The first-term economic records: Bush vs. Obama

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

http://www.caintv.com/the-first-term-economic-record

sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Treasury Department, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Social Security Administration

JOBS - At the end of President Bush’s first term, total non-farm employment in the U.S. consisted of 104,000 fewer jobs than when he took office in January 2001. At the end of President Obama’s first term, total non-farm employment in the U.S. consisted of 970,000 fewer jobs than when he took office in January 2009.

UNEMPLOYMENT - At the end of George W. Bush’s first term the U-6 unemployment rate was 9.3 percent, up from 7.3 percent in January 2001. At the end of President Obama’s first term, the real unemployment rate, meaning the number of unemployed or underemployed Americans, was 14.4 percent or 23 million people, up from 14.2 percent in January 2009.

DURATION - During President Bush’s first term, the average duration of unemployment was 17 weeks. During President Obama’s first term, the average duration of unemployment was 34 weeks.

PARTICIPATION - At the end of President Obama’s first term the labor force participation rate was 65.8 percent, down from 67.2 percent. At the end of President Obama’s first term, the labor force participation rate was 63.7 percent, down from 65.7 when he took office.

FOOD STAMPS - In January 2005 roughly 25 million people participated in SNAP. About 17 million participated in the program in 2001. Under Obama, individuals on food stamps grew from 32 million to 47 million.

DISABILITY - In 2004, the last full year of Bush’s first term, roughly 7.2 million people received disability benefits. The number of individuals receiving U.S. Social Security disability insurance payments in 2012 was 9 million.

GDP - The total increase in U.S. GDP during the first four years of President Bush was 9.4 percent. The total increase in U.S. GDP during the first four years of President Obama was 5.9 percent.

DEBT - At the end of President Bush’s first term the U.S. national debt was 64 percent of gross national product. The U.S. national debt was $7.6 trillion or roughly $26,000 per person. At the end of President Obama’s first term in office the U.S. national debt was more than 100 percent of gross domestic product. The U.S. national debt was more than $16.4 trillion, more than $52,000 per person.

Edited January 14, 2014 by The conciliator

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

[spookyturtle 9,465]

It's Bush's fault.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

If you two can't see the glaring problems with the OP then you simply can't be helped. I will be glad to spell out some of them when I have a bit more time.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

W didn't take office in the middle of a deep recession. I'd say that's pretty obvious.

Incidentally you'd be hard pressed to find any country that is doing as well or better economically than 13 years ago.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Net private sector jobs creation during first term in office

Bush: - 46,000

Obama: +1,208,000

Fact is that there were more private sector jobs created during Obama's first term than during all of Bush's Presidency.

Unemployment rate Feb 2001: 4.2%

Unemployment rate Jan 2005: 5.3%

Unemployment rate Change: +1.1%

Unemployment rate Feb 2009: 8.3%

Unemployment rate Jan 2013: 7.9%

Unemployment rate Change: -0.4%

Months of Job losses:

Bush 26

Obama 18

Months of job gains:

Bush 22

Obama 30

Edited January 14, 2014 by Mr. Big Dog

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

http://www.caintv.com/the-first-term-economic-record

PARTICIPATION - At the end of President Obama’s first term the labor force participation rate was 65.8 percent, down from 67.2 percent. At the end of President Obama’s first term, the labor force participation rate was 63.7 percent, down from 65.7 when he took office.

So let me get this straight: At the end of Obama's first term the labor force participation rate was 65.8% and it was 63.7%. It was down from 67.2% and it was down from 65.7% when he took office. How can all that be true at the same time? Anyone care to explain how we had two different labor force participation rates at the end of Obama's first term? And how we had two different rates at the beginning of his first term?

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Net private sector jobs creation during first term in office

Bush: - 46,000

Obama: +1,208,000

Huh? According to this, the numbers were a lot closer...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms

Then again, the Dems last year claimed...

"With the Democratic National Convention in full swing, a number of party leaders are attempting to boost President Barack Obama's re-election effort by asserting that 4.5 million new jobs have been created during his term.

Obama himself has recently claimed more job growth in the past 27 months than President George W. Bush created "during the entire seven years before this crisis."

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Some more info on our economy in 4th quarter 2013:

America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.

Not saying it's Obama's fault, but with new jobs created, more people living in poverty, and national debt nearly double... is that really progress?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Huh? According to this, the numbers were a lot closer...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms

Then again, the Dems last year claimed...

"With the Democratic National Convention in full swing, a number of party leaders are attempting to boost President Barack Obama's re-election effort by asserting that 4.5 million new jobs have been created during his term.

Obama himself has recently claimed more job growth in the past 27 months than President George W. Bush created "during the entire seven years before this crisis."

According to your source, Bush's first term was a net loss of 13K jobs. Per BLS data it is a net loss of 46K jobs. Both agree on the Obama number of a net 1.208 million jobs gained during the first term. Not sure what you are looking at but your link is very much in line with what I posted based on raw BLS data. Job creation during Obama's first term far outpaced that during Bush's first term. Well, there wasn't any job creation during Bush's first term - there was a net elimination of jobs.

The 4.5 million number are the jobs that were created between Jan 2010 (when employment started to stabilize and the economy no longer shed jobs in the six figure range which was largely the case since Great Recession started) and mid 2012. It's a true figure but it is largely meaningless. What counts is net job creation and that figure since the beginning of the first term was more in the 500K range.

The last statement would be incorrect. If one counts the seven years prior to the Great Recession (which began in Dec 2007), then the net job creation over that time period would be 5.4 million jobs. The last 27 months would be 5.1 million (assuming that the statement was made recently but prior to the December 2013 figures). One would have to go back three additional months to exceed that 5.4 million net figure.

Either way, thus far, job creation is ahead of the previous administration. And that despite the fact that this administration started with 4.25 million jobs in the hole while the previous one started with merely 2.25 million in the hole. So they had a head start of 2 million that is not only gone by year 5. The recent administration is actually a good million ahead of the previous one. Not too shabby.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politics/fact-check-obama-jobs/index.html

Conclusion:

The figure of 4.5 million jobs is accurate if you look at the most favorable period and category for the administration. But overall, there are still fewer people working now than when Obama took office at the height of the recession.

And that STILL doesn't account for the fact that millions more now live in poverty. 46.5 million in 2012 vs. 31 million in 2000. Even if there are more jobs available, because they are minimum-wage, part-time jobs, more people today live in poverty than ever before.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politics/fact-check-obama-jobs/index.html

Conclusion:

The figure of 4.5 million jobs is accurate if you look at the most favorable period and category for the administration. But overall, there are still fewer people working now than when Obama took office at the height of the recession.

That was true a year and a half ago when it was written but it is no longer the case. The 3+ million private sector jobs that were created since changed that.

And that STILL doesn't account for the fact that millions more now live in poverty. 46.5 million in 2012 vs. 31 million in 2000. Even if there are more jobs available, because they are minimum-wage, part-time jobs, more people today live in poverty than ever before.

And until we address the rising income and wealth inequality, that trend will continue.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

That was true a year and a half ago when it was written but it is no longer the case. The 3+ million private sector jobs that were created since changed that.

Well how about some September 2013 stats?

The number of jobs gained since President Obama first took office has now climbed to just over 2.5 million as of August, which is the most recent period for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics has reported its seasonally adjusted figures for total nonfarm employment.

Any additional gains during September have yet to be reported, because BLS was forced to postpone the report it had scheduled for Oct. 4 due to the partial shutdown of the federal government that began Oct. 1. A private report issued by the ADP Research Institute estimated that an additional 166,000 jobs were added during September in the private sector. But we’ll have to wait until after the shutdown is over to see what the BLS reports for total employment, which often differs slightly from the ADP’s estimate of private employment, and which also includes gains and losses in government jobs.

The official BLS estimate for August is still 1,923,000 jobs short of the peak reached in January 2008. Even so, the number of jobs added under Obama is nearly two-and-a-half times the number added during George W. Bush’s entire eight years in office, which were plagued by two economic recessions.

Meanwhile, the unemployment rate for August was 7.3 percent, which is 0.3 percentage points lower than the rate in our last report, and half a percentage point lower than it was the month Obama first took office. While the rate is improving, it is still far higher than the average monthly rate of just over 5.3 percent under George W. Bush, or the average of less than 5.2 percent under Bill Clinton.

You keep harping on the "inequality of wealth"... do you just expect all the billionaires to give what they earned to us? Would you do that for your fellow man?

[Merle 458]

You keep harping on the "inequality of wealth"... do you just expect all the billionaires to give what they earned to us? Would you do that for your fellow man?

Even if they did, it probably wouldn't be long before there would be poor people and rich people and people complaining about inequality of wealth.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Well how about some September 2013 stats?

The number of jobs gained since President Obama first took office has now climbed to just over 2.5 million as of August, which is the most recent period for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics has reported its seasonally adjusted figures for total nonfarm employment.

Any additional gains during September have yet to be reported, because BLS was forced to postpone the report it had scheduled for Oct. 4 due to the partial shutdown of the federal government that began Oct. 1. A private report issued by the ADP Research Institute estimated that an additional 166,000 jobs were added during September in the private sector. But we’ll have to wait until after the shutdown is over to see what the BLS reports for total employment, which often differs slightly from the ADP’s estimate of private employment, and which also includes gains and losses in government jobs.

The official BLS estimate for August is still 1,923,000 jobs short of the peak reached in January 2008. Even so, the number of jobs added under Obama is nearly two-and-a-half times the number added during George W. Bush’s entire eight years in office, which were plagued by two economic recessions.

Meanwhile, the unemployment rate for August was 7.3 percent, which is 0.3 percentage points lower than the rate in our last report, and half a percentage point lower than it was the month Obama first took office. While the rate is improving, it is still far higher than the average monthly rate of just over 5.3 percent under George W. Bush, or the average of less than 5.2 percent under Bill Clinton.

You keep harping on the "inequality of wealth"... do you just expect all the billionaires to give what they earned to us? Would you do that for your fellow man?

What about the Sept stats? Are you referring to the bold part? That would be shifting the goal-post from the earlier statement that employment was lower than when Obama took office. Now you want to look at employment levels from the peak in Jan 2008. From that peak until Obama took office, the economy shed about 4.5 million jobs. That job loss did not happen under this administration - it happened under the previous one.

The rising income and wealth inequality are not some coincidence or unavoidable fact of life. They are the direct result of policy. It is - at least in theory - within the power of the people to change policy to address the issue. Other industrialized nations demonstrate that this. Of course, that's not going to happen in a country that has a government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations such as this one.