Posted on 01/07/2017 10:44:32 AM PST by expat_panama
Obamanomics: The last jobs report of President Obama's presidency came out on Friday. What it says about his economic performance can be summed up in one word: Lackluster.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday that the economy created a modest 156,000 new jobs in December, while the unemployment rate remained essentially unchanged at 4.7%.
Reuters, however, took this news as evidence that the economy is nearing full employment, and the White House boasted that it marks the 75th consecutive month of job growth — "more than two years longer than the next-longest streak." The current unemployment rate is as low as it was just before the recession hit.
But look at the job market in the proper context, and Obama's record is pretty dismal...
...question going forward is whether this sluggish job growth is a permanent fixture of the economy, or whether it's the result of bad public policy.
Our view has consistently been that the economic recovery from the Great Recession could have been — and should have been — very robust. And that the only reason it wasn't is growth-choking policies imposed by Obama: Dodd-Frank, ObamaCare, tax hikes, huge new regulatory burdens.
If Trump manages to turn these policies around, we have no doubt that the days of mediocre job growth will be a thing of the past.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
This 'jobs legacy' shtick seems to be the big think in the newsbiz these days. Here's a graphic from another article--
--and it paints quite a different picture from the one from a NYT piece on this other thread:
--but imho the best take is the one from IBD:.
Grampa said “figures don’t lie, liars figure”. It all depends on who is doing the counting and the preconceived bias’s of the recipient.
That bottom graph is the most telling since there’s been no improvement after falling behind in 2010, exactly when the recession should have been fading away. Instead, the recession’s effects were being locked in by the factors cited in the IBD article.
All that job growth you're talking about, it's all part time jobs. You also need to talk about the underemployed; those college grads who are flipping burgers because your leadership can't create any real jobs. Worst President ever...including Carter.
Excellent analysis by the only free market business paper left.
During the first term, the Obama administration kept trying to sell the poor economic numbers as ‘the new normal’.
If the Obama admin numbers were real, they would be proclaiming from the rooftops how he managed to salvage the economy and drive the UE from 9.7% in 2010 to 4.7% today.
Great graphs - thanks for posting them.
The best evidence that the admin (and enemedia) numbers are BS is the election of Donald Trump.
Libs have to push the “Russian hacking” lie because history will always show the “Best President Ever” (Otoken) was followed by the “Worst Monster Ever” (Trump)...
Or what is included in the count.
Missing is the chart that shows the continuous increase in the chocolate ration.
Can we pronounce this to be a “failed presidency” yet?
A terrible curse was laid on the Current Occupant back in the very early days in 2009, when Rush Limbaugh said, “I hope he (Obama) fails.”
It all depends, of course, on what the definition of “failure” is. As a President, the Current Occupant has failed miserably. As a community organizer activist he has exceeded all his personal expectations.
It’s not a “jobs” report, it’s an Unemployment report.
Some of those are a bit ‘cherrypicked’ and could be refuted easily by a Zero supporter (e.g. the median family income bounced a bit since 2012).
While it’s not as intuitive as those you’ve picked, the ‘velocity of money’ or M2 really shows when real economic activity and wealth is happening and when it’s not:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2V
They are trying to do that but I don’t think it’s getting much traction so HEY! Look over there! Russians!
It is a disaster for the American workers.
Great graphs, what’s the link to them ?
Re: “Great graphs, what’s the link to them?”
The graphs stamped with “FRED” come from the Federal Reserve, but the actual source for the specific data may come from other sources, which is usually visible on an enlarged graph.
The one graph with no “FRED” stamp - “Health Insurance Costs” - comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The velocity of money is not M2. It’s the ‘V’ in P*Q = M*V. M2 is simply a different measure of the money supply, M1. M2 is the conventional definition of the money supply (i.e., M1) plus “near money”; those assets that are very liquid, but not strictly part of M1 (e.g., time deposits).
They were posted online, but I can’t find the link now. If I do, I’ll post it.
My recollection of 2007 is basically this:
The economy was pretty strong. Most people had jobs. Even your lazy brother-in-law had a job.
THE MEDIA SAID: Worst economy since Hoover!!!!
Result: Voters were frightened by the awful economy and gave Pelosi control of the senate.
My recollection from 2012:
The economy was damn weak. Your brother-in-law was out of work. Your neighbor too. Even you might have been out of work.
THE MEDIA SAID: Great economy! Major recovery! Gotta love that Obama!
Result: Voters who couldn't pay their bills were glad to hear of the economic boom and voted Obama a second term.
My recollection from 2016:
The economy was damn weak. America was weak around the world. Democrats were engaging in multiple felonies.
THE MEDIA SAID: Trump is a crazy man. Jeb is a statesman. Hillary is as pure as the driven snow.
Result: Voters said -- "hey the media lies a lot" and voted for Trump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.