Posts Tagged economy

Democrats’ Economic Record

Common Cents has this gem, which illustrates the effect that a Democrat majority in Congress has had on unemployment numbers. But remember: it’s all Bush’s fault!

2000

4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.8 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.6 6.9 7.4
2009 7.7 8.2 8.6 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.8 10.1 10.0 10.0
2010 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.9 9.7 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.6  

,

Leave a comment

Where Are the Jobs?

Reason TV Presents this brief video that asks a simple question: If Obama’s economic policies are so great, and he’s fixed the recession, then where are all the jobs at? An interesting comparison between the policies of today and those that ended prolonged the Great Depression.

Today many Americans credit FDR with rescuing our nation from the Great Depression, but there’s plenty wrong with that view, says Lee Ohanian, a UCLA economics professor who specializes in economic crisis. “What’s wrong with that view is that private-sector job growth did not come back under Roosevelt,” says Ohanian, who notes that Americans often forget how long the Great Depression lasted. Unemployment stood at 17 percent in 1939, a decade after the infamous stock market crash, and, although times were much worse back then, Ohanian sees troubling parallels between the Great Depression and the Great Recession. In both instances our nation emerged from a severe downturn with strong productivity growth and the banking system largely restored. We were poised for a recovery, but didn’t get one. “So the key puzzle for both today and the 1930s is why aren’t private-sector jobs being created at a much more rapid rate?” Read the rest of this entry »

, , ,

Leave a comment

Obamanomics 101

Andrew B. Wilson at the American Spectator presents a rather scathing critique of Obama’s economic policies, and how they are spun as doing things that they don’t do:

For spendthrift Democrats to go around claiming that they have “cut taxes” is to engage in the most deliberate and outrageous obfuscation — throwing dirt in the eyes of an American public. What Obama and the Democrats have done, in the course of running up $2.7 trillion in federal deficits and spending nearly 25% of GDP over the past two years, is to put checks in the mail to people who, for the most part, pay no income tax — meaning that these payments from the federal government out of borrowed money are indistinguishable from welfare checks. The Obama administration has not cut tax rates for real taxpayers and has no intention of doing so (with huge tax increases soon to take effect with the expiration of the earlier round of George W. Bush tax cuts).

But none of this stops Democratic Party stalwarts from playacting the part of favoring tax cuts. On CNN, California Senator Boxer made the laughable claim that she had supported “$1.2 trillion in tax cuts” through the stimulus bill — which would suggest that the entire stimulus bill, and more, was devoted to tax cuts. In fact, she began her interview with Wolf Blitzer in claiming she had supported $2.2 trillion in tax cuts.

Since Obama came to office in January 2009, the unemployment has risen from just under 8% to close to 10% — where it has stayed for the past year.  There has been a net loss of about 2.5 million jobs.  Even so, the Obama administration continues to claim that it has “created or saved” about 3 million jobs.  That is a meaningless metric, which is not based on any evidence.  It comes from plugging data on government spending into a Keynesian computer model and assuming (against a great weight of contrary evidence) that every dollar spent would provide $1.50 in economic growth and job creation.  It is merely a restatement of what the target was at the outset of the stimulus program, as opposed to an objective measure of what the program has actually achieved.

Read the whole thing.

, , ,

Leave a comment

Jobs and Economics

Herbert Meyer at American Thinker explains some basic economic principles, and why free market principles are the best way to create new jobs.

Broadly speaking, a country can choose one of two economic operating systems. It can be a free-market economy, or it can be a command economy. In a free-market economy, businesses work within the rules set by government to sell their products and services, but no one is in charge. In a command economy, there may still be privately owned businesses, but the government’s role is so large that it really calls the shots. Because each country — unlike each cell phone owner — designs its own operating system, no two economies are precisely the same. So our country’s free market is somewhat different from Canada’s, which itself is different from Germany’s, Australia’s, Poland’s, and so forth. Likewise with command economies. Still, the similarities among all free-market economies are more striking than the differences, and all command economies are pretty much the same, whether it’s a left-wing or a right-wing government in power. Read the rest of this entry »

, , ,

Leave a comment

A Now for a Taste of Things to Come: Health Care Chaos in Massachusetts

Peter Suderman at Reason Magazine gives us a peek at the future of Obamacare by way of the current state of “market chaos” in the Massachusetts health insurance industry caused by government interference regulation.

Want a preview of ObamaCare in action? Check out the Massachusetts insurance market—which earlier this week entered a state of “market chaos” after Governor Deval Patrick denied a host of health insurance rate increases. Read the rest of this entry »

, , ,

Leave a comment

Obama to Order Banks to Cut Mortgages

Because the best thing to do for the economy right now is to meddle even further with the banking system, and keep banks from actually recovering their debts. The fact that the President of the United States and be so completely, utterly ignorant of economics just astounds me. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

A Radical Recovery Proposal

Jeffrey L. Scribner at American Thinker presents a radical, crazy, almost unheard of plan for economic recovery: cut spending and lower taxes. Unlike the current plan of the Obama administration to spend the nation into debt to save it economically, cutting spending and reducing taxes actually makes sense, and has actually been effective in he past – every time it has been employed. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , ,

Leave a comment