AEIdeas

The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (93 comments)

  1. John Mcaluney

    June and July were revised down. August was unexpectedly low(great media word). Unemployment rate goes down to 8.1.

    Romer and Berstein were wrong because they tried the impossible explaining it to President Obama.

  2. Nice thorough post Jim, thanks. The key data point, that you emphasize every month is:

    “If the labor force participation rate was the same as when Obama took office in January 2009, the unemployment rate would be 11.2%”

    This isn’t just an interesting factoid – it “feels” like 11% unemployment out here.

  3. Steve Lyle

    Every month, the official comment from the media, the spokesmen for the left and the Dept of Labor is “unexpected.” The jobs numbers have been unexpected now for how many years? How many years and months of unexpected results would be necessary before a person of average intelligence realizes the results are expected under constant and unchanging conditions? I know some liberal morons and they’re ignorant, but not that ignorant. What we’re seeing is the aim of this administration. The monthly theater is nothing more than the usual dishonest, feigned surprise from the left.

  4. obama has gone full-on orwell....

    as he re-adjusted the Ministry of Plenty’s figures, it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version.

  5. James Lots

    Jim, thanks for the great analysis. Any chance you can either release the numbers you’re using, or update the Romer-Bernstein chart with the 2009 participation rate for all of the actual unemployment rate data points? It should provide an interesting insight into how unemployment has not been keeping up with the population growth rate, even when corrected for constant participation rate.

  6. James – one rising meme, as the LFPR finally gets some deserved mainstream attention, is that the dropping LFPR is supposedly due to ‘Boomer retirees.

    I checked, and it turns out, the LFPR trend for those 65 and over is the REVERSE of the overall rate. That is – it’s been INCREASING over the last five years, rather than dropping along with the overall rate or holding steady. Presumably this is due to the fact that fewer people can afford to retire in this abysmal economy, and are working longer.

    This is shown in series LNU01375379, at:

    http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgate

    1. You are right. One big reason is interest rates are now so low, the boomers that wanted to retire earn almost nothing on their retirement funds, and have thus decided to continue working, rather than retire.

  7. “If the labor force participation rate was the same as when Obama took office in January 2009, the unemployment rate would be 11.2%”

    Here is how the chart at the top of the article would look if it included a series of dots showing unemployment with a fixed LFPR rather than just the one.

    http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/39/romerchart.png/

    The so-called recovery is only a government created mirage.

  8. There needs to be a new statistic — a running total of how many RACISTS are being added to the general population, because once any pundit, economist, politician or citizen mentions or discusses this Godawful report, they will all be deemed racists by the left, which unabashedly includes the mainstream media.

    Given the general gloominess of this report, I would say the Racists Ratio would increase by about 1.2 million or so for the first week in September.

    Also, an economic IRE report (Index of Racists to Employed), should be graphed until the numbers intersect, demonstrating a totally Obamapproved balanced economy, whereby EVERYONE who is employed is also a Racist.

  9. Yet the polls remain close! Either voters are lying to the pollsters, or it isn’t “the economy, stupid” this time around. Aside from those voters turned on by the crease in Obama’s pants, there must be something else at work here. One candidate: FEAR. The Democrats (aided by the media, of course) have actually managed to convince a large segment of the electorate in the middle that electing a Republican will roll back all the civil rights advances of the last fifty years, completely shred the social safety net, throw women back into the kitchen, and establish a theocracy in the United States. Another possibility: SELF-ESTEEM. That is, a vast segment of independent voters have been convinced by the argument that they cannot look at themselves in the mirror and say, “You’re not a racist,” if they vote against the first black president of the United States. A third possibility: that it’s those with jobs against those without jobs. But whatever it is, none of the poll results square with the economic data.

    1. The polls really aren’t that close. if you look at the most accurate pollster, Rasmussen, you’ll see that obama is stuck in the 45-46% range. That’s his high point. Romney is up anywhere from 2-4%. As this bas news continues people will continue to go towards Romney. Romney by 5-6%.

      1. Where on earth did you get the idea that Rasmussen was the “most accurate pollster.” Their polls overestimated republican support by almost 4 points in the 2010 elections, and were off an average of 5.8 points, and they were far from the most accurate. Quinnipac University polls were most accurate and least biased in the 2010 elections. A dose of reality is probably in order here.

      2. LOL. Rasmussen is actually the most inaccurate pollster statistically.

    2. The only hope I have at this point is that the taxpayers still outnumber the “entitled” especially when we talk about who actually votes. The baseless scare tactics will unfortunately continue to work on the uneducated.

    3. The polls show a dead heat, but there are 2 big pro romney factors that do not show up in the polls. First repubs are far more likely to vote, especially in a year like this where repubs cant wait to vote obama out, and dems are dispirited, giving romney about another 3%. Second, undecided votes tend to break strongly toward the challenger, giving romney about 3% more. Put those 2 together, and the dead heat turns into a 6% Romney lead.

      1. What planet do you live on?

    4. James Burdo

      Don’t forget the Bradley Effect. If you’re told that you’re a racist for voting against Obama or even not liking him, you hide your true views or just don’t participate in polls.

  10. Add a series of purple dots showing the “real” unemployment rate, assuming the labor-force participation rate at the start of the Great Recession. You’ve plotted the last of those dots already (in red), but it would be illuminating to fill in the whole series.

  11. Joseph McNulty

    Why us anyone puzzled that the polls are close when the unemployment figures — even manipulated by fraud as they are — are so weak? All that you have to know is that 50 percent of households pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX. Why shouldn’t such people — worried about SOMEONE ELSE is paying their “fair share” — support Obama, who will keep the “gravy train” on the tracks until the printing press breaks or we run out of ink or the computers fry. If Obama wins, it will only prove that Democratic efforts to remake the electorate have succeed creating a new permanent majority for dependence.

    1. oldlaptops

      perhaps if everyone had to pay Federal income taxes … maybe a minimum of $500 for the privilege of voting for the President we would have a fiscally responsible President and one that would at least come up with a budget and live within a budget which most of us federal tax paying voting citizens do as a course of living our lives. Living within our means … why can’t our US government figure out how to do so?

    2. Blacksaint

      What does the 26 cities over 250K and the greatest poverty level have in common?

      All are heavy unionized and all have been controlled by Democrats for many many years!

      Does this fact and the Blue States bordering on Bankruptcy penetrate the mental fog surrounding. the Liberal mind of most Democrat voters?

      Of Course NOT!

      Never have so many been oblivious to the obvious.

      They still think the Democrat Politicians are concerned about their Welfare.

      The same party and polities that reduced the black population into welfare bondage and the most dependable Democrat voters will work just as well for the rest of the population.

      Just reduced them to poverty and Depending on Welfare and you have a Democrat voter for life!

      President Zero and the Democrats are pursuing the same polities and spreading poverty for the rest of the Nation that have turned those cities and blue States like Calif., Illinois, New York etc. into basket cases and made them dependable votes for the Democrats!

      The more the Democrats can spread Poverty, Welfare and the Entitlement mentality the more Democrat voters they make and the closer they get to a Third World Socialist Food Stamp Paradise controlled Lock, Stock and Barrel by the Democrat party!

    3. Al Brockman

      Joseph – You have hit the nail on the proverbial head. We are at or may have just passed the tipping point. If Obama wins, what happens then is anyone’s guess. By 2016, the government dependent non-workers will probably exceed 60%. Then all is lost.

  12. At some point we must realise that the government feeds lies to us via the so-called free press. During Viet Nam it was that we were winning. Iraq was weapons of mass destruction. Now its lies about our economy, the real debt of the government, the privileges and perks of the politburu over the people, the corruption of Washington and Wall Street versus the taxpayers, etc. We will come to revolt and revolution at some time if the deceptions continue as we will have economic destruction. I do not belong to the NRA however the right to bear arms was allowed in order to overthrow an unjust government. We are almost there.

    1. Neal, I served in Viet Nam and I don’t recall the “free press” pushing the viewpoint that we were winning. As I recall it was portrayed as an unjust war by the U.S., failure to hold an election in 1956 in which North Vietnam would have prevailed, and it was an illegal war because Congress never declared war on North Vietnam. All of these were watered down excuses that eventually were sold to the public and resulted in a Democrat Congress defunding our South Vietnam allies in 1974. The U.S. could have won the war but leftist politicians undermined the effort.

      As for the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, have you ever wondered where Syria’s weapons of mass destruction came from?

  13. Arnold Ziffel

    What was the jobs report 4 years ago? -420,000? What would you say about Obama if he lost 420K. You bushies don’t have a leg to stand on.

    1. Sorry, Arnold. What killed those jobs was bad policy.

      Things changed drastically in 2008 – even before the meltdown. We didn’t get a new PRESIDENT in 2007, we got a new CONGRESS. And the anti-business policies pursued by that Congress were just as responsible for the jobs report 4 years ago as the credit crash.

      We had a stock market crash in 1929 that would have cleaned up the equities markets if left alone. But FDR and his ilk saw that as their opportunity to “fundamentally transform” this country. In the process, his ill-conceived policies gave us a Depression that lasted almost a decade.

      In 2008 we had a credit market crash that would have cleaned up the financial markets, albeit painfully, if left alone. But Obama saw that as his opportunity to “fundamentally transform” this country. In the process his ill-conceived policies are going to give us another Depression that will probably last a lot longer than a decade.

      Thanks, no.

      See also: Japan.

      1. Maybe I was a little hasty in my response, because as soon as I seen what I thought was someone SMART enough to criticize FDR, I knew I had a winner. So Wise one tell us more about your vast experience standing in lines for food and watching your kids starve growing up during the largest economic crisis in our history, or more about how another Dem’s policies slowed a recovery process. Actually, I feel all your other buddies are just as wrong about President Obama. I guess the Great Presidents aren’t given any credit until long after their terms for the most part anyway.

        1. Gmsmith, if you’re addressing me (hard to tell), there’s this weird thing they used to cover in high school and college called U.S. History. It’s no longer taught today, other than to list the many “egregious crimes” Americans have committed since the first settlers arrived from Europe.

          Thankfully, I graduated long BEFORE public education completely switched to this new, politically correct curriculum. I also tend to read (you know: books?). So I have a pretty thorough understanding of what happened before, during and after the Stock Market crash that nanny-state policies transformed into a crushing, decade-long Depression. Interestingly, that history includes the Depression of 1920-21, which was handily dealt with using policies Diametrically Opposed to FDR’s and Obama’s. If you’d like a shortcut for that, get a copy of Amity Shlaes’ _The Forgotten Man_. Then read it.

          Since you were clearly subjected to the ‘new, improved’ version of “U.S. History” in school, it’ll come as somewhat of a surprise that FDR was LIONIZED in his time. His myth has persisted to this day because FDR happened to still be President when we were attacked by the Japanese, effectively ending the Depression for all intents and purposes, punctuated by his declaration of war. This ultimately rendered him a hero in death, despite the massive damage his “leadership” visited on this Republic.

          Just so, Obama was LIONIZED even before he’d done anything at all to deserve attention, much less nomination, much less election to the office of POTUS – and that fawning, irrational adulation continues among his media shills and cow-eyed fans to this day. If and when media and academia corruption is ever dealt with definitively in this country, Obama will come to be seen, correctly, as the absolute worst President this Republic has ever been saddled with. Because that is what he is.

          As for FDR, his imperious governance, his craven attempt to stack the Supreme Court, and the glaringly unconstitutional nature of MUCH of his so-called “New Deal” have been airbrushed from history by the socialist left who’ve seized the reins of American academia. It’s only fairly recently (see: O’Hanian/Cole) that we’ve come to understand how much damage FDR’s policies did, extending the Depression by close to a DECADE. And it’s only recently that a critical mass within the electorate have even begun to hear about HOW he rammed through the extra-constitutional, nanny-state agenda that has NOT ONLY been bankrupting this country for 80 years, but which has ALSO provided the practically infinite slush fund government has used, along with the infinite borrowing power provided by the counterfeiting presses at the Fed, to buy the votes needed to support its relentless overreach.

          So, too, is it only recently that more of the electorate is learning of the policies that quickly ended the Depression of 1920-21. Those policies can help us now, but you won’t see the nanny-state O-Bots promoting them – that’s not how they get their Taxpayer-funded benefits, maintain their Taxpayer-funded lifestyle or support their Taxpayer-funded, perpetual incumbencies.

          Thanks for your “thoughts”.

    2. Actually the job losses happened after Obama took office. They were Bushes fault, but the happened in 2008.

    3. First, Bush was not mainly to blame for the recession, both parties share blame for it. If anything the dems deserve more blame, because of the changes made under Clinton with Fannie Mae, Glass Steagal, and the Community Redevelopment Act, that set the ground for the housing crisis. The repubs paid the price for their part in 2008, now its the dems turn.

      But the real problem for Obama is not the recession, but the complete lack of a recovery. Reagan inherited a recession just as bad as this one, but by this point he had robust 6% growth, while the paltry 1.7% growth under Obama is not even enough to keep up with population and labor force growth, as the horrible looking charts in this article clearly indicate.

      1. Those changes under Clinton were made by a Republican majority in the Congress. Don’t be partisan.

    4. what do you say when 368k are just ‘giving up’?

      is there that much difference from losing -420k?

      the brightest take for a obama supporter is that they didn’t have jobs to begin with, the bad part is that they will not being contributing to gdp growth anytime soon.

      “bushies”…?
      reagan brought unemployment down from 10.8% in decemeber 1982, to 7.2% in september 84.

      yes deficit spending was at 6% of gdp for 83, but gdp for 1984 was at 7.2%, adjusted for inflation.

    5. Who’s a ‘Bushie’?
      GW Bush was a warmongering, crony capitalist spendthrift.
      His record is largely indefensible – and so is Obama’s.

  14. Andrew Sparks

    I’m not an Economist, but I do teach Statistics at the college level. Looking at all the data gathered, it seems to me that the portrayal of the jobs report as disappointing is appropriate. Baby-boomers continue to retire and even if their rate or age of retirement has slowed, there are a lot of baby boomers (hence the term), so if 15% retire in a given year as opposed to 20%, the year-to-year rate of retirees can still increase.

    Looking at the data objectively, one sees an economy struggling to recover, but with generally slow, modestly improving (or one could argue flat) trend lines. Overall, looking at the trends for the last 2 years I think the argument and data for “modest improvement” is stronger than the argument for “no improvement”.

    This leads me to the following point: the title of this article “The awful, awful August jobs report” is one of unproductive hyperbole and, my guess is, political motivation. From Q1 2008 to Q3 2008 unemployment rose a full percentage point. From Q3 2008 to Q1 2009 it rose 1.5%!!! During the current period it stayed essentially flat.

    A more responsible, less hyperbolic title for this article could/would be:

    “The highly disappointing job report” or “Job trends worrisome” or “Troubling trends in current job report”.

    The actual title, “The awful, awful August jobs report” just shows that we are in political “silly season” as some call it.

    1. We’re also apparently in the “silly complaints” season, especially for non-economists.

      The job report WAS awful, and by the way, the evidence is that the Boomers are retiring at a much lower rate than one would have expected—nonetheless, the labor participation rate continues to decline. That means that job increases aren’t keeping up with the increase in population; the only reason that headline unemployment isn’t much higher is that there are so many who have stopped looking for work. Even the Democratic Party spin meisters have called the report “awful.”

      1. I agree on the spin. One more awful and I might have changed my vote LOL

    2. R. L. Hails Sr. P. E.

      A distinction without a difference. I am reminded of the comic’s line, “He is not just dead; he is most sincerely dead.” After the trillions given to favorite too-big-to-fail winners, the US wage earner is approaching just dead.

      These are awful-awful numbers.

    3. Unemployment only rose because labor force participation fell, which the article makes clear.

      Today’s headline figure of 8.1% would be 8.4% – up from last month – if labor force participation hadn’t dropped again, by more than 300,000 people. It is hard to overstress how bad it is that labor force participation is declining at the alarming rate it continues to decline.

      In the context of an imminent presidential election where Obama, with his dangerously wrong-headed approach to addressing this fundamental crisis, is narrowly ahead – damn RIGHT the title’s hyperbolic. And it’s not inaccurate – labor force participation hasn’t been this bad in THIRTY YEARS. And the only proposals the President has made would make hiring MORE EXPENSIVE and FURTHER suppress labor force participation

    4. John Breland

      And I, sir, am a proud graduate of third grade arithmetic, and have taught my four year old to count his toes, all of which fully qualify me to judge that these are in deed awful, awful numbers.

    5. Skip in SC

      I like the old saying about statistics. “There are lies, damn lies and statistics.” The liberal progressives believe “Obama doesn’t lie: he gives us statistics to prove his claims!

      Even at that he has to finagle the figures to make himself look good. I had a freshman chemistsry professor who suggested that when plotting the results of our experiments we could use “finagler’s variable constant” to make our graphs look good. Increase this figure, decrease that figure and we end up with a nice, smooth graph.

      Obama wasn’t even a gleam in his momma’s eye at that time, but he somehow learned that same little trick and used it to make the unemployment charts support his deceptive claims.

    6. This article is obviously politically motivated. Otherwise there is no reason to include the long stale jobs projection by Christina Romer from over three years ago before the scale of the Bush recession was evident. This jobs report was awful, awful” only if one expected a return to boom times, which no reputable economist expects. The focus on the labor participation rate is highly misleading, as its baseline figure counts everyone over 16 years old, which includes my Mother who will be 90 years old shortly and retired 28 years ago. Too bad the AEI didn’t give a reasoned analysis instead of a hatchet job.

      1. Al Brockman

        Read the report. UNEMPLOYMENT IS AT 8.1%. 336,000 DROPPED OUT LAST MONTH. What don’t you or can’t you understand? This is the worst it has been in decades. If reelected, what will Obam’s excuse be? “I couldn’t fix it because the constitution does’t allow me 3 terms”? “If I just had 4 more years”. Meanwhile, we would be Greece!!!!

  15. Excellent analysis, James! Romney should be pounding these facts repeatedly with the American voters. Per the polls, he’s still behind in ‘likely’ electoral votes, so he needs to get the message across. We need to replace the current Incompetent in Chief…

  16. Dont trust the polls people. First almost all polls are vastly over sampling demos by 8-9%. Second they are expecting black and youth turnout at record levels again. Both these demographics are suffering worse than the larger populace with 20+% unemployment. Just be sure to go vote on Nov 6 and encourage someone else to. If you have an elderly neighbor or relative offer to take them to vote as even the life long Dems I have talked to know how bad this president is and are planning on voting Romney. Also remember most Dems are ever public sector or on the doll so that is why Obama still polls even. Still this will be about turnout and many people who know their candidate is a loser and hurting America will just stay home…so we must turn out in force like 2010 and sweep prezzy downtrodden out of office! This should be 1980 all over again where the polling was close to the end but Reagan won huge

  17. Chris Wadlington

    Lets try this again, with known indisputable facts and you can try again to explain it to me like I am a fifth grader, and remember treat me like the unintelligent commenter that I will already presume you think I am and refrain from comments about me, just stick to the specifics below in your commentary, or don’t comment at all…

    Dow Jones at its highest 2000-2008=14,164 in 10/9/07 (highest in history)
    Dow Jones on Jan 20th 2009=8,279.63 on 1/20/09.
    Represents a 5,885 pt drop or approx 45% of Stock Wealth
    Dow Jones 9/6/12=13,283.09 or a restoration of American pensions, retirements, 401K, etc. to close to record levels…..This happened on Obama watch, so if you are one to criticize his inability to clean up the previous administrations economic mess, built on the same policies that are being proposed again, in a timeline that meets your expectations, then you also better give him his just due on the improvement of your stock portfolio.

    And since this is a MA news source riddle me this. If Governor Romney is all that and a bag of chips why is he losing the only state he has ever governed by 12 pts. Can’t be because the state only votes blue, ask Scott Brown, so how can it be so if he is the great job creator as should be evidenced by his record in MA(worst in the union on his watch)how come he is not winning MA??Just sayin….like I am a fifth grader, and refrain from attacks on my intellect just comment on the proposition.

  18. It’s unfortunate that we have arrived at a point where so many people do not “believe” the data. Statistics never quite tell the whole story but you have to ask yourself, “is it actually better than it appears – or is it actually worse than it appears”. Unfortunately, every measure says that things are worse than they appear.

    At the heart of all this is a “lack of confidence”. We live in a society where we could easily do well with half the material benefits we have. If everyone decides to put off buying a car for one year (and everyone could easily do that), then our economic prosperity would drop like a rock. My view is that what is at the heart of all this is not retirement, per se, but preparation for retirement. The middle class is (gasp) trying to live within their means – something that hasn’t happened in decades.

  19. hacim obmed

    To understand the true awful impact of this report one has to remember that because of population growth, about 180,000 new workers enter the labor force each month. Thus creating only 96,000 new jobs means we are able to provide for only about half of the new workers and and the rest get added to existing total of about 1.5 million unemployed. We must also remember that because of his recent “executive amnesty” program for young illegal aliens Obama has essentially added about 1.7 million additional job seekers to the american labor market (if all eligible aliens apply). These will come on board as the applicants are processed and the work permits are issued over the coming months. To get some idea of the impact of this consider that at the present rate of 96,000 jobs per month it would take about 18 months to provide employment to these new workers. Meanwhile the presently unemployed will have to wait and the new workers added to the population would have to wait. To prevent undue suffering to american workers I would suggest, as a matter of fairness, that Obama should provide only residence and study permits be for illegal aliens. Work permits should be held back until the monthly jobs report indicates enough new jobs to satisfy the current population growth of legal workers (i.e. at least 180,000 per month). Our current unemployed have been suffering long enough. It is just too much to ask them to wait additional time in order to accommodate individuals who have violated of our immigration laws and have no legal right even to reside inside our borders.

    1. hacim obmed

      correction!!, in the second sentence the total of current unemployed is 12.5 million not 1.5 million.

  20. The fed keeps providing steroids. The health of the economy keeps going down. The stock market keeps going up because it enjoys the steroids. How long before the patient dies?

    1. Chris Wadlington

      Answer: Not until 2024 or in other words when the next chance a Republican could hold the office.
      Obama 2008-2016
      Clinton 2016-2024

    2. Good point. The stock market is not rising because of economic health, but because the fed has interest rates so low, below the rate of inflation, that the market is the only place left that has any return on your money at all. Basically the stock market is another potential bubble, propped up by funny moneuy printed by the fed.

      1. Exactly. The stock market appears to be keeping pace with the increase in the amount cash forced into the system from the Fed stimuli.

      2. The stock market has risen because unlike the gov’t. corporations know how to cut costs Whether it be overhead, jobs or decrease production….to increase profit….

      3. Exactly. This printing of money is just killing us. Keeping costs of everything sky high but I guess that all mighty stock market looks good. Sad really. Obama has no clue…nor Bernake.

        We need deleveraging to take place but as long as the Fed prints it wont happen

  21. If Romney is elected, he should call the bankers into his office and give the following advice.

    You can choose to loan or not to loan money to anyone you want. If they don’t repay the loan, don’t call the federal government. Any money you borrow from the federal government can not be re-loaned at more than 0.5% above (pick a metric), to be reviewed semi-annually. Good luck, gentlemen.

    If Obama is re-elected, I’m going to the pawn shop.

  22. Sean Patterson

    What I would like to know is what is in this “jobs bill” that Dems say the Republicans are “blocking” or won’t pass? How can a jobs bill create a million jobs like the President has said it would? Does anyone have any real hard data on what is in this jobs bill?

  23. Davis John

    “Awful jobs report”

    We have an awful President.

  24. The month President Obama took over the reigns we lost 450000 jobs. Now THAT is a truly awful, awful employment report. This latest report isn’t great, but it’s much better than that.

  25. Blacksaint

    Never in American politics has anymore promised more and did less than Obama. That he is still leading in the battle ground States proves a fool is born every minute, idiots every 30 seconds and stupid is constant!

    1. No, it’s called the Bidenization of America.

  26. Well the way to solve unemployment is for Obama to pander to racist Latinos by legalizing millions of illegal aliens so those racist Latinos are satisfied. You have to wonder if illegal aliens were from Sweden or Japan, if Latinos would be out in the street with their Mexican flags and insults to whites and other non Latinos. Should deport all who entered illegally and no citizenship for children of illegal aliens. Or, look at the pseudo-Mexican shithole of Santa Ana, CA to see the pig pen America will become…

  27. Blacksaint

    We needed a bigger-than-life President – we got a Dope smoking, Coke snorting, Radical Left wing Chicago thug!
    We needed a well-grounded stable President – we got a certifiable narcissist.
    We needed bold leadership – we got a teleprompter
    We needed a seasoned hand – we got a hand in in our pockets
    We needed a champion for American citizens… we got a champion for the invading horde of Illegal Aliens
    We needed a skilled bridge builder – we got a class-warfare specialist and inciter-in-chief.
    We needed practical, proven policies – we got socialist dogma and monumental waste
    We needed an inspirational visionary – we got an ideologically blinded, left learning-impaired radical
    We needed a Constitutional champion – we got a domestic enemy of the Constitution
    We needed a restrained, respected and intimidating warrior – we got groveling, bowing, Barney Fife
    We needed a patriot – we got G. D. America, G. D. America, G. D. America.
    We needed someone to unshackle our economy – we got someone who is a friend to our enemies and an enemy to our businesses
    We needed a president beyond color – we got a green president embracing every whim and myth ever spoken by the kook environmental fringe.

    We needed mature, principled leadership – we got a petulant, lying, whining, blaming, sulking, accursing, excusing, man-child.

    It is a national disgrace that someone this incompetent, racist, and a American hating Socialist could be elected to the office of the Presidency.

    1. Wonderfully said!

      1. Better than the Gettsburg address. Every school kid should be required to memorize it.

    2. Excellent! Might I add one Item? We need an original thinker – instead we got a convelouted rip-off of Romneycare and a convoluted version of Romney’s plan to save the auto industry via managed bankruptcy.

    3. We just have to pray that our friends & neighbors vote with their heads & not their feelings & worry about what people think by firing a failed president. Eastwood had it right; don’t reward failure get someone who can do the job. Socialism has failed the world over; yet we are expected to believe not enough money has been thrown at our problems and the right people have not tried these lofty ideas. Liberals/socialists/progressives are selfish vote-buying deceivers who laugh at their duped supporters as they carry their bags of money to the bank. Downsize the bloated government beauracracy cut taxes let us produce our own energy and see what Americans unleashed can. Done it before we can do it again. Get the broom and sweep the socialists out!

  28. David Miller-Engel

    News flash: we aren’t trying Obama’s jobs agenda….Republicans have blocked all attempts to remedy the situation…get a grip on reality people….

    1. Um, you need to get a grip and also brush up on history. Obama had a majority for two years. There was no opposition besides the American people who wanted none of what he was selling but got it anyway a la Obamacare. you can’t blame Republicans forever, and even if you try someone will have to come along, pull you head out of your arse and remind you of the facts.

  29. Ken Nelson

    Of course the “stimulus” plan failed. The stimulus plan lead to greater Federal spending! Increased federal spending REDUCES economic growth. Just look at each President from George Washington to Barack Obama. Here’s a link that goes into detail discussing every US President:http://soundcloud.com/bostwick-kingsley/republican-and-democratic

  30. The month that President Obama took office the nation lost 450,000 jobs and the economy was in full free fall. Now THAT is an awful, awful employment report. This recent report was not great, but by comparison it was a good unemployment report.

    1. Al Brockman

      1. Stop blaming George Bush!!!! 2. Obama has had 4 years to fix it and we are worse off today. Can you even understand this report?

      1. Good? Seriosly? did you read the article? It basically said we are just as bad off now as we were when he took office. 4 years of treading water and getting nowhere. Keep drinking that blue kool-aid.

    2. Technically, in 2009, our recession had stalled and could have begun to climb. This was not due to anything Obama did, but, in fact, to the policies George W. Bush implemented in 2008 at the end of his term.

      Now, let’s stop and think.

      If this was to Obama’s credit, and the bills/stimuli that were passed did stop the recession, then why are we still in our recession? Wouldn’t the same policies have kept us at either a stalemate or a growth?

    3. Obama came in at the perfect time. He could blame the recession on his predecessor and given historical recessions he could do anything he wanted that didn’t make things worse and could expect by now to be able to take credit for the recovery that naturally should have happened. What he did was make things so much worse that we’re still scraping along the bottom.

  31. American is a vibrant country if you are rich. The rich is getting richer and the poor only has one asset and that is their vote. Americans you have a beautiful country dispite yourself and your total hate for each other. God is love. You are called on to stop waiting for the Koch brothers to bail you out but you cannot see it because you are consummed in hate. God is love. God helped Mr Obama to win and if God wants him to win a second term there is nothing that the republicans can do because it would not be the republicans against Mr. Obama but the rebupublicans against God. God bless the good people of America who are willing to help her lift up walk again and soar regardless of who is in power and make the rich people poor who would put America in harms way just to defeat Mr Obama.

    1. Al Brockman

      Hey – Don’t you remember??? The Dems took God out of their platform. Nobody can be dumb enough to believe that God helped Obama. Jeremiah Wright, maybe

    2. I can hardly wait for the english translation!!

    3. I’ll bet that most of Obama’s supporters are just like you. Reading your paragraph just killed a couple brain cells, so thank you.

      I’m sure God will be glad to help Democrats get America to “walk again and soar” with Obama now that they proclaim God isn’t allowed in their political conventions/discussions.

  32. One item not pointed out in your article, or anywhere I can find in the media, is how the numbers stack up against numbers from just a year ago. When I looked at the data I found the numbers now are actually worse than a year ago. So how can anyone say things are getting better if we are even worse off than a year ago?

  33. The republicans did not want the job of president four years ago when the state of the Union was really bad. They want it now which means things are looking up. Dont fool yourself young man get up off your ass and do something for your country instead of waiting for the Koch brothers and freinds of 32 billionaires who hold the American economy ransom until they get the man they want as president before they hire a few more people. When someone is not helping you in time of need why should you give them your vote the only comodity the average American has. Trickle down economics does not work – if the rich has to trick the people they propose to help. Stop crying that the rich is not helping and make your country strong from the ground up – creat a strong middle class that is loyal to the United States of America. No out sourcing of loyalty and capitalism. Good bless the good people of The United States of America who will lift her to rise and soar regardless of who is in power and to make the rich who hold the economy ransom as poor as they are making the people now who need their help because they hate the president that the people for the people elected.

    1. Al Brockman

      Hmmm – Soros isn’t rich? How many of the 1% already support Obama? Many. Why is it that only republican rich are bad, not the liberal Progressives. We have one here in Maine – Donald Sussman bought his wife’s (US Rep Chellie Pingree) election. That wasn’t enough – he bought the major newspapers in Maine. BTW, he is a hedge fund billionaire. Why isn’t he as bad as Koch?????????

      1. Or all the Hollywood clon? Or Stryker in Michigan or Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs etc.., etc..

  34. Max Planck

    I’ll say one thing Mr. Pethokoukis. “You can always judge a man by the company he keeps!”

    :)

  35. As an educated scientist and successful engineer, I watched as Eastman Kodak used many tools to suck the $9 billion dollars out of America, hide under American bankruptcy law and tell me my pension was gone. Why and how do corporations do this? By the power of the court and with support from our government. While Obama bailed out the banks with a few billion, the Fed, who is not a part of the American Govt, gave the banks over $7 trillion dollars. The result of printing $ is always lower $ value and higher inflation. My point? Our govt has been and still is working for the corporations. If you want to see a happy pig, vote for Mitt! As for me, I’m looking for the Exit.

    1. Mitt is a small business champion. He has invested billions to grow small business, not large corporations. He will be the first to tell you jobs and growth are created by small business. 80% of GDP is small business. Romney has an 88% success rate reabilitating troubled small-mid businesses. He will turn the business climate around.

      1. Sorry to disagree but Mitt is nothing but a corporate raider. He will only sell out to the banks just like Obama, except Obama at least tries to help the poor and sick while Mitt says their capital gains should pay for their care. I feel your pain as 45% of my check goes to taxes, but I am human and the humane thing to do is to ease suffering. The problem isn’t the elderly and poor, it is banks who get trillions of dollars at 0.01% interest undermining our economy. While bankers steal our pensions and pay the courts to say its OK, America has dropped into disgust in the world view. On the bright side, if we look at history in Washington, we are doing pretty good.

  36. How can people claim there is a recovery when median income has decreased in the years since the end of the recession or the trough? Meanwhile gas prices and food prices have continued to rise. If this stagflation was not enough, GDP is shrinking again.
    This appears to be the only time since the Great Depression where a recession was not followed by a rebound. In otherwords, the surprise is not that some jobs have returned since the end of the recession, but that they are so slow and low quality. In the 1st 2 years. 0bama had a democrat rubber stamp congress passing multiple stimuli and bailouts, and yet we are worse off than we should have been without the bailouts. How is that the repub fault?

  37. Mr.,James Pethokoukis the article on Jobs report is an excellent piece, which had taken you a lot of time compiling these facts! What’s sad about your article is the major networks, will not report or cover your story, with the only exception being the Fox Network. What can we do to get your story out to the voters in the U.S.?

    I cannot fathom any voters in the U.S., who would ignore these astonishing facts, vote for Obama, its shocking to say the least! It is my opinion if Obama is reelected, we have lost this country as we now know it. If you have not been on Fox as of yet, you certainly should be!

    Tell me how we, on the right side can assist you in getting your message out to the general voting public? I look forward to hearing from you

    Sincerely, Ray Smith

  38. Dear Mr. Pethokoukis,

    I don’t understand how you calculated that “unemployment rate if labor participation rate was the same as when Obama took office.”

    The labor participation rate is down from 65.5% to 63.5%, but (65.5/63.5) x 8.1% = 8.36%, not 11.2%.

    There’s no question that Obama and his team of neo-Keynesian bunglers have been an unmitigated disaster, but I don’t think it is true that the unemployment rate would be 11.2% if the labor participation rate hadn’t declined.

    This page…
    http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm
    …gives the August 2012 civilian labor force as 154,645, the labor participation rate as 63.5%, and the unemployment rate as 8.1%.

    This page…
    http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_01092009.htm
    …gives the December 2008 civilian labor force as 154,447, the labor participation rate as 65.7%, and the unemployment rate as 7.2%.

    This page…
    http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02062009.htm
    …gives the January 2009 civilian labor force as
    153,716, the labor participation rate as 65.5%, and the unemployment rate as 7.6%.

    1. Whoops, my bad. I worked out the numbers correctly (this time), and they’re close to yours: 10.7% rather than 11.2%.

      153,716 k = Jan 2009 labor force, = 65.5% of 234,681 k working-age population
      unemployment of 7.6% = .076 x 153,716 k = 11,682 k

      154,645 k = Aug 2012 labor force, = 63.5% of 243,535 k working-age population
      unemployment of 8.1% = .081 x 154,645 k = 12,526 k

      Now, if labor participation rate were 65.5%, then labor force would be 243,535 k x .655 = 159,324 k
      and unemployment would be (159,234 k – 154,645 k) + 12,526 k = 17,115 k
      and the unemployment rate would be 17,115 / 159,324 = 10.74%

      I’m still curious about the (now small) difference between our numbers.

      Dave

      1. Okay, I think that the 65.5% LPR for 1/2009 was a preliminary number. The BLS now says it was 65.7% in January 2009.

        An LPR drop from 65.7% to 63.5% equates to almost 5.4 million people dropping out of the labor force. Add those to the unemployment rate, and it would be 11.2%.

        So Mr. Pethokoukis is right.

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:

Scholar

Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Open
Refine Content