With all kudos and credit to CNBC (not known as a liberal friendly site), the short answer to the question of "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" is, for the US economy, and unequivocal "Yes." Please refer to the link below:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/48911596/page/2/
The page shows, in all areas, the economy is stronger. Things may be slowing, but they are undoubtedly much better. The question is of course far more complex than this simple, jingo-istic and somewhat stupid quip from Ronald Reagan. When he uttered it, it failed to recognize the country was reeling from the end of the Vietnam War, an oil embargo and an active choice to choke-off inflation by hiking interest rates. That move, by then Fed Chariman Paul Vollker, was the exact reason for the end of killer inflation, but it of course also slowed the economy. Reagan was happy to take credit for the end of inflation, but never acknowledged the realities which faced the country in 1980.
Romney and the Republicans fail to recognize this countryas in free-fall at the start of Obama's Presidency. While I never give the President much overall credit for the economy, hiring is done by companies far more than the government, the fact is Obama's choice to act to save the auto industry probably saved not less than four million US jobs, jobs which pay well enough that people can live a decent life besides. The Republicans also fail to recognize it was their policies which wrecked things, which made drastic action necessary. They (the Republicans) lit the house on fire and blame Obama for not putting it out fast enough then tell you that you should give them back the gas can and the lighter.
The country IS better off, far better off than if we'd allowed the auto industry to fail. Had Romney (or McCain) been President, the country would have almost certainly fallen into depression, just as it did when Herbert Hoover failed to act after the crash in 1929. I wish President Obama were more forceful in demanding respect for the needs of the middle class, rather than the upper class, but he's far better a choice than folks who promoted off-shoring, promoted and still do relaxing regulation on industries which have proven they'll take wreckless risks with our country's future, and who promoted (for years) the idea that deficit spending "didn't matter" while they ran the country, but now want to end Medicare and if they get a chance Social Security because of "deficit cliffs" - cliffs they created by underfunding the government.
So, no mention of the 13 Billion that Chrysler and GM received thanks to then President Bush. Those loans were made until the incumbent was in office. Just to keep them afloat. Your number of 4 million jobs is way over inflated. Not to mention, that when some economists were talking about those "saved" jobs, they were including the waitress down at the local diner. I don't think she makes very much money. She may very well be one of the 45 Million Americans on varying food programs.
ReplyDeleteWhere exactly did you get the 4 millions jobs figure from?
And, President Obama did not save the auto "Industry". Two companies received loans. There were at least 5 others that did not. Plus, those loans, and taxpayers acting as shareholders, stand to lose.
Since we're passing blame (Yet again), let's go even further. One could argue that NAFTA (Clinton) sent jobs to Mexico, which cost Americans dearly. My '02 Cavalier (GM) was assembled there.
5.5 million: Americans unemployed and not receiving benefits
ReplyDeleteThe job market may be on the mend, but that’s not much consolation to millions of Americans facing a frightening deadline: the end of their unemployment benefits.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/04/30/number-of-the-week-millions-set-to-lose-unemployment-benefits/
Hey but don't count them in 8.3% unemployment.
Because that would make the number more like 12.48%
Thomas,
ReplyDeleteAre you aware when the decision was made to no longer count those who stop receiving benefits in the unemployment figure? During the presidency of one Ronald Reagan. Had we counted THEN those same people, the unemployment figures THEN, during HIS presidency, probably would have topped 14%.
It was BS then, it was objected to THEN by Democrats, NOT Republicans. Wonder why... gosh..
I agree that it's fraudulent to exclude those people, but it was a fraud invented by the most popular Republican president in the past 100 years.
Just sayin'.
Thomas, we're still waiting for that apology.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to engage in the same conservative dishonesty and hypocrisy and outright lies and misrepresentations.
It has been right wing policies that have damaged this economy and other nation's economies as well.
We are going to need a longer time than 4 years to undo 8 years of damage. The right wing has rigged the game to benefit corporations and the wealthy, at the expense of everyone else in the 99%.
You are cleaarly not in the 1%, so obviously you lack the knowledge to vote in your own interest AND in the interests of the country as a whole.
That makes you a gullible culture war victim of conservatives. Tsk tsk tsk.
That tends to happen to people who aren't good at separating facts from propaganda, and who don't do well at independent thinking and analysis - which is something liberals do better than most conservatives.