The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

[Synthaholic]

That is highly unlikely. There is an even chance he might do better than Ford in the last months of 2016, but its far from certain.

For sure, he'll never touch W.

W left office after doubling the unemployment rate and losing 700,000 jobs a month

His legacy is the reason we are talking about Obamas average

11 months before W left office, the unemployment rate was sitting at 4.9%, historically low. His average for all 96 months in office is 5.27%, one of the best in the history of the United States Of America. The Unemployment rate did shoot up in his very last months in office, but that does not erase what happened throughout 90% of the time he was in office. When he left office in January 2009, the latest reported rate was 7.3%, which is NOT a doubling of the unemployment rate while he was in office.

11 months before W left office, Wall Street hadn't collapsed yet.

What was the figure on the day he left office?

 

[TemplarKormac]

What's the time period that's being measured?

As @Agit8r posted in another thread:

So, President Jimmy Carter handed Ronnie 7.50% unemployment in January 1981, which Ronnie turned into 10.80% unemployment by December of 1982!

That's 24 months! By today's wingnut argument, Carter can't be held responsible for Reagan's 10.80% unemployment - he's been in office for TWO YEARS!!1!ZOMG!!!

Aannnd, that argument is gone.

It's not gone.

Don't you see where it goes up to 10.80% at the end of 1982? It's right there in your own chart!

By 1988 it all but disappeared, just like your argument. Carter caused stagflation, Reagan inherited it. Had Carter not been toying around with interest rates, you wouldn't have seen them as high as 17-20% for loans and whatnot. The peak of the misery index is due to the lingering effects of Carter's malfeasance. Paul Volcker was a moron to boot.

 

[Bfgrn]

 

[The Rabbi]

NIce.
Let's see if you can actually interpret a chart. My money says no.

 

[The Rabbi]

What's the time period that's being measured?

As @Agit8r posted in another thread:

So, President Jimmy Carter handed Ronnie 7.50% unemployment in January 1981, which Ronnie turned into 10.80% unemployment by December of 1982!

That's 24 months! By today's wingnut argument, Carter can't be held responsible for Reagan's 10.80% unemployment - he's been in office for TWO YEARS!!1!ZOMG!!!

Aannnd, that argument is gone.

It's not gone.

Don't you see where it goes up to 10.80% at the end of 1982? It's right there in your own chart!

Yes, two years into his first term, when he was trying to clean up Carter's mess. And what happens after that? What was it when he left, compared to when he came in?
Yeah, I thought so.

 

[Bfgrn]

Aannnd, that argument is gone.

It's not gone.

Don't you see where it goes up to 10.80% at the end of 1982? It's right there in your own chart!

Yes, two years into his first term, when he was trying to clean up Carter's mess. And what happens after that? What was it when he left, compared to when he came in?
Yeah, I thought so.

DEBT...PLUS 188.6% - % Change During his Presidency

The Free Market: The Sad Legacy of Ronald Reagan

Reagan tripled the Gross Federal Debt, from $900 billion to $2.7 trillion. Ford and Carter in their combined terms could only double it. It took 31 years to accomplish the first postwar debt tripling, yet Reagan did it in eight.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's not gone.

Don't you see where it goes up to 10.80% at the end of 1982? It's right there in your own chart!

Yes, two years into his first term, when he was trying to clean up Carter's mess. And what happens after that? What was it when he left, compared to when he came in?
Yeah, I thought so.

DEBT...PLUS 188.6% - % Change During his Presidency

The Free Market: The Sad Legacy of Ronald Reagan

Reagan tripled the Gross Federal Debt, from $900 billion to $2.7 trillion. Ford and Carter in their combined terms could only double it. It took 31 years to accomplish the first postwar debt tripling, yet Reagan did it in eight.

Obama's deficits are bigger than Reagan's entire budget.
I knew you coudn't answer the question.
Pwned again.

 

[U2Edge]

What's the time period that's being measured?

As @Agit8r posted in another thread:

So, President Jimmy Carter handed Ronnie 7.50% unemployment in January 1981, which Ronnie turned into 10.80% unemployment by December of 1982!

That's 24 months! By today's wingnut argument, Carter can't be held responsible for Reagan's 10.80% unemployment - he's been in office for TWO YEARS!!1!ZOMG!!!

The time period being measured is January 1948 to the most recent month for which unemployment figures are available which is January 2014. The Bureau of labor statistics has the monthly unemployment figures going all the way back to January 1948. Each month that a President was in office has that unemployment rate added up and then divided by total months in office to arrive at the average unemployment rate experienced while that President was in the White House. Its not about what the unemployment rate was the last month the President was in office or the first month. Its about all the months that they were in office, sometimes up to 96 months which is a very long time. The only way to assess all that time and those months is to take the average. Looking at just one month at the end or the beginning leaves out 98% of what things were like when the President was on the job!

That's not what I'm asking.

You didn't include a link for your OP, so you could have pulled those numbers out of your ass.

But assuming they are valid, are they comparing Reagan's 8 years to GHW Bush's 4 years? That's not a fair analysis.

A Gerald Ford enthusiast could rightfully claim that his guy had the lowest % of increase in unemployment throughout his term. May be true, but he was POTUS for 2.5 years.

Hell, you can make William Henry Harrison out to be one of our best presidents manipulating data like that.

Ever hear of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That is where the information comes from. Its the monthly unemployment rates found at the Bureau of Labor statistics from January 1948 to the latest month January 2014. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Yes, the numbers compare all the Presidents regardless of their time in office. Its simply the average level of monthly unemployment while each President was in the White House. I took all the data there was, from 1948 through 2014 and averaged the results for each Presidents time in office. That is the only purely objective and fair way to do it. Its simply a pure objective presentation of RAW economic data for each Presidents time in office. No bias, involved at all!

The Unemployment rate hit 9% under Ford, which at the time was the highest monthly rate of unemployment since World War II at that point. But that is just one month. The average looks at ALL 30 months or so that FORD was in office which gives a more complete and objective look at what conditions were like while he was sitting in the White House.

If you think a President can't be evaluated or compared given the number of months in office they spent, then that is a SUBJECTIVE factor that you bring to the numbers. The numbers by themselves are objective, unbiased and the truth as reported from the Bureau of labor statistics.

 

[U2Edge]

W left office after doubling the unemployment rate and losing 700,000 jobs a month

His legacy is the reason we are talking about Obamas average

11 months before W left office, the unemployment rate was sitting at 4.9%, historically low. His average for all 96 months in office is 5.27%, one of the best in the history of the United States Of America. The Unemployment rate did shoot up in his very last months in office, but that does not erase what happened throughout 90% of the time he was in office. When he left office in January 2009, the latest reported rate was 7.3%, which is NOT a doubling of the unemployment rate while he was in office.

11 months before W left office, Wall Street hadn't collapsed yet.

What was the figure on the day he left office?

7.3% was the latest figure at that time. But again, that is only a reflection of one month. Bush was President for 96 months. In order to get an accurate idea of what life was like while he was in the White House, you have to look at ALL 96 months. The average unemployment rate for W during his 96 months in office was 5.27% which is one of the lower averages of any President in history. So for the vast majority of the time that Bush was in office, people had jobs, could find jobs when they entered the work force, or could move from job to job with ease. On average, that is what the job climate was like while W was sitting in the White House!

 

[Synthaholic]

11 months before W left office, the unemployment rate was sitting at 4.9%, historically low. His average for all 96 months in office is 5.27%, one of the best in the history of the United States Of America. The Unemployment rate did shoot up in his very last months in office, but that does not erase what happened throughout 90% of the time he was in office. When he left office in January 2009, the latest reported rate was 7.3%, which is NOT a doubling of the unemployment rate while he was in office.

11 months before W left office, Wall Street hadn't collapsed yet.

What was the figure on the day he left office?

7.3% was the latest figure at that time. But again, that is only a reflection of one month. Bush was President for 96 months. In order to get an accurate idea of what life was like while he was in the White House, you have to look at ALL 96 months. The average unemployment rate for W during his 96 months in office was 5.27% which is one of the lower averages of any President in history. So for the vast majority of the time that Bush was in office, people had jobs, could find jobs when they entered the work force, or could move from job to job with ease. On average, that is what the job climate was like while W was sitting in the White House!

Just as Obama inherited Bush's rising numbers, Bush inherited Clinton's lower numbers, then started a war and created a massive new government bureaucracy, both of which created an enormous amount of jobs.

Please tell me whom you would like to start a war with, and which government agencies you would like to grow in size, and Obama's numbers will look as good as Dubya's.

 

[The Rabbi]

11 months before W left office, Wall Street hadn't collapsed yet.

What was the figure on the day he left office?

7.3% was the latest figure at that time. But again, that is only a reflection of one month. Bush was President for 96 months. In order to get an accurate idea of what life was like while he was in the White House, you have to look at ALL 96 months. The average unemployment rate for W during his 96 months in office was 5.27% which is one of the lower averages of any President in history. So for the vast majority of the time that Bush was in office, people had jobs, could find jobs when they entered the work force, or could move from job to job with ease. On average, that is what the job climate was like while W was sitting in the White House!

Just as Obama inherited Bush's rising numbers, Bush inherited Clinton's lower numbers, then started a war and created a massive new government bureaucracy, both of which created an enormous amount of jobs.

Please tell me whom you would like to start a war with, and which government agencies you would like to grow in size, and Obama's numbers will look as good as Dubya's.

Seriously? That's your response? That's lame and pathetic, even for you.

 

[American4Americ]

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%

You fudged the numbers...

Ronald Reagan had a significantly lower unemployment rate.

 

[U2Edge]

11 months before W left office, Wall Street hadn't collapsed yet.

What was the figure on the day he left office?

7.3% was the latest figure at that time. But again, that is only a reflection of one month. Bush was President for 96 months. In order to get an accurate idea of what life was like while he was in the White House, you have to look at ALL 96 months. The average unemployment rate for W during his 96 months in office was 5.27% which is one of the lower averages of any President in history. So for the vast majority of the time that Bush was in office, people had jobs, could find jobs when they entered the work force, or could move from job to job with ease. On average, that is what the job climate was like while W was sitting in the White House!

Just as Obama inherited Bush's rising numbers, Bush inherited Clinton's lower numbers, then started a war and created a massive new government bureaucracy, both of which created an enormous amount of jobs.

Please tell me whom you would like to start a war with, and which government agencies you would like to grow in size, and Obama's numbers will look as good as Dubya's.

Its not about the number you "inherit" at the start of your term, or the last month of your term. Its about all 96 months. 8 years. The economy can go up and down multiple times over such a long span of time, which makes the hand off from one President to the other largely irrelevant when you look at an 8 year, 96 month period of time.

As for the Wars, they did not create many jobs, as the United States military grew very little during that time, and industry supplying weapons already had plant and employees they needed prior to the start. The impact on overall US employment was non-existent. Wars have a way of boosting an economy when a country is not prepared for war as the United States was not ready for World War II. But since then, the United States has always been prepared in peacetime for multiple wars, which means once war breaks out, the overall economic effect is rather small compared to the impact that wars had prior to 1950.

 

[U2Edge]

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%

You fudged the numbers...

Ronald Reagan had a significantly lower unemployment rate.

Ronald Reagan did achieve lower unemployment rates for individual months towards the end of his second term. But the above list does not look at any individual monthly unemployment rates. Instead, it takes all of the monthly unemployment rates, adds them up and divides them by the number of months the President was in office in order to get what the average monthly unemployment rate was while that President was in the White House. Reagans average is very high due in part to the very high monthly unemployment rates experienced in 1982 and 1983. Reagan may have left office with a 5% unemployment rate in the last month, but the average for all 96 months was 7.54%.

 

[American4Americ]

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%

You fudged the numbers...

Ronald Reagan had a significantly lower unemployment rate.

Ronald Reagan did achieve lower unemployment rates for individual months towards the end of his second term. But the above list does not look at any individual monthly unemployment rates. Instead, it takes all of the monthly unemployment rates, adds them up and divides them by the number of months the President was in office in order to get what the average monthly unemployment rate was while that President was in the White House. Reagans average is very high due in part to the very high monthly unemployment rates experienced in 1982 and 1983. Reagan may have left office with a 5% unemployment rate in the last month, but the average for all 96 months was 7.54%.

no

 

[paulitician]

Massive Poverty and Massive Debt is this President's legacy. That, along with awful corruption and continuous assaults on our Constitution & Freedoms. If he were a Republican, every Communist wingnut on this Board would be screeching for Impeachment over such a dismal record.

 

[RKMBrown]

W left office after doubling the unemployment rate and losing 700,000 jobs a month

His legacy is the reason we are talking about Obamas average

11 months before W left office, the unemployment rate was sitting at 4.9%, historically low. His average for all 96 months in office is 5.27%, one of the best in the history of the United States Of America. The Unemployment rate did shoot up in his very last months in office, but that does not erase what happened throughout 90% of the time he was in office. When he left office in January 2009, the latest reported rate was 7.3%, which is NOT a doubling of the unemployment rate while he was in office.

11 months before W left office, Wall Street hadn't collapsed yet.

What was the figure on the day he left office?

Who was in charge of Congress at the time?

 

[healthmyths]

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 are right! Presidents don't decide but Presidents appoint and hire people that think like him.
So we have had these people that have told us in their OWN words how they would change our economy...

Obama himself..
Obama has said: "I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program."Obama's words exactly!!
So Obama and you defenders... IF YOU WANT single payer, what happens to :
"I prefer to destroy the 1,300 health insurance companies that pay $100 billion a YEAR in Federal/State/Local taxes AND local property taxes on their office buildings! I prefer to put out of work the 400,000 people that work in the health insurance companies!"
I prefer that the remaining 99% pay HIGHER TAXES BECAUSE I"VE destroyed coal companies, utilities, health insurance companies!
So IF Obama prefers ONE payer that means 1,300 insurance companies no longer are in business!

If Obama prefers to put out of business 1,300 companies what does that mean to those that work there???
This is certainly NOT a job creation statement!

 

[Synthaholic]

7.3% was the latest figure at that time. But again, that is only a reflection of one month. Bush was President for 96 months. In order to get an accurate idea of what life was like while he was in the White House, you have to look at ALL 96 months. The average unemployment rate for W during his 96 months in office was 5.27% which is one of the lower averages of any President in history. So for the vast majority of the time that Bush was in office, people had jobs, could find jobs when they entered the work force, or could move from job to job with ease. On average, that is what the job climate was like while W was sitting in the White House!

Just as Obama inherited Bush's rising numbers, Bush inherited Clinton's lower numbers, then started a war and created a massive new government bureaucracy, both of which created an enormous amount of jobs.

Please tell me whom you would like to start a war with, and which government agencies you would like to grow in size, and Obama's numbers will look as good as Dubya's.

Seriously? That's your response? That's lame and pathetic, even for you.

Give me a reason why my response is "lame and pathetic". Use facts, logic and data.

I'm guessing you cannot.

 

[Synthaholic]

7.3% was the latest figure at that time. But again, that is only a reflection of one month. Bush was President for 96 months. In order to get an accurate idea of what life was like while he was in the White House, you have to look at ALL 96 months. The average unemployment rate for W during his 96 months in office was 5.27% which is one of the lower averages of any President in history. So for the vast majority of the time that Bush was in office, people had jobs, could find jobs when they entered the work force, or could move from job to job with ease. On average, that is what the job climate was like while W was sitting in the White House!

Just as Obama inherited Bush's rising numbers, Bush inherited Clinton's lower numbers, then started a war and created a massive new government bureaucracy, both of which created an enormous amount of jobs.

Please tell me whom you would like to start a war with, and which government agencies you would like to grow in size, and Obama's numbers will look as good as Dubya's.

Its not about the number you "inherit" at the start of your term, or the last month of your term. Its about all 96 months. 8 years. The economy can go up and down multiple times over such a long span of time, which makes the hand off from one President to the other largely irrelevant when you look at an 8 year, 96 month period of time.

For the last time, not all POTUS have served 8 years. I don't know what's so hard to understand.

And, again, as I've already mentioned William Henry Harrison, but what if President Obama (praise be unto Him!) had become incapacitated after his 3rd month in office (maybe choked on a pretzel or something . . . ) and Vice President Joe "Cool" Biden had to take over? Would you average those 3 months of inherited unemployment and conclude that Obama had the worst in your list?

As for the Wars, they did not create many jobs, as the United States military grew very little during that time, and industry supplying weapons already had plant and employees they needed prior to the start. The impact on overall US employment was non-existent. Wars have a way of boosting an economy when a country is not prepared for war as the United States was not ready for World War II. But since then, the United States has always been prepared in peacetime for multiple wars, which means once war breaks out, the overall economic effect is rather small compared to the impact that wars had prior to 1950.

False. Almost from the start of the Bush Quagmire there were desperate calls for more and better armored gear, which resulted in big contracts and large increases in employment, to supply them. And Halliburton employed their own vast army of employees, hired specifically as sub-contractors, in all fields - these were not jobs that already existed. The job of driving a supply truck for Halliburton in Iraq did not exist before the Iraq War, for example.

Same with KBR, and Raytheon, and Blackwater, and the company who had the armored vehicle contract, ITT, CACI, Titan Corp., DynCorp, General Electric, and all the electronics/IT companies, etc, etc, etc. All these corporations hire a lot of people.