Actually, it's pretty close. Clinton changed the way the government calculates unemployment. <a href="http://www.shadowstats.com" title="Visit ShadowStats.com"><img src="http://shadowstats.com/imgs/sgs-emp.gif?hl=1" border="0" alt="Chart of U.S. Unemployment" /></a> From this graph, the differential between the blue line and gray line represents the "discouraged workers" (unemployed workers who have given up on a job search). It's about 2% right now. Adding that to the 7.6% headline unemployment, and you get 9.6%, which was the same as in 6/82.
We're in 1930, not 1934. With any luck and a little realism from our Republican policy makers, we'll never get past 1931.
Of course, part of the way we got through that was a large increase in government spending. During Reagan's 8 years, government spending increased by 80%. (for comparative purposes, Clinton's 8 years were 29%, and the first 7 years of Bush totalled 52%).
they were followed by the tech boom of the 80's, tech/internet boom of the 90's It seems pretty obvious every so often we get into a bind with employment. We have come to the end of the road in spending ourselves out of it. We can no longer afford it.
Why? In 1980, government spending was 21.7% of GDP. In 2007, it was 20% of GDP. (it peaked in 1983 at 23.5%, and hit bottom in 2000 at 18.4%)
It's now clear to me that the Republican aim of the last 40 years was not to undo the New Deal but rather to make it incredibly difficult to do it again, regardless of the consequences.
well they obviously failed because that is exactly what we are doing now. The stimulus is going to pass and Bernake is going to get his quantitative easing. Japanese stagflation economy followed/preceded by inflationary wonderland here we come! What the government is doing is textbook Keynes.
Boomers are getting old and their pension funds/housing equity is wiped out. Even without a terrifying recession or wars to fight, their entitlement burden as it is now will crush us. The me first generation will be notorious in American history...
Your comparing the start of the recession to the height of the depression. You have to use comparable periods for an accurate analysis. The first year of the depression compared to now. Which is actually very close.
I just saw the chart. RimRocker posted. It shows the peak at the 5th year. We are only 2-3 quarters into the current one.
If Japan didn't do enough stimulus for Pres. Obama, this is going to be a real Depression. Maybe we can get something really cool at the other end of it. I vote for Pyramids across the Great Plains States.
Who needs Pyramids? The first 2 story 100 mile NASCAR racetrack would make me proudER to be an American.
His issue with Japan is not necessarily the amount of stimulus - it's the when. I don't know much about what Japan did so I don't how right or wrong he is on that, but once you get far into the spiral, it's going to more difficult to stop. We saw this with everyone saying to hold off on TARP and wait and spend a few months debating it. As we've since since, Bank of America and Citigroup would be long-gone if that had happened and the snowball would have grown into an avalanche already.
Here's a little more info: A graph for the last several recessions: Doesn't go that far back, but does go back to the 1970's.
Actually they would undo the New Deal if it was not so popular, if they could. They tried to kill social security and they still are trying. You have them frantic to prevent health care for all or even children's health care, which could be viewed as another New Deal. Social security, medicare, medicaid were all Democratic laws passed with little if any bi-partisan support.
Building schools and firestations is the same as the Great Pyramids-- they were spending by the government. Whew!! No wonder Weslinder bristles at the term "wing nut".
SS and Medicare had bipartisan support. 81 Republicans in the House voted for it, compared to only 15 against. 16 GOP Senators voted for it, while 5 didn't. http://www.ssa.gov/history/tally.html Medicare was a bit less, but still about 50% GOP support: http://www.ssa.gov/history/tally65.html Government has always been partisan, but they used to work together a bit more and be less spiteful than today.
Thanks for the research. There was more bi-partisanship. The one thing that stands out is that the Dems had great majorities and really did not need the Repubs. 70 Dem senators for SS and 64 for Medicare. As a whole the GOP have never been strong supporters of Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid.
