« Romey Bows Out of Presidential Campaign | Main | Foreskin Man: "features a litany of evil Jews doing battle with blond Nordic saviors" »

What you want (a job) is not what you get, from Obama


Even the Wall Street Journal was forced to admit that private sector job creation during the Bush 43 administration was anemic, averaging only 375,000 new jobs per year during his 8 years in office.  Liberals of course spared no effort in lambasting President Bush over this, the prime example being Nancy Pelosi's infamous 2003 "Where are the jobs, Mr. President?" speech.

But yesterday's May employment numbers seem to have guaranteed that Barack Obama will be the new front runner in paltry job creation since the government began tracking that data during the Truman administration.

Out of the embarassingly low 54,000 jobs added nationwide during the month of May, half of them came from one company, McDonald's Corporation (which, not surprisingly, was one of the first corporations granted a waiver from ObamaCare health insurance requirements by the Department of Health and Human Services.)

"Burger flipper jobs" indeed.

I'm not lovin' it.  How about you?
Enhanced by Zemanta

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/41687.

Comments (26)

I'm not liking it at all. ... (Below threshold)
James H:

I'm not liking it at all. I'm employed full-time, and my job seems to be secure ... but I'm also wary. Every so often I wonder if I'll lose my job through something that's really no fault of my own ... and I wonder what will happen then, given where the economy is, the extremely anemic job growth in my field, and rules that make it difficult for me to relocate.

It's not a good way to exist.

Barry's misery index grows.... (Below threshold)
Sep14:

Barry's misery index grows.

I blame the Koch's.

James H,You're not... (Below threshold)
jim m:

James H,

You're not alone. Few people are hiring in my field and I don't know what would happen if my employer starts to lay people off. Right now they are merely eliminating open positions.

In other good economic news I see where China has managed to divest themselves of 97% of their US bond holdings, having sold off ~$205B in assets since obama took office.

So nobody can find jobs here and the rest of he world is betting that we are going to see hyperinflation due to Barry's incompetence.

" . . averaging only 375... (Below threshold)
SShiell:

" . . averaging only 375,000 new jobs per year . . "

I believe you meant to say 375,000 new jobs per month.

Quit whining folks and head... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

Quit whining folks and head over to McDonalds...THEY'RE HIRING!!

Thank you Lord Obama, for creating an economic environment where I could re-apply for a job I last held in High School!!

Good Lord! Even the Brits ... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Good Lord! Even the Brits see what is going on in America. They can see across the ocean what the leftists are unable to see right in front of them.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100090677/after-29-months-of-the-most-left-wing-government-in-us-history-the-american-superpower-is-heading-towards-the-financial-abyss/

No, "jobs per year" is what... (Below threshold)
wolfwalker:

No, "jobs per year" is what the chart he's quoting from says.

Said chart, however, is a champion example of Disraeli's Law of Statistics: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." The chart averages GW Bush's jobs performance over his full eight years -- including a serious recession in 2000-01, and the 2007-08 jobs crash, which is now looking very much like the onset of the first true economic depression the United States has seen in eighty years.

To be sure, President Bush must bear a lot of the responsibility for this depression, since he either failed to see the warning signs, or saw them and failed to act. And a lot of the "prosperity" of 2002-06 was fueled primarily by debt and worthless investments. Still, many more jobs were created in the mid-2000s than that "average" in the WSJ article shows.

If I tried hard enough I co... (Below threshold)

If I tried hard enough I could probably invent a statistic that would make Obama look like the most pro-business president in history. But what purpose is served other than blatant politicizing?

Even the Wall Street Journal was forced to admit...

Incidentally, it might help to remember that the WSJ is a generally left-leaning publication with a right-leaning editorial page.

wolfwalker: "To be sure, Pr... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

wolfwalker: "To be sure, President Bush must bear a lot of the responsibility for this depression, since he either failed to see the warning signs, or saw them and failed to act."

Except that the unemployment rate was 7.2% when Obama took office 2 1/2 YEARS, and 4.5 TRILLION $$$ in debt, ago! Now the unemployment rate is 9.1% and RISING...and Lord Obama wants TRILLIONS more from the peasants.

Ain't Obamanomics wonderful... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

Ain't Obamanomics wonderful?

Let me add another thing, s... (Below threshold)
James H:

Let me add another thing, since this is a political blog. I tend to vote for Democrats. I have an intense I oppose conservative stances on such things as gay rights, abortion, religion, and so forth. If I vote for a Republican, I'm likely to get all those social stances alongside Republican economic proposals. But if this economy does not improve significantly by election time, then it will be time to try something other than Obama to fix the economy. And if that economy has not improved I may overcome my distaste for the Republican Party.

And I suspect I am not alone.

Maybe everyone should admit... (Below threshold)
superdestroyer:

Maybe everyone should admit that the administraiton of a president has little to do with job creation. Should credit really be given to Clinton for creating jobs in the dot.com sector while Bush II be given the blame for those same unsustainable dot.com's going broke?

James H...you appear to be ... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

James H...you appear to be on the road to recovery. :)

James H - none of the reaso... (Below threshold)
epador:

James H - none of the reasons you say you vote Democratic have a whit to do with financial and national security. So you are telling us that you have generally voted for the feel good reasons and not what was in your best long-term interests for survival. Now that winter approaches, and your grasshopper appendages are shivering in dread anticipation, you are saying you are thinking of voting like an ant because its really cold outside?

And Justrand says you on on the road to recovery?

Until you can stand up and say "I am a deluded liberal voter that has brought this chaos upon us" I really don't think you are on the long road to your first coin.

I'd say

Not quite, epador.... (Below threshold)
James H:

Not quite, epador.

I happen to value certain issues. In situations where economic security and national security are reasonably assured, I vote on those issues. If we reach a point where economic security is threatened, I vote for the candidate I believe will address it. If that candidate does not address it, I am free to vote for another.

I bear no loyalty toward one party or another; I simply vote on issues that are most important to me at election
time.

the Bush 43 administrati... (Below threshold)
john:

the Bush 43 administration was anemic, averaging only 375,000 new jobs per year... But yesterday's May employment numbers seem to have guaranteed that Barack Obama will be the new front runner in paltry job creation... Out of the embarassingly low 54,000 jobs added nationwide during the month of May

I know that math is not a strength of the right, but I should point out that 54,000 jobs per month is quite a bit greater than 375,000 jobs per year.

James, I'm similar to you. ... (Below threshold)
john:

James, I'm similar to you. I'm a fiscal conservative, and social liberal. Economies are cyclic, but the damage done to our social fabric by conservative values are hard to repair, and hence I vote Democratic, since those are more important for me to preserve.

I too am frustrated by Obama's and the Democrats' fumbling on the economy. However, that doesn't mean the other side is any better. The policies that got us into this mess are largely Republican, and it's Republican gamesmanship that's hindering policies that might get us out of it.

I'm a fiscal conservative. But the Republican party turned its back on fiscal conservatism long ago. All they stand for now are "lower taxes" and "oppose Democrats". There is no reason to believe that Republicans would be any better for the economy. Remember that TARP and the stimulus are now acknowledged to have saved our economy. And Republicans opposed both.

John, I'm not sure how you ... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

John, I'm not sure how you can think you're a "fiscal conservative" and vote Democrat. And what damage to our "social fabric" did the Republicans do?

The policies that got us into this mess are largely Republican, and it's Republican gamesmanship that's hindering policies that might get us out of it.

Really? The Republicans are responsible for the housing crisis? How so? The Republicans are the ones racking up 1 1/2 TRILLION dollar deficits each year?

Remember that TARP and the stimulus are now acknowledged to have saved our economy.

By who?

If you're truly a fiscal conservative and social liberal, then vote Libertarian.

Remember when TARP and the ... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Remember when TARP and the Stimulus were supposed to be temporary actions to boost the economy? Then explain why obama has increased federal spending by over a trillion dollars annually and claims now that he cannot cut even a couple of billion?

These were never GOP policies. obama has spent us to the brink of economic disaster and shows no sign of recognizing it or of caring.

It wasn't GOP policy to print trillions of new dollars to buy government debt when obama wanted to produce more debt than anyone in the world was willing to buy. Now he is planning to do a third round of dollar printing, oblivious to the fact that inflation is taking off and that he primary purchaser of US debt over the last few decades, China, has been shedding US backed securities at an alarming rate. No one will buy our debt anymore. obama has guaranteed a generation of poverty for all Americans. And that is exactly what he wanted.

Republican gamesma... (Below threshold)
Chip:
Republican gamesmanship that's hindering policies that might get us out of it.

Didn't democrats have a super-majority for a while there?

Why yes, the dems had contr... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Why yes, the dems had control of the House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Yet despite those facts were unable to pass much of their agenda.

But never mind the facts. Just because the dems could have passed any law they chose without needing to garner a single GOP vote, it was the GOP refusal to go along with their policies that kept those policies from becoming law.

Don't confuse the lefties with facts. They know with "certitude" that it is all the GOP's fault.

All they stand for... (Below threshold)
James H:
All they stand for now are "lower taxes" and "oppose Democrats".

My main fiscal nit with the Republicans, actually. Tax rates -- whether high or low -- are a policy tool like anything other. The Republicans seem to have raised tax cuts to the level of Gospel.

James H,By the sam... (Below threshold)
jim m:

James H,

By the same token, the dems have made class warfare their gospel and raising taxes on "The Rich" (and "the Rich" are whoever the moment determines it needs to be) is their sacrament.

Take your pick. For my part I will choose to work with the party that doesn't need to determine who wins and who looses the economic game as a matter of political policy.

Justrand @#9, above: if you... (Below threshold)
wolfwalker:

Justrand @#9, above: if you read very, very carefully, you might notice that I said nothing whatever about Barry Lackwit or his job performance since inhabiting the Oval Office. I was simply pointing out that, while President Bush did make several serious mistakes, the WSJ table is phrased in a way that's very unfair to him.

Gee, wouldja look at that. ... (Below threshold)

Gee, wouldja look at that. Wall Street has one of the best years its ever had, and yet there aren't magically jobs available for everyone.

It's almost like trickle-down economics doesn't work. Who'd'a thunkit?

With Democrats its "Raise t... (Below threshold)
Ryan M.:

With Democrats its "Raise taxes" and "Every government program)(Except constitutionally mandated ones like the military) is sacrosanct and cutting a single penny is killing grandma!!!!!




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy