The Obama Economy Sux

[Ddawg]

More "exciting" employment news .........

All Tennessee's Employment Growth Since 2000 Has Gone to Immigrants; Yet, Natives Accounted for 60% of Population Growth

WASHINGTON, Aug. 4, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Gang of Eight immigration bill (S.744) passed by the U.S. Senate last June, and voted for by both Tennessee senators - Lamar Alexander (R) and Bob Corker (R), would have roughly doubled the number of new foreign workers allowed into the country, as well as legalized illegal immigrants. To put into context the possible effects of this legislation on Tennessee, the Center for Immigration Studies has analyzed recent government data on employment.

The analysis shows that, since 2000, all of the net increase in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job in Tennessee has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal). This is the case even though the native-born accounted for 60 percent of the growth in the state's total working-age population.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101890969#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ddawg]

An insightful read -

The Washington Post
"The Insiders: The Democrats want a smokescreen to hide the economy"
By Ed Rogers, August 4, 2014

There is no chance the economy will be strong by November, even if we see some improvements between now and then. The real questions are how weak it will still be and to what degree voters will want to send a message that they are unhappy with the Democrats’ stewardship of the economy.

Obama apologists will point to the most recent quarter of gross domestic product growth as evidence that the economy is improving. Well, even the boost from this one quarter of good growth under President Obama – which is still subject to revision – means that GDP growth for the year is now an anemic 0.9 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos ... e-economy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ddawg]

"Why the Middle Class Isn’t Buying Talk About Economic Good Times"
Aug. 20, 2014

For five years, the United States economy has been expanding at a steady clip, the stock market soaring, the headlines filled with talk of recovery. Yet public opinion polling shows most Americans still think the economy is pretty miserable.

What might account for the paradox? New data from a research firm offers a simple, frustrating answer: Middle-class American families’ income is lower now, when adjusted for inflation, than when the recovery began half a decade ago.

Sentier Research, a firm led by former census officials, used census data to tabulate an estimate of the median household income — how much is earned by families at the exact middle of the nation’s income distribution. In June 2014, it found in a report issued Wednesday, the median household income was $53,891, down from $55,589 in inflation-adjusted dollars when the economic expansion began in June 2009.

The economic paradox isn’t much of a paradox at all in this light: The purchasing power of the typical American family is 3.1 percent lower now than it was five years ago. No wonder people are unhappy about the economy! The benefits of rising levels of economic activity have simply not accrued to middle-income wage earners.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/21/upsho ... abg=1&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ddawg]

The business community has lost confidence in Obama. Imagine that -

Breitbart, Aug. 3o

US News and World Report Chairman and Editor-in-Chief and publisher of The New York Daily News, Mort Zuckerman argued that President Obama “has lost the confidence of the business community” on Friday’s broadcast of “The McLaughlin Group.”

“[The economy] has...grown by about 2%, 2.1%, for the last five years, which is the lowest rate of growth coming out of a recession we have had ever, since the Great Depression. And what’s more, that only took place, not because of the fact that the economic environment was that good, it's because we have a hugely stimulating monetary policy and fiscal policy.

We have run up huge national debt and we have undermined the value of the dollar, and this is in my judgment not representing a good economic policy” he argued. And “he [Obama] has lost the confidence of the business community and the business world in terms of where it counts, which is investment, and new plant and equipment.”

Zuckerman concluded that the national debt would “restrict what we are going to be able to do as a country for decades,” adding that “we have a situation where we are losing the competitive edge that we had, not totally, but in many, many areas.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2 ... -Community" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ddawg]

"Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low"

September 5, 2014

A record 92,269,000 Americans 16 and older did not participate in the labor force in August, as the labor force participation rate matched a 36-year low of 62.8 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali ... 6-year-low" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Screamineagle]

The business community has lost confidence in Obama. Imagine that -

Breitbart, Aug. 3o

US News and World Report Chairman and Editor-in-Chief and publisher of The New York Daily News, Mort Zuckerman argued that President Obama “has lost the confidence of the business community” on Friday’s broadcast of “The McLaughlin Group.”

“[The economy] has...grown by about 2%, 2.1%, for the last five years, which is the lowest rate of growth coming out of a recession we have had ever, since the Great Depression. And what’s more, that only took place, not because of the fact that the economic environment was that good, it's because we have a hugely stimulating monetary policy and fiscal policy.

We have run up huge national debt and we have undermined the value of the dollar, and this is in my judgment not representing a good economic policy” he argued. And “he [Obama] has lost the confidence of the business community and the business world in terms of where it counts, which is investment, and new plant and equipment.”

Zuckerman concluded that the national debt would “restrict what we are going to be able to do as a country for decades,” adding that “we have a situation where we are losing the competitive edge that we had, not totally, but in many, many areas.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2 ... -Community" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I agree with all of this other than the last statement.I am a big believer that the American spirit is still there and the economic fundamentals have not yet been destroyed. I think if we had leaders that knew/cared what they were doing and did away with the things that are hurting the economy and the nation.I think we would be amazed at how quickly things could come back. Most people I know want to be working and contributing not being a drag on society.Well see what happens just trying to be optimistic during these continual hard times.

[Ddawg]

From the Wall St. Journal -

"The Recovery That Left Out Almost Everybody"

Every fall, the U.S. Commerce Department issues a detailed analysis of trends in income, poverty and health insurance. Although economists have some technical quibbles with the Commerce data, the broad trends are unmistakable.

This year's report found that median household income was $51,939 in 2013, 8% lower than in 2007, the last year before the recession. Households in the middle of the income distribution earned about $4,500 less last year than they had six years earlier. No wonder 56% of Americans told the Pew Research Center that their incomes were falling behind the cost of living.

The Federal Reserve's triennial Survey of Consumer Finances confirms these findings. Between 2010 and 2013, the Fed reports, median family income fell by 5%, even though average family income rose by 4%. This is, note the authors, "consistent with increasing income concentration during this period." Only families in the top 10%, with annual incomes averaging nearly $400,000, saw gains during these three years. Families headed by college graduates eked out a gain of 1%, while those with a high-school diploma or less saw declines of about 7%. Those in the middle—with some postsecondary education—did the worst: From 2010 to 2013, their annual incomes declined to less than $41,000 from $46,000—an 11% plunge. Families headed by workers under age 35 have done especially badly—even when the heads of those young families have college degrees.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/william- ... 1411511226" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ddawg]

Time to revive the "Suck-o Obama Economy" thread. The truth is, Obama does not know what he is doing with the economy. He has used quick sugar fixes (printing money, historical low interest rates, borrow - borrow from the Chinese, a historic $830 billion stimulus package that did nothing but line the pockets of his cronies and accrue more debt).

WSJ -
"Obama's Stimulus, Five Years Later"
The legacy is a slow-growth economy: Growth over the last 18 quarters has averaged just 2.4% -- pretty shoddy compared to better than 4% growth during the Reagan recovery in the 1980s and almost 4% in the 1990s recovery.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240 ... 2278347858" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And now? After 7 years of Obama running the U.S. economy - we have a record of 94+ million Americans NOT in the labor force.

"Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month"
Sept 4, 2015

A record 94,031,000 Americans were not in the American labor force last month -- 261,000 more than July -- and the labor force participation rate stayed stuck at 62.6 percent, a 38-year low, for a third straight month in August, the Labor Department reported on Friday, as the nation heads into the Labor Day weekend.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-j ... ck-38-year" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[nuk13]

Hey, not to worry, our president is in Alaska saving us from global warming. That is far more important than having a job and buying food, isn't it? Maybe he can get them to stop drilling that dirty black petroleum up there and get them to put up Don Quixote hot air windmills. They can get rid of some of those pesky bald eagles that are otherwise illegal for the rest of us to kill. Gee, there will be more fish that they can take rowboats out to catch. Some of the laid off oil workers can man the oars. Maybe they'll be a minimum loss of jobs and the ones that can't get jobs can get some of the $$$ hot off the printing presses.

[Ddawg]

After 8 years of Obama running the economy - the numbers are in.

In all of U.S. history, there has NEVER been 1 single president that has not achieved a minimum 3% economic growth, at least 1 year of their presidency. That includes both 1 and 2 term presidents - until Obama.

Obama will go down in history as the 1st U.S. president to never achieve at least 3% growth 1 time. Why? Because he is committed to higher taxes, massive regulation increases, and redistribution of wealth instead of creating a climate of economic growth. Obama is a socialist - and our economy has suffered lackluster results.

Here ya go -
"In addition, Barack Obama remains solidly on track to be the only president in all of U.S. history to never have a single year when the economy grew by at least 3 percent. Every other president in American history, even the really bad ones, had at least one year when U.S. GDP grew by at least 3 percent. But this has not happened under Obama even though he has had two terms in the White House."

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-3 ... gdp-growth