kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 11:48 AM
Original message |
Barack Obama will have a worse job-creation record than George W Bush... |
|
in his first four years in office.
You will hear much more about this subject in the future but there is a distinction to be made.
When GWB took office, the unemployment rate was 4.1% and he inherited a huge surplus from Bill Clinton. Barack Obama inherited a depression from George W Bush. And a world-wide economic collapse.
It is doubtful that we will have any jobs created during the first four years of Barack Obama. Unless, of course, the economy gets back on course fairly quickly. With the damage that was done, that would be a very optimistic outlook.
|
MineralMan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 11:49 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Well GWB holds the record for job-destroying, so it all balances |
|
out. Bush's work is still ongoing.
|
Altoid_Cyclist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. Let's not forget his hard work in destroying two countries also. |
|
Well, actually it's two and a half if you include the US.
|
MineralMan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
7. Indeed! What a wonder and a marvel was the Son of a Bush. |
|
Edited on Fri Sep-11-09 12:03 PM by MineralMan
|
Altoid_Cyclist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. Just think, if only someone had taken the time to neuter Prescott Bush. none of this would |
|
Edited on Fri Sep-11-09 12:15 PM by Altoid_Cyclist
have happened. You're correct Kentuck, they'll use any distortions that they can or just invent some inane illogical reason(s) to say that we were better off when the idiot son was running things with Darth Cheney to advise him.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 11:52 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Though he'll come out way ahead on the "Americans killed for a lie" stat |
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
I am only pointing out a future political issue of the Repubs. I don't personally see any parallel but I'm sure the Repubs will use it to their advantage, if possible?
|
HughBeaumont
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 11:57 AM
Response to Original message |
4. If we break even by the end of his first term, I'll be MORE than happy. |
|
Obama just got handed the worst economic fuck-up in 75 years (the last one, not coincidentally, was ALSO caused and made worse by bad Republican economic policy). Obama's also getting an economic situation handed to him that was caused by 28 years of Free-Trade Laissez Fail with very little regulations. This isn't just an average mess he's being forced to clean up.
|
Statistical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 12:03 PM
Response to Original message |
6. "doubtful that we will have any jobs created during the first four years" |
|
Unemployment is expected to peak around Q3-2010. Jobs will be created after that.
While there may not be a net gain of jobs (i.e jobs lost prior to Q3-2010 > jobs created after Q3-2010) it is virtually impossible that no jobs (i.e. not a single month of job gains) will happen in first 4 years.
If it does it won't matter who is at fault I 100% guarantee Obama will lose re-election in a landslide.
Luckily no economist supports a theory that we will have continued job losses all the way to Nov-2012.
|
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. As with Bush, they will note the "net jobs" created... |
|
Hopefully we will recover enough to have some jobs created but the numbers that have been lost already will be difficult to make up. Sorry for the confusion.
|
Statistical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
10. Ok I agree with you net jobs will be VERY difficult to get above 0. |
|
2.8 millions lost since day Obama took office.
We are losing about 300K per month. Say it declined linearly (300K, 290K, 270K, etc) to 0 by Oct 2010.
That would be another ~2.0 million jobs lost.
So say we hit 0 monthly losses in Oct 2010 likely total lost "so far" will be around 4.0 - 4.8 million lost.
Nov 2010 to Nov 2012 is 24 months. We would need to see 200K jobs created per month to be back at net gain/loss of 0 by election day.
Considering substantial momentum is built 6 months form election day that would be more like 250K net jobs created per month from Oct 2010 to Apr 2012 to hit net gain/loss of 0.
Both are possible but are difficult numbers to hit. Even worse would be a period of front loaded slow growth. Say 6 months where average job creation is about 50K jobs (+200K on month, -100K next, etc). That would require more like 350K-400K jobs per month for remaining 12 months to get back at net of 0.
So I think your right Obama likely will have to run for re-election having a net loss of jobs during his first term.
|
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-11-09 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. Which makes it even more amazing that Bill Clinton averaged.. |
|
about 225,000 per month for 8 straight years!!
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 03:25 PM
Response to Original message |