Perspective on Unemployment Rate Reagan vs. Obama

[Hot Mega]

In Jan. '81 when Reagan took office the U/E rate was 7.50%. In Jan. '82, a year later it was 8.60% and rising. In July of '82 it was 9.80% and rose steadily until topping out at 10.80% almost 2 years after his inauguration in Nov. and Dec. of '82.

Once topping at 10.80% it didn't fall below 10% until July of '83...2 yrs. 6 mos. after taking office.

In Jan. 09 when Obama took office the U/E rate was 7.70%. In Jan. '10, a year later it was 9.70% and falling (after topping out at 10.10 in October of '09). It has dropped slightly and stood at 9.50% in Jun '10.

The U/E rate under Obama topped out at 10.10% 9 months after Obama took office and was below 10% on the anniversary of his inauguration and has declined ever since standing at about 9.40% today (1 yr. 6mos).

By all accounts this economy was/is worse than that inherited by Reagan....Hopefully this puts things in a little more perspective.

What is laughable is how the GWB shills at Fox (Hannity and the gang) whined compulsively over Bush inheriting a Clinton recession with an U/E rate of 4%. Then Bush turns around to hand his successor an U/E rate nearly double, a bankrupt financial institution, auto industry and 2 wars.:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp

 

[jod0565]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

That's so '83.

 

[Smallville417]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

Good information, some people need to be reminded. You should send a memo to Hannity, seeing as how he worships Reagan, and does nothing for 60 minutes other than spending his time bashing everything Obama......though I'm sure he would come up with some excuse for his idol. EVERYTHING Reagan did was great, if you talk to Hannity.

 

[Hot Mega]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

Good information, some people need to be reminded. You should send a memo to Hannity, seeing as how he worships Reagan, and does nothing for 60 minutes other than spending his time bashing everything Obama......though I'm sure he would come up with some excuse for his idol. EVERYTHING Reagan did was great, if you talk to Hannity.

Never mind the fact that the U/E rate was never higher than under Reagan nor for a longer period of time.

But the US economy is going to hell in a hand basket according to GOPer shills even though comparatively Obama's recovery appears to be happening much sooner than Reagan's from a worse condition than Reagan's.

 

[emceeemcee]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

facts mean nothing when it comes to political cheerleading

 

[Facetious]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

^ how many accounts have you opened up here ? 5, 6, 7 more?
What, do you actually think that you're going to topple the consensus via multiple accounting.


Where's your true transexual self these days ? :1orglaugh

 

[Hot Mega]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

^ how many accounts have you opened up here ? 5, 6, 7 more?
What, do you actually think that you're going to topple the consensus via multiple accounting.


Where's your true transexual self these days ?

:translation:
I haven't worked up a spin for the facts of the thread nor has one been issued by the GOPer symbiod yet....give me a few days.:cussing:

In the mean time I need something to attack here just to keep from being quiet.

 

[1ManRevolution]

In Jan. '81 when Reagan took office the U/E rate was 7.50%. In Jan. '82, a year later it was 8.60% and rising. In July of '82 it was 9.80% and rose steadily until topping out at 10.80% almost 2 years after his inauguration in Nov. and Dec. of '82.

Once topping at 10.80% it didn't fall below 10% until July of '83...2 yrs. 6 mos. after taking office.

In Jan. 09 when Obama took office the U/E rate was 7.70%. In Jan. '10, a year later it was 9.70% and falling (after topping out at 10.10 in October of '09). It has dropped slightly and stood at 9.50% in Jun '10.

The U/E rate under Obama topped out at 10.10% 9 months after Obama took office and was below 10% on the anniversary of his inauguration and has declined ever since standing at about 9.40% today (1 yr. 6mos).

By all accounts this economy was/is worse than that inherited by Reagan....Hopefully this puts things in a little more perspective.

What is laughable is how the GWB shills at Fox (Hannity and the gang) whined compulsively over Bush inheriting a Clinton recession with an U/E rate of 4%. Then Bush turns around to hand his successor an U/E rate nearly double, a bankrupt financial institution, auto industry and 2 wars.:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp

By today's standards in the GOP Reagan would be considered a RINO and run out of the party.

 

[Hot Mega]

By today's standards in the GOP Reagan would be considered a RINO and run out of the party.

I can't tell. He is still roundly worshiped and lionized by all those who would be inclined to run "RINOs" out of the party.

In fact, Reagan is the standard bearer whenever there is a political hero in need of hearkening back to for GOPers.

GWB was a train wreck and they've run out of spin on his failures...his father was a one termer who couldn't beat Bill Clinton. That transgression alone is something they despise him for...

Their last bastion of spin resides with the alleged Reagan "revolution". BTW, don't love how these clowns love to toss around gaudy, hyperbole like "revolution" every time they do something??

 

[1ManRevolution]

I can't tell. He is still roundly worshiped and lionized by all those who would be inclined to run "RINOs" out of the party.

In fact, Reagan is the standard bearer whenever there is a political hero in need of hearkening back to for GOPers.

GWB was a train wreck and they've run out of spin on his failures...his father was a one termer who couldn't beat Bill Clinton. That transgression alone is something they despise him for...

Their last bastion of spin resides with the alleged Reagan "revolution". BTW, don't love how these clowns love to toss around gaudy, hyperbole like "revolution" every time they do something??

It you look at his spending and his social programs he is more of a Democrat than a Republican. I really wish that the moderate Republican would take the party back over...I might rejoin them again.

I don't think that Reagan was a great president say like a Washington or Jefferson...but he is better than average.

I for one can't stand the Tea Party and I feel that it is going to hurt the GOP in the mid term election...I think they will split the GOP vote.:2 cents:

 

[ralph furley]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

FOX news is a joke. only idiots watch this crap

 

[Hot Mega]

It you look at his spending and his social programs he is more of a Democrat than a Republican. I really wish that the moderate Republican would take the party back over...I might rejoin them again.

I don't think that Reagan was a great president say like a Washington or Jefferson...but he is better than average.

I for one can't stand the Tea Party and I feel that it is going to hurt the GOP in the mid term election...I think they will split the GOP vote.

Do you know why tobacco companies are making even more money now in spite of the "sin taxes" designed to curb cigarette use? For the same reason consumption taxes are inflationary ....when the g'ment taxes something more, manufacturers simply use it as a cover to increase base pricing also.

What does this have to do with your point on Reagan and his spending? Well, it's no different from a g'ment spending standpoint. Reagan's exorbitant spending on his projects just gave backers of social programs cover to increase the spending on theirs.:2 cents:

The Teabagger party is just an amalgam of mostly rabid GOPers who would be inclined to vote against Demos in any event. How else do they sit around listening to an imbecile like Palin??

But until they run candidates on a separate ticket...GOPers don't have much to worry about IMO.

 

[Crazy4theBrat]

In Jan. '81 when Reagan took office the U/E rate was 7.50%. In Jan. '82, a year later it was 8.60% and rising. In July of '82 it was 9.80% and rose steadily until topping out at 10.80% almost 2 years after his inauguration in Nov. and Dec. of '82.

Once topping at 10.80% it didn't fall below 10% until July of '83...2 yrs. 6 mos. after taking office.

In Jan. 09 when Obama took office the U/E rate was 7.70%. In Jan. '10, a year later it was 9.70% and falling (after topping out at 10.10 in October of '09). It has dropped slightly and stood at 9.50% in Jun '10.

The U/E rate under Obama topped out at 10.10% 9 months after Obama took office and was below 10% on the anniversary of his inauguration and has declined ever since standing at about 9.40% today (1 yr. 6mos).

By all accounts this economy was/is worse than that inherited by Reagan....Hopefully this puts things in a little more perspective.

What is laughable is how the GWB shills at Fox (Hannity and the gang) whined compulsively over Bush inheriting a Clinton recession with an U/E rate of 4%. Then Bush turns around to hand his successor an U/E rate nearly double, a bankrupt financial institution, auto industry and 2 wars.:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp

I think it's fair to say that Barrack Hussein Obama inherited an even worse economy than Ronald Wilson Reagan did. I'm sure the democrats were trying to blame President Reagan during the first couple years just like the republicans are trying to put blame on the current President.

It's just politics. Your guy is in office now, and the economy hasn't turned around. It's natural that he will be under fire until people see things starting to change. If his policies are effective, he will have the last laugh, just like Ronaldus Magnus did when he said "I knew my economic policies were working when the democrats quit calling them "Reaganomics". :1orglaugh

All economies have different factors causing their rises and dips, and the current one is no different. I personally don't think what is being done to repair the economy is going to work, but I'll be more than happy to eat a big helping of crow if I end up being wrong. It will be worth it because that will mean the country's economy has been turned around. We shall see.

 

[Hot Mega]

I think it's fair to say that Barrack Hussein Obama inherited an even worse economy than Ronald Wilson Reagan did. I'm sure the democrats were trying to blame President Reagan during the first couple years just like the republicans are trying to put blame on the current President.

It's just politics. Your guy is in office now, and the economy hasn't turned around. It's natural that he will be under fire until people see things starting to change. If his policies are effective, he will have the last laugh, just like Ronaldus Magnus did when he said "I knew my economic policies were working when the democrats quit calling them "Reaganomics". :1orglaugh

All economies have different factors causing their rises and dips, and the current one is no different. I personally don't think what is being done to repair the economy is going to work, but I'll be more than happy to eat a big helping of crow if I end up being wrong. It will be worth it because that will mean the country's economy has been turned around. We shall see.

The highest marginal tax rate currently is 35% and has been for the last 3 years. That is lower than every year except for 1 year (his last 28%) under Reagan and significantly lower than 6 (69%-'81, 50%-'82-'86 and 38.5% in '87) of his 8 years.

By comparison are you saying the tax rates are too low under Obama because that's about the only difference?

I don't know how long it will take the economy to "boom" again but at least from an unemployment perspective the worst would appear to be over.

I only cite this in order to lend some perspective to the rhetoric. Part of the reason GWB was made from Teflon on many things he rightfully should have been criticized over is because of the GOPer very effective apples to apples tactic.

As soon as Bush was criticized the first defense GOPers raised was the what Clinton did defense. Much of it was malarkey but some of it was reasonable.

It is reasonable to compare similar situations in this case and by comparison it appears Obama is doing a better job than did Reagan out of a worse circumstance. The problem is while GOPers would have an army of operatives on tv pointing this out every day..Demos are oblivious of it because they simply don't keep up with the facts. As soon as GOPers line up a bunch of misinformation to bully them off a point they clam up because they don't know or are too lazy to put facts in perspective.

 

[1ManRevolution]

Do you know why tobacco companies are making even more money now in spite of the "sin taxes" designed to curb cigarette use? For the same reason consumption taxes are inflationary ....when the g'ment taxes something more, manufacturers simply use it as a cover to increase base pricing also.

What does this have to do with your point on Reagan and his spending? Well, it's no different from a g'ment spending standpoint. Reagan's exorbitant spending on his projects just gave backers of social programs cover to increase the spending on theirs.:2 cents:

The Teabagger party is just an amalgam of mostly rabid GOPers who would be inclined to vote against Demos in any event. How else do they sit around listening to an imbecile like Palin??

But until they run candidates on a separate ticket...GOPers don't have much to worry about IMO.

Excise taxes....:thefinger

I think you seriously under estiminate the Tea Party power within the GOP. They are trying to take over the party. If it was truly an independent movement, they would not be alligned so closly with the GOP on every issue.

I look at them like I did with the NeoCons...if your not with us, your aganist us mentality has run amuck in the Tea Party and it will be the downfall of the GOP as teabaggers will chase out the moderate Republicans and the votes that follow them. Thus making the GOP a regional party that will never win a national election...unless the Moderates take back the GOP.

 

[Crazy4theBrat]

The highest marginal tax rate currently is 35% and has been for the last 3 years. That is lower than every year except for 1 year (his last 28%) under Reagan and significantly lower than 6 (69%-'81, 50%-'82-'86 and 38.5% in '87) of his 8 years.

By comparison are you saying the tax rates are too low under Obama because that's about the only difference?

I don't know how long it will take the economy to "boom" again but at least from an unemployment perspective the worst would appear to be over.

I only cite this in order to lend some perspective to the rhetoric. Part of the reason GWB was made from Teflon on many things he rightfully should have been criticized over is because of the GOPer very effective apples to apples tactic.

As soon as Bush was criticized the first defense GOPers raised was the what Clinton did defense. Much of it was malarkey but some of it was reasonable.

It is reasonable to compare similar situations in this case and by comparison it appears Obama is doing a better job than did Reagan out of a worse circumstance. The problem is while GOPers would have an army of operatives on tv pointing this out every day..Demos are oblivious of it because they simply don't keep up with the facts. As soon as GOPers line up a bunch of misinformation to bully them off a point they clam up because they don't know or are too lazy to put facts in perspective.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. As I said, I hope what Obama is doing will work, but as far as I can see, there hasn't been much change. I know of a LOT of people who are out of work, and who have been looking for a job for quite some time.

Reagan's record is already a matter of history. Before declaring Obama as being in the league of a president like Reagan, I want to make sure something happens. Let's not be fooled by smoke and mirrors, or by what you hope will work out.

Also, I wouldn't underestimate how bad it was when Reagan pounded Jimmy Carter in that first election. Unemployment was bad, as you pointed out. Inflation was another factor that Reagan had to deal with. The state of the country's outlook as a whole was really in pretty bad shape after going through Watergate with Nixon, and the pathetic attempt of a job that Carter did as president.

There is no doubt that Reagan turned this country around. People can try to say this or that in attempt to discredit him, but facts are facts. He did a tremendous job leading this country.

Let's hope Barrack Hussein Obama can say the same by the time he's through.

 

[1ManRevolution]

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. As I said, I hope what Obama is doing will work, but as far as I can see, there hasn't been much change. I know of a LOT of people who are out of work, and who have been looking for a job for quite some time.

Reagan's record is already a matter of history. Before declaring Obama as being in the league of a president like Reagan, I want to make sure something happens. Let's not be fooled by smoke and mirrors, or by what you hope will work out.

Also, I wouldn't underestimate how bad it was when Reagan pounded Jimmy Carter in that first election. Unemployment was bad, as you pointed out. Inflation was another factor that Reagan had to deal with. The state of the country's outlook as a whole was really in pretty bad shape after going through Watergate with Nixon, and the pathetic attempt of a job that Carter did as president.

There is no doubt that Reagan turned this country around. People can try to say this or that in attempt to discredit him, but facts are facts. He did a tremendous job leading this country.

Let's hope Barrack Hussein Obama can say the same by the time he's through.

He also did a tremendous job spending this country into a hole.

 

[Hot Mega]

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. As I said, I hope what Obama is doing will work, but as far as I can see, there hasn't been much change. I know of a LOT of people who are out of work, and who have been looking for a job for quite some time.

Reagan's record is already a matter of history. Before declaring Obama as being in the league of a president like Reagan, I want to make sure something happens. Let's not be fooled by smoke and mirrors, or by what you hope will work out.

Also, I wouldn't underestimate how bad it was when Reagan pounded Jimmy Carter in that first election. Unemployment was bad, as you pointed out. Inflation was another factor that Reagan had to deal with. The state of the country's outlook as a whole was really in pretty bad shape after going through Watergate with Nixon, and the pathetic attempt of a job that Carter did as president.

There is no doubt that Reagan turned this country around. People can try to say this or that in attempt to discredit him, but facts are facts. He did a tremendous job leading this country.

Let's hope Barrack Hussein Obama can say the same by the time he's through.

I'm not comparing Obama to Reagan as Obama is but a year and a half into his first term. That would be silly.

I'm comparing unemployment rates at similar points in their presidencies considering the economic downturns they apparently inherited are similar.

By most reasonable accounts (even yours) what Obama inherited was worse yet by comparison the unemployment rate would appear to have topped out at a lesser rate over a far shorter span of time under Obama (1 year compared to 2.5 under Reagan). Those are simple facts to this point.

The same people criticizing Obama over a 35% tax rate, hail Reagan for cutting taxes yet the top tax rate was 50% or above for 6 of his 8 years.

We can compare them after Obama completes 4 years...If power drunk GOPers don't spend the rest of his term trying to impeach him should they prevail in Nov.

 

[Kingfisher]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

I've said it before, we've re-entered the 80's. The Rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

 

[CptHa]

Re: Perspective on Unemployment Rate Regan vs. Obama

So what you're saying is, we need to invade Grenada again to jump start the economy?