The Facts About Obama's Economic Record

[mikegriffith1]

We continue to see liberals here ignoring the facts about Obama's economic record, to the point of claiming that the economy is "roaring" (actually, GDP growth has slowed to a crawl again), that Obama "rescued" America from the economic mess "that Bush left behind," that Obama has been more fiscally conservative than Bush, and other rather surprising myths. Here are some facts to set the record straight--and plenty of links will be provided at the end of the post [I just added an addendum with more links]:

-- Obama has shattered Bush's record of debt accumulation, and he has done so in less than 6.5 years. In 8 years, Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt (from $5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $10.6 trillion in January 2009). In only 6 years and 5 months, Obama has added $7.5 trillion to the national debt (from $10.6 trillion in January 2009 to $18.1 trillion as of last month). And it's worth noting that we would be even deeper in debt if Obama and the Democrats had gotten their way on spending.

-- Obama's "recovery" has been the slowest and weakest in modern history. For example, by this same point in Reagan's recovery, the labor force participation rate was substantially higher, median income was higher, disposable income was higher, and the gain in jobs was more than twice as high. And it should be noted that the recession that Reagan had to overcome was arguably just as bad as, and in some ways worse than, the one that Obama faced (e.g., the unemployment rate went higher, interest rates were in double digits, and inflation was in double digits in the recession that Reagan faced).

-- Under Obama, there has been a net increase in the number of Americans out of the workforce. In February 2009, there were 80.7 million Americans out of the workforce. As of last month, there were 92.9 million Americans out of the workforce, a whopping increase of 12.2 million in less than 6.5 years.

Some liberals have argued that workforce participation has dropped because the number of retirees has substantially increased. Sorry, that argument won't work. Kyle Smith, an economic and financial analyst with Forbes magazine, explains:

It’s misleading to compare employment rates during the two presidencies. Imagine 90 out of 100 people are employed, and because the economy looks like it’s picking up more steam 10 more people enter the workforce. If nine out of ten of them find jobs, the unemployment rate doesn’t go down at all, yet ten percent more people are employed.​

Reagan’s economy was so strong that, for the last three-quarters of his administration, Americans were flooding into the workforce. Under Obama, the opposite has happened, and those who have given up on working aren’t counted as unemployed. Even today, more than five years into the tepid recovery, labor-force participation remains at its lowest level since 1978.

Don’t blame waves of retirement for that fact: the Census Bureau reported that, from 2005 to 2010, older Americans actually became more likely to be employed. The percentage of 65-69 year-olds remaining in the workforce jumped from 26 percent to 32 percent over a ten-year-period ending in 2012. Among those 70-74 the jump was even more startling: from 14 percent to 19.5 percent. Meanwhile workers in the prime of their lives have simply left the playing field. (Sorry Obama Fans Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth - Forbes​

-- Believe it or not, under Obama, income equality has gotten worse and has done so at a faster rate than under any other president since Jimmy Carter.

-- During Obama's 6 years and 5 months in office, median income has dropped substantially from the average median income under Bush (adjusted for inflation). Under Bush, median income averaged at least $56K. Under Obama, median income has averaged around $53K. Last month (May), median income finally reached $54.5K (under Bush, it stayed above $55K for at least 92 of Bush's 96 months in office).

-- Under Obama, wage growth has been worse than it was under Reagan and Clinton.

-- Under Obama, America's debt-to-GDP ratio has gotten much worse. In 2009, our debt was 76% of GDP. Our debt is now 102% of GDP. Our GDP is $17.6 trillion, but our debt is $18.1 trillion. So in just 6 years and 5 months, Obama has increased our debt-to-GDP ratio by a staggering 26 percentage points. (And, yes, we are approaching Greek levels of debt-to-GDP ratio.)

-- Obama's weak and slow recovery has broken the pattern of previous recoveries. In previous recessions in the modern era, the worse the recession was, the stronger the recovery was. Not so under Obama. James Pethokoukis explains:

Typically, after the economy suffers an unusually severe recession, it bounces back in an unusually rapid recovery -- what some economists and others refer to as the "rubber-band effect." But not now. Despite the huge worldwide recession in 2008-09, the economy has experienced only a weak recovery, with fewer people employed in America today than when President Obama took office. "At this point in the typical post-World War II recovery, the economy was growing at an average pace of nearly 5 percent. The Obama recovery has managed just over 2 percent." As James Pethokoukis notes in the New York Post,

A Federal Reserve study from late last year looked at the behavior of recoveries from recessions across 59 advanced and emerging market economies during the last 40 years. The Fed found, to no great surprise, that recoveries “tend to be faster” after severe recessions, such as the one we just had. . .The deeper the downturn, the more robust the rebound — unlessgovernment messes things up.​

For example, during the 1981-82 recession, output fell by 2.7 percent and then rose by 15.9 percent over the next 10 quarters (at an average pace of 6.0 percent). During the Great Recession, output fell even more, by 5.1 percent. But during the 10 quarters since, total economic output is up only a paltry 6.2 percent. Score one for Reaganomics.​

But what about the depressing effect of Wall Street’s near-death experience back in 2008 and 2009? Well, that same Fed study found that bank or other financial crises “do not affect the strength” of subsequent recoveries. . .[What] might explain half of the Obama recovery’s underperformance versus the Reagan recovery. . .? Maybe we can attribute that to policy differences.​

While one president cut long-term marginal tax rates, the other tried a massive burst of federal spending. One empowered private enterprise; the other empowered government. (Economic Recovery Is Slow and Weak Due to Obama Administration Policies Competitive Enterprise Institute​

Reagan vs. Obama These 5 Charts Prove Who Was the Better President

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_03062009.pdf

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

The Median Household Income Rose in April - dshort - Advisor Perspectives

Reagan s Median Income was double Obama s

Study Income Growth Under Obama Trails That Under Reagan Clinton

Sorry Obama Fans Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth

Wage growth still lagging behind Clinton Reagan years

United States Government Debt to GDP 1940-2015 Data Chart Calendar

America s economy cools in first quarter - Apr. 29 2015

U.S. economic growth slows to 0.2 percent grinding nearly to a halt - The Washington Post

News Release Gross Domestic Product

Economic Recovery Is Slow and Weak Due to Obama Administration Policies Competitive Enterprise Institute

Obama s Latest Non-Recovery Chokes Out - Breitbart

ADDENDUM

Our dismal GDP numbers Under Obama US stuck in slow growth rut

Articles The Obama Economic Record is Even Worse than You Realize

DONALD LAMBRO Obama cherry-picks number to boost economic record - Washington Times

By the Numbers Obama s Economic Jobs and Deficit Performance Is the Worst On Record

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics Facts And Figures - Forbes

Barack Obama-san - WSJ

Obama s Stimulus Five Years Later - WSJ

The Five Biggest Failures From President Obama s Stimulus Law - US News

Many Americans still struggling in dismal Obama economy Human Events

Here s How GOP Can Destroy Myth of Obama Economy - Wayne Allyn Root - Page full

 

[Mac1958]

This stuff is complicated.

I've never seen this long a period of constantly conflicting data, not even close. Every time I get my hopes up on some good data, some lousy data comes along. Every time I think we may be going back into the shitter, some great numbers pop up. About four freaking years of this now. Absolutely bizarre.

On one hand, this administration has clearly damaged the psyche of American business with various statements it has made and actions such as the ACA. And in an increasingly competitive global economy, that's some pretty lousy timing.

On the other hand, the Meltdown was broad, deep, terribly complex and unique, and only when we look back later will we be able to see the longer term damage, in terms of the way both businesses and individuals now approach risk regardless of WHO is in the White House. This constant comparison of the Meltdown to other recessions is absurd.

And oh, by the way, since I know this is coming: The stock market is not the economy.

.

 

[Wildman]

This stuff is complicated.

nothing complicated about it, Mike's post proves what a fucking failure O'Husseinbama has been...., for his entire life.

 

[Stephanie]

This stuff is complicated.

nothing complicated about it, Mike's post proves what a fucking failure O'Husseinbama has been...., for his entire life.

That. And he's succeeded in Dividing the country and setting back race relations, to the point of riots, lootings, shootings of police officers, etc

what President SETS out to do something like that?
One who attended a CHRUCH for 20years that preached, Black Liberation.

It's been the most MISERABLE I've seen this country since back in the 60s

 

[NYcarbineer]

-- Obama has shattered Bush's record of debt accumulation, and he has done so in less than 6.5 years. In 8 years, Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt (from $5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $10.6 trillion in January 2009). In only 6 years and 5 months, Obama has added $7.5 trillion to the national debt (from $10.6 trillion in January 2009 to $18.1 trillion as of last month). And it's worth noting that we would be even deeper in debt if Obama and the Democrats had gotten their way on spending.

Obama didn't add all of that debt. In fact he added very little of it.

Do you know that over 2 trillion dollars worth of spending in the last six years is interest on the debt - debt accumulated for decades?

Is that Obama's fault?

 

[mikegriffith1]

-- Obama has shattered Bush's record of debt accumulation, and he has done so in less than 6.5 years. In 8 years, Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt (from $5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $10.6 trillion in January 2009). In only 6 years and 5 months, Obama has added $7.5 trillion to the national debt (from $10.6 trillion in January 2009 to $18.1 trillion as of last month). And it's worth noting that we would be even deeper in debt if Obama and the Democrats had gotten their way on spending.

Obama didn't add all of that debt. In fact he added very little of it.

Do you know that over 2 trillion dollars worth of spending in the last six years is interest on the debt - debt accumulated for decades?

Is that Obama's fault?

You are immune to facts and reason. And, just FYI, the interest paid on the debt has gone up substantially under Obama because he has shattered Bush's spending record. Just pull up the federal budgets since January 2009--all the ones with Obama's signature on them--and do the math yourself.

 

[Mr. H.]

-- Obama has shattered Bush's record of debt accumulation, and he has done so in less than 6.5 years. In 8 years, Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt (from $5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $10.6 trillion in January 2009). In only 6 years and 5 months, Obama has added $7.5 trillion to the national debt (from $10.6 trillion in January 2009 to $18.1 trillion as of last month). And it's worth noting that we would be even deeper in debt if Obama and the Democrats had gotten their way on spending.

Obama didn't add all of that debt. In fact he added very little of it.

Do you know that over 2 trillion dollars worth of spending in the last six years is interest on the debt - debt accumulated for decades?

Is that Obama's fault?

There is such a thing as retiring debt.

You and your New York state of mind.

 

[Dragonlady]

The Competitive Enterprise Institute is a Liberterian think tank with an anti-government agenda. Of course they are putting out articles with blame Obama for the weak recovery.

Here's the big difference between Obama's recovery and Reagan's: the Reagan recovery had less the 8 years of Reaganomics' stalled wages, and wealth moving to the top 5%. Workers still had disposable income and once working, could buy goods and services. All of the good paying jobs hadn't been off-shored. NAFTA didn't exist and the auto industry hadn't moved to Mexico.

After 30 years of stagnant wages, and loss of wealth, lower and middle income workers are drained. For the lowest income workers, they are only able to make ends meet because of food stamps and earned income credits. Manufacturing has moved to Mexico, and Asia and the jobs that remain don't pay very well. And the Republican Congress refuses to vote tax increases to the rich or to raise the minimum wage.

 

[mikegriffith1]

As for the nonsense that a large chunk of the debt is Bush's fault, below are some links that debunk this myth. Also, it's worth pointing out that when Obama was a senator, he pushed for spending even more money than Bush requested, over and over again--just go look at his votes and speeches on budget issues. So it's just plain lame to blame Bush for a large chunk of Obama's debt accumulation. Also, Obama's signature, not Bush's, has been on every spending measure since February 2009. Anyway, here are some links that address this issue:

Articles It s Not Bush s Fault

Who Caused the Federal Deficit You amp Me but Mostly Bush and Obama - Hit Run Reason.com

http://Marc Thiessen Obama cannot blame Bush for his deficits any longer - The Washington Post

Column Obama owns the debt now

Obama Must Stop Blaming Bush Accept Responsibility for Failing Economic Policies - US News

For Some Democrats Bush Is To Blame-Forever And Ever - Byron York - Page full

Liberals Claim Obama Has Reduced National Deficit By 50

The Deficit Blame Game - The Atlantic

 

[NYcarbineer]

-- Obama has shattered Bush's record of debt accumulation, and he has done so in less than 6.5 years. In 8 years, Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt (from $5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $10.6 trillion in January 2009). In only 6 years and 5 months, Obama has added $7.5 trillion to the national debt (from $10.6 trillion in January 2009 to $18.1 trillion as of last month). And it's worth noting that we would be even deeper in debt if Obama and the Democrats had gotten their way on spending.

Obama didn't add all of that debt. In fact he added very little of it.

Do you know that over 2 trillion dollars worth of spending in the last six years is interest on the debt - debt accumulated for decades?

Is that Obama's fault?

There is such a thing as retiring debt.

You and your New York state of mind.

Which has nothing to do with what I pointed out. Barack Obama has little or no power to simply stop government spending.

 

[Care4all]

Obama has reduced the running deficit that he was handed....

2010 fiscal year was Obama's first budget created and signed by him, 2009 budget was President bush's fiscal budget....you cant give 9 fiscal budgets to Obama and only 7 fiscal budgets of responsibility to Bush. Bush's fiscal budget put him through September 30th 2009 and that includes what was added to the National Debt under his fiscal rule of 8 years which was 6 TRILLION DOLLARS added to the National debt from his beginning 1st year budget to his ending 8th year budget....so number fudging is what your articles have done to confuse the ill informed.

When Bush inherited the economy from Clinton we were running fiscal SURPLUSES, when Bush handed it over to Obama, the running deficit was $1.4 TRILLION.

You can't say the deficits were Obama's starting the day he was hired, it is simply ridiculous and NOT how the economy or History works... no new CEO is criticized the day they start for the CRAPOLA they were handed by the actions of the previous management, they have at least 1-3 year's grace period to overcome what a previous, lousy CEO did.

Obama's spending increases are the lowest increases in spending from what he inherited, than any other President in my entire lifetime....

We are at the lowest level of taxes collected as a percentage of the overall GDP in my lifetime as well.

there are some HUGE deficits coming from the Medicare Pill Bill that the republicans passed in the wee hours of the morning, (through cheating) without FUNDING the new entitlement, that Obama is having to pay for out of his budgets, and a huge huge huge interest on the National Debt under President bush that he has to pay for as well....out of his budgets....

I can't imagine what a wonderful job Obama would have done if he had inherited a SURPLUS in the budget as pres bush did... (And squandered).

President Obama INHERITED the Tarp bail outs, and the Auto Industry bail out, and the Fannie and Freddie bail outs....all were instituted by the Bush admin in 2 parts.

 

[Manonthestreet]

no reason we cant be running a surplus with the record revenue we are collecting.......Obama and the dem Congress he had made zero effort in area of fiscal control....immediately added a trillion to the budget....yeah its his fault

 

[The Rabbi]

The Competitive Enterprise Institute is a Liberterian think tank with an anti-government agenda. Of course they are putting out articles with blame Obama for the weak recovery.

Here's the big difference between Obama's recovery and Reagan's: the Reagan recovery had less the 8 years of Reaganomics' stalled wages, and wealth moving to the top 5%. Workers still had disposable income and once working, could buy goods and services. All of the good paying jobs hadn't been off-shored. NAFTA didn't exist and the auto industry hadn't moved to Mexico.

After 30 years of stagnant wages, and loss of wealth, lower and middle income workers are drained. For the lowest income workers, they are only able to make ends meet because of food stamps and earned income credits. Manufacturing has moved to Mexico, and Asia and the jobs that remain don't pay very well. And the Republican Congress refuses to vote tax increases to the rich or to raise the minimum wage.

Yeah its all Reagan's fault.
Libs are a hoot. They cannot face facts. They always have an excuse. It was Bush. It was Reagan. It was Abraham Lincoln. Like Obama hasnt been president for 6 years and didnt have a pliant Congress the first two that passed a bunch of shit legislation that has ruined our economy.
Businesses are in holding mode. No one wants to expand in this environment. THey are hunkered down waiting for the Republicans to win in 2016. Then watch what recovery looks like.

 

[Stephanie]

Obama has reduced the running deficit that he was handed....

2010 fiscal year was Obama's first budget created and signed by him, 2009 budget was President bush's fiscal budget....you cant give 9 fiscal budgets to Obama and only 7 fiscal budgets of responsibility to Bush. Bush's fiscal budget put him through September 30th 2009 and that includes what was added to the National Debt under his fiscal rule of 8 years which was 6 TRILLION DOLLARS added to the National debt from his beginning 1st year budget to his ending 8th year budget....so number fudging is what your articles have done to confuse the ill informed.

When Bush inherited the economy from Clinton we were running fiscal SURPLUSES, when Bush handed it over to Obama, the running deficit was $1.4 TRILLION.

You can't say the deficits were Obama's starting the day he was hired, it is simply ridiculous and NOT how the economy or History works... no new CEO is criticized the day they start for the CRAPOLA they were handed by the actions of the previous management, they have at least 1-3 year's grace period to overcome what a previous, lousy CEO did.

Obama's spending increases are the lowest increases in spending from what he inherited, than any other President in my entire lifetime....

We are at the lowest level of taxes collected as a percentage of the overall GDP in my lifetime as well.

there are some HUGE deficits coming from the Medicare Pill Bill that the republicans passed in the wee hours of the morning, (through cheating) without FUNDING the new entitlement, that Obama is having to pay for out of his budgets, and a huge huge huge interest on the National Debt under President bush that he has to pay for as well....out of his budgets....

I can't imagine what a wonderful job Obama would have done if he had inherited a SURPLUS in the budget as pres bush did... (And squandered).

President Obama INHERITED the Tarp bail outs, and the Auto Industry bail out, and the Fannie and Freddie bail outs....all were instituted by the Bush admin in 2 parts.

Obama also didn't have to deal with a 9/11
and the people has spoken on what they think of the job he's done on the economy, jobs, raising taxes everywhere he can, sticking a new government entitlement on our backs called, OsamCare, etc et

They evidently think he sucks..they voted out his party in control of the Senate FIRST and then voted them out of the HOUSE next...In only SIX years of his reign of terror over...

on top of that: he's made RACE relations in the country (if I had son he could be Trayvon Martin BS) to point of RIOTS, lootings, picking OFF police officers sitting in their cars WITH THE HELP of 60 visits by that SNAKE Al Shartpon to our white house.

I can't find anything GOOD about him, NOTHING

 

[Auld Phart]

Obama has reduced the running deficit that he was handed....

2010 fiscal year was Obama's first budget created and signed by him, 2009 budget was President bush's fiscal budget....you cant give 9 fiscal budgets to Obama and only 7 fiscal budgets of responsibility to Bush. Bush's fiscal budget put him through September 30th 2009 and that includes what was added to the National Debt under his fiscal rule of 8 years which was 6 TRILLION DOLLARS added to the National debt from his beginning 1st year budget to his ending 8th year budget....so number fudging is what your articles have done to confuse the ill informed.

When Bush inherited the economy from Clinton we were running fiscal SURPLUSES, when Bush handed it over to Obama, the running deficit was $1.4 TRILLION.

You can't say the deficits were Obama's starting the day he was hired, it is simply ridiculous and NOT how the economy or History works... no new CEO is criticized the day they start for the CRAPOLA they were handed by the actions of the previous management, they have at least 1-3 year's grace period to overcome what a previous, lousy CEO did.

Obama's spending increases are the lowest increases in spending from what he inherited, than any other President in my entire lifetime....

We are at the lowest level of taxes collected as a percentage of the overall GDP in my lifetime as well.

there are some HUGE deficits coming from the Medicare Pill Bill that the republicans passed in the wee hours of the morning, (through cheating) without FUNDING the new entitlement, that Obama is having to pay for out of his budgets, and a huge huge huge interest on the National Debt under President bush that he has to pay for as well....out of his budgets....

I can't imagine what a wonderful job Obama would have done if he had inherited a SURPLUS in the budget as pres bush did... (And squandered).

President Obama INHERITED the Tarp bail outs, and the Auto Industry bail out, and the Fannie and Freddie bail outs....all were instituted by the Bush admin in 2 parts.

2009 $1413 Billion (TARP included)

2010 $1294 Billion (No TARP)

2011 $1299 Billion (No TARP)

2012 $1100 Billion (No TARP)

2013 $680 Billion Deficit

2014 $492 Billion Deficit

Can you remember what year Republican retook the House?

 

[nat4900]

The O/P should be labeled as partisan UNTIL the right wing answers TWO simple questions:

How did the Bush administration plan to pay for the Iraq debacle?
How did the Bush administration plan to pay for Medicare Pt. D?

 

[nat4900]

Facing massive debt to pay for WWII, what was the tax rate under the Eisenhower administration? ......and facing massive debt to pay for the Iraq huge mistake, what was (and is) the tax rate under the Bush-Obama administrations?

(and please note that a tax rate versus the tax code loopholes are to be considered.)

 

[Auld Phart]

Democrats had a lock on Congress, and the White House during Obamas first term.

The failure to increase tax rates to pay for those items is theirs

 

[Stephanie]

On top of everything this man has lied about: he finally tell the truth here
Isn't that what you ALL elected him for. to do everything he can for ILLEGAL immigrants. VIDEO OF IT if you can STAND it at the site.

SNIP:

‘I’m doing EVERYTHING I can’ for illegal aliens – Obama in his weekly address
Posted by soopermexican on Jun 6, 2015 at 10:20 AM in Politics | 50 Comments



Obama made clear who his real constituents are when he crapped on regular Americans and said he’s doing everything he can for illegal aliens in his weekly address.

Watch below:



Well hey at least he’s being honest for once about who he really cares about…


video of at the site
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/im-doing-everything-i-can-for-illegal-aliens-obama-in-his-weekly-address/#ixzz3cOAoKu9g

 

[nat4900]

Democrats had a lock on Congress, and the White House during Obamas first term.

The failure to increase tax rates to pay for those items is theirs

Of course you're conveniently forgetting exactly what a "lock" means in congressional voting.....Do you still think that 51% constitutes a majority in congress?