Romney's doing okay now that he doesn't have to carpet-bomb TV with negative, expensive ads against other Repubs. He can concentrate on Obama. However, once the campaign really really kicks in, all anyone has to do is be notified to go google "Romney flip flop". The stuff you'll find on youtube is stunning. The man literally changes with the wind. Other than being pro-big business, I truly wonder if he stands for anything.
The Unemployment rate is lower than when Obama became president. This means more Americans are without a job than when he took office. Its been 3 years and its not like there's been austerity with continued deficits by the government which is an artificial inflator of jobs and the economy. This seems pretty straightforward, don't know why its being debated so much.
I will never stop blaming him for things that are his fault, as it should be. Blame should be placed where it is deserved, when it comes to how high the unemployment rate went, it is hardly Obama's fault that the economy was shedding 750,000 jobs per month at inauguration.
Yes, because the economy was losing 750,000 jobs per month when he took office. No, but there HAS been unprecedented obstructionism and opposition to anything that might improve the economy by the party that is rooting for the American economy to falter: the GOP. It is debated because people like you want to point out the numbers, but don't want to discuss WHY the numbers are as bad as they are. You are so consumed by wanting Obama ousted that you can't face facts and have divorced yourself from reality.
another excuse from you to cover up Obama's inability to work across the aisle. remember his famous quotes on healthcare...."we won the election, we'll write the bill" the clown thinks he's a god
Obama took over in January 09 the total employment was 131555000. In May of 2012 total employment was 133727000. If you believe presidents create jobs then he has created 2172000 jobs. I believe the inauguration date for Obama was was on jan 19. 5 million jobs were lost between dec 2008 and jan 2009. So most of the loses would be on W. In any case under Obama companies have made more money than ever, and government payrolls have fallen greater than ever. So I don't know why republicans are even complaining. It would seem democrats should have more reason to complain about Obama. Data is from BLS: <style type="text/css"> table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;} .tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;} </style> <table class="tableizer-table"> <tr class="tableizer-firstrow"><th>Year</th><th>Jan</th><th>Feb</th><th>Mar</th><th>Apr</th><th>May</th><th>Jun</th><th>Jul</th><th>Aug</th><th>Sep</th><th>Oct</th><th>Nov</th><th>Dec</th><th>Annual</th></tr> <tr><td>2002</td><td>128602</td><td>129069</td><td>129673</td><td>130257</td><td>131024</td><td>131404</td><td>129960</td><td>130044</td><td>130557</td><td>131227</td><td>131345</td><td>130933</td><td>130341</td></tr> <tr><td>2003</td><td>128248</td><td>128660</td><td>129148</td><td>129801</td><td>130559</td><td>130889</td><td>129550</td><td>129601</td><td>130253</td><td>131045</td><td>131208</td><td>131026</td><td>129999</td></tr> <tr><td>2004</td><td>128365</td><td>128976</td><td>130019</td><td>131140</td><td>132047</td><td>132495</td><td>131334</td><td>131352</td><td>132067</td><td>133050</td><td>133301</td><td>133075</td><td>131435</td></tr> <tr><td>2005</td><td>130369</td><td>131195</td><td>132038</td><td>133247</td><td>134059</td><td>134728</td><td>133665</td><td>133910</td><td>134533</td><td>135260</td><td>135817</td><td>135615</td><td>133703</td></tr> <tr><td>2006</td><td>132962</td><td>133887</td><td>134868</td><td>135780</td><td>136584</td><td>137084</td><td>135908</td><td>136110</td><td>136776</td><td>137475</td><td>137857</td><td>137746</td><td>136086</td></tr> <tr><td>2007</td><td>134952</td><td>135641</td><td>136533</td><td>137335</td><td>138277</td><td>138779</td><td>137379</td><td>137488</td><td>138046</td><td>138786</td><td>139090</td><td>138875</td><td>137598</td></tr> <tr><td>2008</td><td>135840</td><td>136356</td><td>136944</td><td>137475</td><td>138045</td><td>138237</td><td>136752</td><td>136635</td><td>136685</td><td>136972</td><td>136288</td><td>135253</td><td>136790</td></tr> <tr><td>2009</td><td>131555</td><td>131314</td><td>131175</td><td>131357</td><td>131626</td><td>131442</td><td>129844</td><td>129719</td><td>130077</td><td>130674</td><td>130721</td><td>130178</td><td>130807</td></tr> <tr><td>2010</td><td>127309</td><td>127746</td><td>128584</td><td>129713</td><td>130833</td><td>130959</td><td>129624</td><td>129695</td><td>130191</td><td>131169</td><td>131481</td><td>131185</td><td>129874</td></tr> <tr><td>2011</td><td>128327</td><td>129148</td><td>130061</td><td>131240</td><td>131889</td><td>132340</td><td>131038</td><td>131278</td><td>131975</td><td>132870</td><td>133172</td><td>132965</td><td>131359</td></tr> <tr><td>2012</td><td>130297</td><td>131210</td><td>132081</td><td>132938(P)</td><td>133727(P)</td><td></td></tr></table>
Since the economy is not recovering fast enough, it's time that we hand the keys back over to the Republicans so that they can employ the same policies that were in place the last time that they had the presidency. Even though those policies resulted in a skyrocketing unemployment rate and massive deficits, somehow this time we will end up with a balanced budget and an economy creating over 500,000 jobs per month.
Average unemployment under Bush: 5.3 Average Deficit under Bush: $248 billion/year Average unemployment under Obama: 9.2% Average Deficit under Obama: $1,334 billion Just saying... Also interesting that if Bush hadn't passed TARP, then his average would have come down significantly (FY2008 was originally projected to be a surplus year).
You do realize that the only reason the average deficit under Bush was that low is because he kept the wars off the books. One of the reasons that Obama's deficits are so high is because he put those costs back on the books. Just saying...
What was the unemployment rate when Bush took office? I would also be curious as the what the deficit was when he took office as well? Would you also mind looking up the number of jobs added under Obama's presidency to the number added during Bush's entire 2 terms. I want to thank you in advance for this pertinent information.
I don't think there's any question that big business runs america. I don't think there's any question that , for lack of a better term, the top 1% has enormous influence on public policy and ultimately our lives. the question is are u better off here or somewhere else? if you wanted to work your way out of poverty, would it be easier in America or in another country?
#1, job growth is a trailing indicator; business will take every other possible measure to grow the bottom line before hiring permanent employees. But, the home sales, car sales and retail spending numbers are good. Interest rates and taxes are very low. The growth of the new energy sectors in the US is hugely promising and every barrel we start producing domestically is $90 we don't send out of the country, so growth in future for cash flow looks pretty good. I think one reason job growth looks bleak is that technology and productivity are advancing so fast in the information age that it renders the average worker obsolete. Bank Tellers, phone banks, welders, logistic management, ( the list cold be 1000's) are being replace by computerized machines. A car plant that might have employed 10,000 people 25 years ago can now make more and better cars with 3,000 people. That's great for profits, but where do the 7,000 people go to get a job?
