Is There Nothing That Obama Can't Do?

Apparently those reporting the real facts forgot to include the collectivist bell curve data. Please call WH for new and improved data.

Unicorns and rainbows should be included and help adjust the graph to "economy is on the right track".

Unemployment is a lagging indicator. Based upon leading indicators, we knew this slowdown was coming in January. If you look at leading indicators now, everything, everywhere, has just fallen off a cliff. On election day, it will be especially ugly, but a little pain now for the next 90 days will save us from four years of hell.

with u.s. unemployment nudging 20% one has to wonder why people pay any attention to the "official" numbers.

First thing I saw was a cAGW eco-cultist model generated temp graph,compared to reality. Oh well.Really no difference.

Yawn. More BS from the gas tank painted in Saskabush. Remember, it was Bush and Republican policies that caused this Depression -- one that Kate, like her hero Harper -- denied for months even existed.

Why is it that whenever I see BamBam or one of his economic trained seals nattering on about how great the US depression is, I hear AC/DC's highway to hell playing loudly in the background?

Puppykins

You have selective memory.
The cause was the bad loans being pushed by freddie mac and fannie may. Actions to clean up the mess created by the Carter administration where halted by the dem controlled congress in....2007.
Old bummer had a lock on both houses when he came to power but instead of putting a stop to the spending, tripled it in less than one year. Instead of letting business to generate income, he burdened it with further costs and regulations.
Instead of stopping what is referred to as crony capitalism, he just moved the deck chairs around, ie Solyndra.
How much longer is it going to be Bushes fault?
Does old bummer have no control over the situation, if so than his solutions are useless.
The jab at Harper is a bit ironic that currently Canada has economic indicators that old bummer would dearly like to have right now.
By the way, if the US numbers don't improve by the end of summer, Mrs Romney will be measuring for new drapes at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Both houses, and the oval office.

Puppykins

You have selective memory.
The cause was the bad loans being pushed by freddie mac and fannie may. Actions to clean up the mess created by the Carter administration where halted by the dem controlled congress in....2007.
Old bummer had a lock on both houses when he came to power but instead of putting a stop to the spending, tripled it in less than one year. Instead of letting business to generate income, he burdened it with further costs and regulations.
Instead of stopping what is referred to as crony capitalism, he just moved the deck chairs around, ie Solyndra.
How much longer is it going to be Bushes fault?
Does old bummer have no control over the situation, if so than his solutions are useless.
The jab at Harper is a bit ironic that currently Canada has economic indicators that old bummer would dearly like to have right now.
By the way, if the US numbers don't improve by the end of summer, Mrs Romney will be measuring for new drapes at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Both houses, and the oval office.

↑ And it's Obama and Democrat policies that aren't reviving the economy.

puppykins is going la la la la la I can't hear you, right now. As far as I can tell this is what all progressives do. I've had heated arguments with them over this issue. I may as well beat my head against a wall. The truth to a progressive is like snake venom.

There are fewer people employed now (this week) in the USA than were employed in the year 2000. There are 25 millions more people in the USA now (this week) than in the year 2000.

The unemployment figure of 8 point whatever is a fraud. Everything about B. Hussien is fraudulent.

I hope Mr. Romney chooses a candidate for V.P. that the TEA Party wing of the Republicans can rally around... It'll be their chance to be the new Reagans.

Joseph, jwkozak 91 and wilddog --

I think you're being way too hard on Puppykins -- his/her post is one of the most encouraging I have seen in a long time: here's an Obama supporter who admits that the United States is in a depression and that Obama has no clue how to deal with it.

And better yet, Puppykins simultaneously BOTH contradicts Warren Buffett AND possesses the same blase attitude that he does toward the economic plight of millions of Americans.

We could have a little fun with Puppykins and suggest a way that he/she could reconcile Buffett's position (that the probability of the US returning to recession is very low) with the idea that the US is in a depression -- we could point out that it's a bit hard to fall back into recession when Obama's policies didn't get you out of it in the first place! But all of that would assume that Puppykins can stay awake long enough to see the irony.

None of these unemployed people can say to the utilities companies, to the grocers, to the gas/diesel companies that they cannot pay their bills, because it's Bush's fault.
Reagan took most of his first term in office to turn the country around, B. Hussien's had his chance and he's failed miserably. Both in the domestic and in the foreign theatre. *bows to those on the left...*

This is exactly the time in the Reagan first term when the economy started to fire on all cylinders. Everything about B. Hussien is anti-matter and stuttering clusterf*** of a miserable failure.

John Batchelor on his radio show last night mentioned that 50% of the university grads in the past 6 years are unemployed. These were to be the leaders, the thinkers. Now their still living in the basement. This is because whatever promises and *hope* were sold to the american public, it all turned out to be fraudulent.

old white guy/marc in Calgary: The official numbers are based upon those actively collecting benefits and/or still looking for work. The reason the official numbers are so low is that millions have given up hope of finding work, and are just waiting and collecting benefits. Rush Limbaugh gets a lot of mileage out of this.

Completely separate (/sarc), but have you noticed the lack of stories about how hard the economy is on the homeless? That obviously means that no-one is in poverty in the US today, unlike when those meanies the Republicans were in. Waiting for the asteroid indeed....

Puppykins "Remember, it was Bush and Republican policies that caused this Depression -- one that Kate, like her hero Harper -- denied for months even existed."

Harper spent months denying because the US went into recession long before Canada. The US has not recovered, Canada has recovered. Harper is a capitalist, Obama is a communist. I wonder if that has anything to do with it?

Before you give any money to the "free speech"Fourniers, keep in mind that this and other "conservative" sites are heavily consored.z*

(proper spelling of this word blocked by filter designed to prevent mentioning of this issue. Real ChiCom-style oproration here)

Canada has recovered? You have to be kidding.

I understand that C_Miner.. unemployed is not the same as those "without work"

Still, there's a wide gulf between those numbers. Wide enough to park the word, "fraud"

↑ 4% unemployment in "Saskabush". 4.4% unemployment in Alberta. The recovery is out West - not Ontario.

The Alberta Federation of Labour xenophobicly don't want "foreigners" filling "Canadian" jobs. The only way to fill jobs with "Canadians" is for blue-collar Ontarians to move here.

Puppykins 11:11a.m. and Puppykins2 2:54p.m. --

Forgive me, but are you two one of Obama's "composites", like his girlfriend Genevieve?
Or like, "it was Bush and Republican policies that caused this Depression" (part truth -- there's a Depression; and part fiction -- it was caused by Bush and Republican policies).

At any rate, you're good at Obama bait-and-switch tactics -- talk about the Canadian economy, gay marriage, amnesty for the children of illegal immigrants, etc. -- anything but the deplorable state of the US economy in the last four years.

Obumble's damn unicorn was lame and so it stumbled and fell flat on it's a$$, and Boosh did it

It's interesting that the shape of the real graph versus the predicted graph actually match well. The difference is a 2% gap between real and predicted (and a 3 month shift, because of the extra time to get up to the peak rate).

It's as though they had a pretty good model for unemployment, and just inserted a 2% fudge factor to make the chart look good.

Marc - yup, it's just optics, isn't it.

And we also need to remember about the Reagan recession early in his term: the time between when he was elected and when the policies that he ran on (including tax cuts) were able to be enacted. A lot of folks, knowing that tax cuts were coming, put off upgrades and overtime until AFTER the changes were in place, causing the economy to slow down before shifting into high gear. This is similar to the "Bush" portion of the recession/depression, the time when Bush was still in office but Obama was known to be elected (although not yet in power), when businesses said "oh carp, bad times are coming, the government is spending like crazy and spending is only going to get crazier and government is unpredictable, we'd better hunker down now".

That's just silly. The banks tanked and the stock market crashed in bush's term because of Obama? Talk about reaching for straws. And the deep recession of 1981-83 was Jimmy Carter's fault? Are you serious? Really?

Nope, banks tanking was Fannie and Freddie and imposing "fairness" on the housing market, and the "free mortgages" and "XYZ always increases in value" (in this case real estate) bubble finally coming to a burst. The degree and speed of recovery is what "stimulus" had slowed down, and Obama's election stopped.

And where did I say that Carter had anything to do with the Reagan recession? Knowing that the rules would change in a year or two, making it most cost effective to defer the spending, is what caused the Reagan recession (IMHO). The knowledge that you could do something now and pay 80% including write-offs, or wait a couple of years and pay 25% (numbers pulled out of thin air) makes it obvious why some would wait.

It's like the difference in governmental action between the two big crashes in the 20's, Coolidge did nothing, and the market recovered in under 2 years. Hoover (and then Roosevelt) jumped in to save everyone, and the depression lasted over a decade. (yes, there was more going on, but the key item of HOW government chose to react and what the public/market reaction to that governmental reaction is the key item.)

Puppykins2 5:13p.m. --

I suppose we could rehash the origins and political responsibility for the sub-prime mortgage and derivative crisis until we are blue in the face; we obviously are not going to agree on much on this subject. And what does it matter anyway -- which is really the point.

Since you brought up the Reagan/Carter period, I think it's pretty clear that Reagan had a policy plan for the economy, which was implemented with bi-partisan Congressional support, and which, by 1984, was successful enough for Mr. Reagan to achieve re-election, carrying 49 states and almost sixty percent of the vote. So Mr. Reagan didn't, er, spend his first four years in office blaming the dealer for the lousy cards -- he played the hand he was dealt in the best way he knew.

The same cannot be said of Mr. Obama, about whom all of five minutes looking around the internet will tell you is a big part of the problem. From the fiscal policy of the US government (there hasn't been a budget in three years and nobody's even going through the motions to get one done, let alone deal with the debt and deficit problem), through to environmental policies that are making the energy crisis worse, through to Obamacare and on it goes -- the message is that the United States is not open for business and is not interested in creating a policy environment that will facilitate opportunity exploitation and job creation. So American companies, who don't know what their cost structure or regulatory compliance environment or a lot of other stuff are going to be, sit on their hands and milk whatever cash they can from
markets they currently serve. If Mr. Obama had been worth his salt and had any relevant experience -- or any interest in finding out, he would have realized a long time ago that the policy vacuum and hostility of his administration were damaging American business prospects and therefore future job creation.

So, as we sit in 2012, we can continue to argue about the past, or we can try to answer one simple question: what's going to be different in the future? Quite frankly, I see no indication that anything is going to change with this guy, and that is simply not acceptable.

puppykins2 "Canada has recovered? You have to be kidding."

Uh! Yeh! The GDP is up significantly from 2008. Ontario has fouled the bed.

Difference between Reagan and Obambi-Reagan understood the Laffer curve and modified taxes to encourage economic expansion.

That, plus Reagan wasn't a narcissistic gay.