Unemployment has more than doubled since Harry Reid and the Democrats took over the US Senate four years ago, promising change.
http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab1.htm
The graph below was published as part of the 2009 “Stimulus” bill. It was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%. Unemployment was supposed to be down to 7% now.
How about the National Debt? The graph below is from the Congressional Budget Office.
Many countries in Europe and Asia are booming.
Russia grows 4% as economy recovers from crisis
India growth rate rises to 8.8%
China overtakes Japan in 2Q as No. 2 economy
Obama took some time off from golf this week to talk to the press about the root of the problem.
The true numbers (unofficial):
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts
ONE would ask – why EVERYONE is talking about US debt dangers and outsourcing manufacturing sites sliding US population into poverty and NO ONE pays any attention to the voices? What’s going on?
Regards
Maybe put a line on your top chart indicating when Obama actually took office, and let me know how that looks.
Also, if I remember right, the Bush team spent years blaming Clinton for Bush’s recession. Seeing how this one started before Obama was even in office, I don’t see any way it can be pinned on him. Next thing we know, Katrina, and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will be Obama’s fault too.
Obama took office in the Senate in January 2007 as part of the controlling Democratic Party.
Oh yeah, I didn’t take into account that Obama was elected dictator of the Senate. And that as a freshmen Senator, he had unlimited power.
We’re talking about president here. Obama took office Jan 20, 2010, well into the significant incline of the unemployment.
And lets take a closer look at the debt chart. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Debt_Trend.svg Who was in charge during the highest debt increases? Republicans. And who tended to reduce debt the most? Democrats. Especially telling is the 180 the debt did once Bush came into office.
Congress controls the budget, not the White House.
In a way, yes. But the president is required to submit a budget to Congress, which it then modifies. So in a broad sense, the president sets the direction the budget will take. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_budget_process
Obama pushed the TARP bill through Congress right before the election, then claimed that he inherited a trillion dollar deficit.
It was actually a one time charge, which he was largely responsible for.
You’re right Matt in September 2002 that is all Bush was saying is that everything was Clinton’s fault. Not! When are the Dems going to accept any responsibility? They have been in control of Congrees since Jan 2007 and have had filibuster proof majority in Senate, large majority in the House, and Obama took office in Jan 2009. Pretty soon using your logic and pathetic excuses, Republicans can blame Iraq on Clinton.
Not at all: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-29-2010/blame
Jon Stewart, while being a funny guy, this particular segment he did provide any video of Bush blaming Clinton. There was Pat Buchanon which I gues would be the equivalent of Howard Dean blaming Bush. Nice try. President Obama still blames Bush, himself, after nearly two years in office. Dems have controlled Congress for four years. Barney Frank And Chris Dodd protected Fannie and Freddie and the governments push to expand home ownership, which is at the core of the crisis. I personally blame Bush, Republicans, democrats and now Obama for where we are at.
Matt, the president can submit a budget, but like 2008 and 2010, congress never has to pass one (they are supposed to, but Nancy Pelosi figured out a way to avoid doing so).
So in essence, the only republican budget in the last 4 years was 2007. And what was the unemployment numbers that year? And what was the deficit?
How soon we forget (or conveniently just are clueless about).
Matt says:
September 5, 2010 at 7:45 pm
(…)
We’re talking about president here. Obama took office Jan 20, 2010, well into the significant incline of the unemployment.
Nothing far from the truth. Mr Obama was destined for his job long ago.
BTW, both Mr Bush and Mr Obama are of the same “political origin”, so let’s stop siding them against each other – both Dem and Rep parties have the same goals.
Regards
Bush = Obama = Clinton = Bush
There is just one political party in the US, the one behind the scenes.
Matt, you would agree that we need a different approach to our economic problems than we currently have?
Seeing as how its become popular to denounce the last hundred years of economic policy as being the fault of out current position, I have to ask.
But beyond that is the baboon behind the curtain, and it has been feed steroids by both parties. It would seem to me there is nothing to do but kill all social programs and cut most departments in order to regain a semblance of fiscal responsibility.
I don’t think the US population is going to accept that, and so there is little to do but wait for the default. Relatively soon will the USA be another Argentinaish 3rd world power.
That my friend will be the death of the CAGW program. So, as I’ve heard, its an ill wind that blows no good.