about through your representative. Any idea as to when the Republican congress or the Republican Senate will do that?

The ACA is such a bad piece of legislation that it really shouldn't have been passed in the first place. You Progressives did so however, Nuhuh...so when you then turn around and demand to know what it is that the GOP is going to do to "save" your beloved ObamaCare...it's an astounding take on how things work.

I don't think Republicans ever intended to do anything with the ACA as evidenced by 60 votes to repeal. The proper thing to do would be to take charge, fix it and take credit for it. But we both know that is likely to never happen. Democrats will get it done as usual, I imagine it will be hard to do without cooperation, but people who have insurance now won't like the fact that Republicans are being so steadfast to block fixes and it will show at the ballot box.

How do you "fix" something that is as fundamentally flawed as the ACA? Do you not realize that almost the same number of people will remain uninsured AFTER the ACA as were uninsured before it was passed? Do you not realize that the ACA will be responsible for about 2 million people losing their jobs? Do you not understand that for millions of other Americans...working fewer hours will now be something they need to do or risk losing their healthcare subsidies? How a small raise at their jobs could end up costing them money?

All of those things were considered before the ACA was even passed and they were rigorously debated in both public forums and news sites. If Congress sees a problem then it is inherent upon them to fix it.

So what was Nancy Pelosi referring to when she made that infamous statement about needing to pass the ACA before we could see what was in the ACA? The truth is that Progressive Democrats own the ACA and it's inherent on them to fix it since they passed such an utterly awful piece of legislation simply to get something on the books before the Republicans that the American people elected in the midterms could take office.

I guess you fell for the partisan tripe and galloped away with it.

 

[nuhuh]

You idiots passed it...you idiots come up with a plan to somehow pay for it!

Yep and they will. Taking away from Republicans any bi-partisan governing trademark , I would hate to be labeled like that.

You truly believe that? Then surely you base that belief on a plan that Progressives have put forth. Yet every time I ask you what that fix would be...you get incredibly vague. Why is that?

I wouldn't have written it if I didn't believe it. I also have spoken to the fact that I am not an expert and that I will leave "fixes" to experts. Why in the world would you want me to offer a fix if I am not qualified to offer one and you are not qualified to interpret its efficacy?

So you believe in something but you don't have the faintest idea what that something is? LOL You're one of those people that bought into that vague "Hope & Change" thing...aren't you, Nuhuh?

Do you enjoy being disingenuous? or do you like being plain insulting because I can do that pretty well myself.

 

[nuhuh]

liberals are complete idiots. it isnt enough that the ACA passed constitutional muster; the law IS fatally flawed. if these emotional mental midgets would put aside their "hate" cards for a minute they might realize appeal of a fatally flawed law IS how you fix it; not endless patches, some legal and some UN-CONSTITUTIONAL as obama/dems are doing

You're howling at the moon. The Supreme Court has passed its ruling and the law is a done deal.

 

[edthecynic]

doubling the national debt with 93,000,000+ people seemingly permanently unemployed is BETTER

Much better than St Ronnie's TRIPLING the GOP National Debt. And why is the Right so heartless that they require Seniors to slavishly labor away until they drop dead on the job?

 

[007]

doubling the national debt with 93,000,000+ people seemingly permanently unemployed is BETTER

Much better than St Ronnie's TRIPLING the GOP National Debt. And why is the Right so heartless that they require Seniors to slavishly labor away until they drop dead on the job?

Your post is actually too STUPID to even attempt responding to with any FACTS... because from what you just said, it appears you've been living on another PLANET.

 

[boedicca]

doubling the national debt with 93,000,000+ people seemingly permanently unemployed is BETTER

Much better than St Ronnie's TRIPLING the GOP National Debt. And why is the Right so heartless that they require Seniors to slavishly labor away until they drop dead on the job?

Ronnie vs. Obama - Job Creation

 

[boedicca]

Or seen another way:

OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH - NOT EVEN CLOSE - The Gateway Pundit

 

[Rozman]

The Obama economy is not a whole lot to brag about....
But yet the left does....constantly.

 

[edthecynic]

doubling the national debt with 93,000,000+ people seemingly permanently unemployed is BETTER

Much better than St Ronnie's TRIPLING the GOP National Debt. And why is the Right so heartless that they require Seniors to slavishly labor away until they drop dead on the job?

Your post is actually too STUPID to even attempt responding to with any FACTS... because from what you just said, it appears you've been living on another PLANET.

Translation: Unable to rebut anything, so stooping to personal attack.

 

[Freewill]

doubling the national debt with 93,000,000+ people seemingly permanently unemployed is BETTER

Much better than St Ronnie's TRIPLING the GOP National Debt. And why is the Right so heartless that they require Seniors to slavishly labor away until they drop dead on the job?

Who is requiring seniors to do what? What the hell is wrong with you? Can you reach a phone and call for help? Or did the right take you free Obamaphone?

Besides, it hasn't been the right who has been in charge for most of the last 8 years. 8 years of disaster brought to us by the liberal lying left.

 

[boedicca]

Look who is making SENIORS work longer:

 

[The Rabbi]

The Obama economy is not a whole lot to brag about....
But yet the left does....constantly.

Its the worst recover on record. The only way they can get away with it is to assume the recession would have continiued indefinitely had Obama not done what he did.
That is clearly untrue. Recessions work themselves out. And usually faster and cheaper than if gov't intervenes.

 

[The Rabbi]

Look who is making SENIORS work longer:

View attachment 46161

See that! Obama is keeping people productive and the Right complains!
LOL!!

 

[boedicca]

The Obama economy is not a whole lot to brag about....
But yet the left does....constantly.

Its the worst recover on record. The only way they can get away with it is to assume the recession would have continiued indefinitely had Obama not done what he did.
That is clearly untrue. Recessions work themselves out. And usually faster and cheaper than if gov't intervenes.

GDP growth under Reagan averged 3.8%. Under Obama, we're getting a meager 2%ish growth rate, and struggling even at that.

This highlights the difference between Pro-Growth policies which free people from excessive regulation and taxes and Pro-Centralized-Power policies which crush the entrepreneurial spirit out of people.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Obama economy is not a whole lot to brag about....
But yet the left does....constantly.

Its the worst recover on record. The only way they can get away with it is to assume the recession would have continiued indefinitely had Obama not done what he did.
That is clearly untrue. Recessions work themselves out. And usually faster and cheaper than if gov't intervenes.

GDP growth under Reagan averged 3.8%. Under Obama, we're getting a meager 2%ish growth rate, and struggling even at that.

This highlights the difference between Pro-Growth policies which free people from excessive regulation and taxes and Pro-Centralized-Power policies which crush the entrepreneurial spirit out of people.

Yeah but Reagan had it easier because he had a GOP Congress to work with.
Reagan had it easier because he could increase spending on the military
Reagan had it easier because he inherited Jimmy Carter's recovery.
Add excuses here:

 

[boedicca]

The Obama economy is not a whole lot to brag about....
But yet the left does....constantly.

Its the worst recover on record. The only way they can get away with it is to assume the recession would have continiued indefinitely had Obama not done what he did.
That is clearly untrue. Recessions work themselves out. And usually faster and cheaper than if gov't intervenes.

GDP growth under Reagan averged 3.8%. Under Obama, we're getting a meager 2%ish growth rate, and struggling even at that.

This highlights the difference between Pro-Growth policies which free people from excessive regulation and taxes and Pro-Centralized-Power policies which crush the entrepreneurial spirit out of people.

Yeah but Reagan had it easier because he had a GOP Congress to work with.
Reagan had it easier because he could increase spending on the military
Reagan had it easier because he inherited Jimmy Carter's recovery.
Add excuses here:

No, he didn't. The House was controlled by the Dems, but Reagan knew how to work in a bipartisan fashion. He had a very productive relationship with Tip O'Neill.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Obama economy is not a whole lot to brag about....
But yet the left does....constantly.

Its the worst recover on record. The only way they can get away with it is to assume the recession would have continiued indefinitely had Obama not done what he did.
That is clearly untrue. Recessions work themselves out. And usually faster and cheaper than if gov't intervenes.

GDP growth under Reagan averged 3.8%. Under Obama, we're getting a meager 2%ish growth rate, and struggling even at that.

This highlights the difference between Pro-Growth policies which free people from excessive regulation and taxes and Pro-Centralized-Power policies which crush the entrepreneurial spirit out of people.

Yeah but Reagan had it easier because he had a GOP Congress to work with.
Reagan had it easier because he could increase spending on the military
Reagan had it easier because he inherited Jimmy Carter's recovery.
Add excuses here:

No, he didn't. The House was controlled by the Dems, but Reagan knew how to work in a bipartisan fashion. He had a very productive relationship with Tip O'Neill.

Link?

 

[edthecynic]

doubling the national debt with 93,000,000+ people seemingly permanently unemployed is BETTER

Much better than St Ronnie's TRIPLING the GOP National Debt. And why is the Right so heartless that they require Seniors to slavishly labor away until they drop dead on the job?

Who is requiring seniors to do what?

The Right is requiring Seniors to work after retirement age to get the LPR up, that's who, as if you didn't know! They will only be allowed to lower the LPR by retiring while a Republican is president, because like deficits the LPR does not matter when the GOP holds the White House.

"You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don't matter"
- Dick Cheney

 

[boedicca]

The Obama economy is not a whole lot to brag about....
But yet the left does....constantly.

Its the worst recover on record. The only way they can get away with it is to assume the recession would have continiued indefinitely had Obama not done what he did.
That is clearly untrue. Recessions work themselves out. And usually faster and cheaper than if gov't intervenes.

GDP growth under Reagan averged 3.8%. Under Obama, we're getting a meager 2%ish growth rate, and struggling even at that.

This highlights the difference between Pro-Growth policies which free people from excessive regulation and taxes and Pro-Centralized-Power policies which crush the entrepreneurial spirit out of people.

Yeah but Reagan had it easier because he had a GOP Congress to work with.
Reagan had it easier because he could increase spending on the military
Reagan had it easier because he inherited Jimmy Carter's recovery.
Add excuses here:

No, he didn't. The House was controlled by the Dems, but Reagan knew how to work in a bipartisan fashion. He had a very productive relationship with Tip O'Neill.

Link?

I really should have you do your own homework, bub. You erroneously claimed that Reagan had a GOP Congress. He didn't. Look at the composition:

Party divisions of United States Congresses - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia