Man, I need some of whatever they’re smoking.
The numbers are all baloney.
Only a fool would believe the outright fabrications put forth in this “article”, but then again, it was crafted for the extremely ignorant in the first place.
DEEEEEE_LUSIONAL! Let’s see. Unemployment? Based on the folks filing? How many have exhausted their 875 weeks or whatever it is now and quit filing? 90 million? 20 million? 10 million? We all know this is a red herring and the numbers are total BS. But, the lyin’ king did say on labor day “I don’t think you can name a segment of the economy that isn’t doing better today than the day I took office.” WHAT!!! OMG! He didn’t even wince when he said it either.
This is hilharryass! I was working back during the Reagan administration and now during the greatly trumpeted mulatos administration I’m not. Baby that’s all I need to know about the veracity of this fiction right there.
we are poorer now then 6 yrs ago..
about 50% or families are poorer thatn just 6 yrs ago..
..prices for everything are higher....we have less security....we couldn't even do well in the Olympics...
the number of people NOT working in America is at an all time high...
What bullshit.
“Any econonmists out there care to rip this apart? Or is this guy somehow correct and the economy is booming and consumers (i.e. jobless) are just not intelligent enough to see it?”
I did a little search on one of the authors - Deitrick and I found a reviewer’s take on a book written by him, essentially advancing the same bogus idea. Here’s her take on his book (and she’s a staunch democrat, but evidently one of those rare one that is also honest). Source: http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/464639239
“After reading this Forbes article, I picked up this book as a possible Christmas gift for some of my relatives. My expectations were too high from the start; I hoped to find a book that would make one person stop moaning about the economy’s “inevitable collapse” due to Obama’s reelection and make another stop compulsively gardening to stave off the coming “food shortages.” In other words, I hoped it would present a convincing enough argument to turn crazy radicals sane. In retrospect, I realize that’s too much to ask of any book.
The main flaw in this one is apparent right from the start — opinions are often presented as facts. In the first pages, for example, it is stated that one of the criteria for determining the economic success of a president was how much he equitably distributed the country’s wealth among its people; my radical relatives would immediately disagree with that standard and probably wouldn’t read any further. It then goes on to state that civil rights issues are mere “distractions” and that you should only vote based on “what’s important — your pocketbook.” This is the point where it turned me off, although I decided to stick with it.
The book goes on to analyze several presidencies based on what the authors call their PRES Rankings (Presidential Rankings of Economic Stewardship.) The book reads like a lower-level college essay, and the whole thing is too heavily footnoted (most footnotes seem to lead to PDFs of university courses) and overly simplified; I’m not sure if the authors felt like they had to dumb it down to reach their intended audience or even who their intended audience was.
Another thing that detail-oriented readers are going to get stuck on is the number of typos and editing errors in the text; while not the worst I’ve seen, it is certainly significant. In my mind, the validity of your argument, no matter how well-researched, looks diminished when you haven’t even bothered to copyread it properly. The authors also use the same quote from Marriner Eccles (to whom this book seems like some kind of stalkery love note) about a poker game four separate times, which by the fourth time is just sloppy writing.
The chapters themselves are also heavily skewed toward the Democrats. Republican presidents are vilified in the text for everything from their upbringing and education to their campaign tactics, whereas Democrats are only lauded for their economic successes. I (full disclosure) am a staunch Democrat, and even I noticed the disparity; it is not subtle, and right-wing-leaning readers are going to pick it up and run with it. It has the effect of making the book seem like subjective propaganda. The authors would have served themselves better to just let their impressive economic facts speak for themselves.”
These guys are out of their minds. 1984 I graduated from electronics school. Tech firms were hiring at an unbelievable rate. Motorola in Huntsville hired 25 out of my class. Texas Instruments came in and hired nearly everyone else.
1984, 1985 and 1986 were UNBELIEVABLE in job growth. Obama has not even sniffed a fraction of that.
Are they smoking crack at Forbes? This has to be satire. Obungler has DESTROYED the American economy. The numbers dont lie, econotards!
Democratic propaganda from a left leaning financial magazine read primarily by financial wizards living in their mommy’s basement.
You will enjoy this article.
MSM Presstitute Bukake video — somebody wake me up, oooooh Goooooood, noooooo...!
Make it stop, make it go away......
Lol. My, my, how things have changed. He didn't even recognize the world at the end of his days. It had left him, though his common sense and sense of humor never did.
One by one, symbols and truths big and small, have been transformed into satire or condemned and torn down to make way for new planned development.
Let’s see, my paycheck doesn’t go as far. Wife has been out of work three times since bammy took office. My house is worth less than what I paid for it 15 years ago. Gas is double what it was. Neither wife nor I have ever kept a car as long as the ones we have now. If this is a recovery economy, I need a recovery from the recovery.
Deitrick – “President Reagan has long been considered the best modern economic President. So we compared his performance dealing with the oil-induced recession of the 1980s with that of President Obama and his performance during this ‘Great Recession.’
...
So they are comparing recessions. I think I’ll pass. But I will say that Reagan approved austerity from the Federal Reserve during his recession while recovering from Carter’s mess. Whereas the Fed has been printing trillions of dollars during Obama’s six “Summers of Recovery.”
Clearly this shows that CEOs can be dumber than a box of rocks when it comes economics.
Frankly I am suspicious of this guy Deitrick. CEOs have been all for the bailouts cause it gave them an edge over their competitors. Its not surprising a CEO comes out praising Obama and big govt.