Unemployment drops to 7.8%

[_Bob Loblaw]

Sure Bob. What planet are you living on again?

The one in which economic growth is depressingly slow, unemployment has been bad for 4 years, and a president who dismissed Republicans in the early days of his administration by saying "I won. You didn't."

Is that the same planet on which "businessmen" make terrible leaders, even when they're not really businessmen?

[_Bob Loblaw]

By the way, I think the Republicans in Congress have acted disgracefully in refusing to compromise or work with the president and the Democrats. But it's not all on one side.

[_Brackite]

During this time in the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, the Unemployment rate dropped down to 7.3%.

But it was 7.2% and on its way down when he first came in. It was Reagan's policies that made it all worse whereas Obama's policies have been chipping away at the employment problem since his first year. The comparison is absurd. The unemployment average over the 40 months under Obama is lower than it was for Reagan's first 40 months.

When Ronald Reagan first entered into office, the Unemployment rate was 7.5% (though it did drop down to 7.2% during his fourth and seventh months in office). When Barack Obama first entered into office, the Unemployment rate was 7.8%. The Unemployment rate is the same right now, than it was when Barack Obama first entered into office. The Unemployment rate was .02% lower during this time in the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, than it was when Ronald Reagan first entered into office.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

[_Kevin Graham]

When Ronald Reagan first entered into office, the Unemployment rate was 7.5% (though it did drop down to 7.2% during his fourth and seventh months in office). When Barack Obama first entered into office, the Unemployment rate was 7.8%. The Unemployment rate is the same right now, than it was when Barack Obama first entered into office. The Unemployment rate was .02% lower during this time in the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, than it was when Ronald Reagan first entered into office.

But what you keep ignoring is the fact that the "Carter recession" was really nothing compared to the economic collapse of 2008. As the stats show, the economy had already started turning around for the better before Reagan even got settled in, whereas Obama came into office when unemployment was literally falling off the cliff with no sign of improvement in sight. After the economy started improving under Reagan, unemployment then jumped four percentage points upwards and stayed above 10% for 13 months before it started to gradually go back down.

The average rate of unemployment under Reagan's first term is still higher than that of Obama's first term. Something you folks on the Right conveniently ignore.

[_palerobber]

a handy comparison...
(note: the horizontal axis lines mark the midpoint of that year, not the start)

Jan 2009 - Present


Jan 1981 - Nov 1984

[_Jason Bourne]

For what it is worth here is another perspective:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-0 ... t-probably

[_krose]

When Barack Obama first entered into office, the Unemployment rate was 7.8%. The Unemployment rate is the same right now, than it was when Barack Obama first entered into office.

Using January numbers to represent the start of a president's influence is not only unfair, it's dishonest. People do the same with gasoline prices, and it's just playing partisan games.

The unemployment rate was on its way up, and didn't reach its peak for several months, before any "policy" could have any real effect. In addition, in every recovery, employment always lags behind.

If we are making an honest and fair assessment, we should use the higher numbers from at least mid-2009 (near 10%) as the starting point.

But honestly, I believe a president usually has little effect on the nation's economy, including unemployment. I do think stimulus works to a limited extent. While I'm not convinced that it's long lasting, a government injection of cash is sometimes helpful as a jump start.

I don't blame Bush for the bad economy either, except to the extent that repealing financial regulations allowed those institutions to run wild. I do blame him for most of the deficits, because of irresponsible tax cutting while expanding military and domestic spending. Lowering taxes during wartime is unprecedented. Such ventures need to be paid for.

[_Brackite]

When Barack Obama first entered into office, the Unemployment rate was 7.8%. The Unemployment rate is the same right now, than it was when Barack Obama first entered into office.

Using January numbers to represent the start of a president's influence is not only unfair, it's dishonest. People do the same with gasoline prices, and it's just playing partisan games.

The unemployment rate was on its way up, and didn't reach its peak for several months, before any "policy" could have any real effect. In addition, in every recovery, employment always lags behind.

If we are making an honest and fair assessment, we should use the higher numbers from at least mid-2009 (near 10%) as the starting point.

It was Reagan's policies that made it all worse whereas Obama's policies have been chipping away at the employment problem since his first year.

What Policies of Ronald Reagan made the Unemployment rate go up to 10.8% in November of 1982??
If the Polices of Ronald Reagan were so bad for the Economy, than why did the Unemployment rate dropped from 10.8% in November of 1982 to 7.3% in September of 1984??
Why did Ronald Reagan win re-election in a landslide in November of 1984??

[_Bob Loblaw]

What Policies of Ronald Reagan made the Unemployment rate go up to 10.8% in November of 1982??
If the Polices of Ronald Reagan were so bad for the Economy, than why did the Unemployment rate dropped from 10.8% in November of 1982 to 7.3% in September of 1984??
Why did Ronald Reagan win re-election in a landslide in November of 1984??

The hard reality is that a president's policies have a negligible effect on unemployment and growth, unless there are drastic policies, like the Smoot-Hawley tariff that plunged the US into a much deeper depression in the 1930s. It's impossible to prove that the first 18 months of Reagan's presidency made things worse. One could argue the opposite, since the US emerged from the recession sooner than most other developed countries. By the fourth quarter of 1984, US unemployment was 7.2%. Compare that with Canada (11.1%), France (10.5%), and Britain (13.2%).

Is anyone going to argue that Canada's imposition of fuel-price controls and much higher energy taxes made things "better" for their economy? Or that Mitterand's massive expansion of the French welfare state made things better for the French? I would count both of those governments as having made drastic changes to their respective policies that did effect their economies. Can anyone say that, had Reagan done what the French and Canadians did, the recession would have been over sooner in the US?

I second Brackite's question: Which Reagan policies made things worse, and how did they make things worse?

[_krose]

I wish it were 3% or lower and that Obama's policies had been much more successful than they seem to have been.

I'm not trying to be combative, Jason, but I would like to know what policies you think would have been more successful. There may be something to Paul Krugman's idea that a much bigger stimulus was needed to make a real difference, but I don't know how much difference that would have made either.

What do you think he should have done that would have substantially lowered unemployment?