Comments on: Job Losses Under Bush and Obama Compared

By: Denis Lowell

Denis Lowell — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 17:40:28 +0000

Everything started going South when Bush reversed the economic policies that worked so well under Clinton. Now the right wing calls those tax rates class warfare.

By: depelton

depelton — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 03:04:38 +0000

PBOHIO:

Thanks for your comments. If you want to continue to comment here, please use your real name.

Don Pelton.

By: PBOHIO

PBOHIO — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 02:53:11 +0000

You do realize Jim that approximately 2.5 to 3.0 Million of those were in the first 3 months of the Obama Presidency?? How do you put the blame on him for that?? If you want to look at it like that,,the month after he took office,,Feb. 2009,,job losses started going down. Which is it????

By: Jim Kilmer

Jim Kilmer — Fri, 06 May 2011 02:50:27 +0000

Tomorrow morning the jobs report will be released at 8:30 am. Since Obama was elected, we’ve lost 4,754,000 jobs. (According to the Obama’s Bureau of Labor Statistics). That’s more than double the record for job losses at this point in a Presidency.
Will Obama reverse hiseconomic positions, and switch to a pro-business, pro-growth policy? We need jobs!

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:55:10 +0000

I’m not sure what Pat (2/17/2009) point is? The graph he sites allows you to see what the unemployment rate was by month. When Obama took office in Jan. 2009, it was 8.5%. How is that different that what the graph above shows?

By: Pabst

Pabst — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 23:03:27 +0000

Of course, the unemployment will still go up since we are still lossing jobs. But, not as much as during the last 2 years of Bush. This is just simple math. Had we continued to loss 800,000 jobs per month, the unemployment rate would be double than it is now? Another thing, do you remember how many times Bush and the Republicans in Congress & Senate passed a Stimulus bill? And who started the TARP? By the way, who controls the Congress & Senate from Jan/2000 to Jan/2006? One final thing, do you remember what’s the top income tax rate under Reagan? Over 50%.

By: depelton

depelton — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 18:42:49 +0000

Both graphs are based on the same BLS data, as explained here:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/02/political-rhetoric-in-graph-form.html

By: Pat

Pat — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 02:16:49 +0000

Yeah, you can spin your data all you want. At a certain point, job losses will stop going down, but it doesn’t mean more people are back to work. It just means that less people are losing their jobs. It does not count the people who are still out of work. Here is the graph that really matters. Make particular note of the hockey stick in the past year:

http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usunemployment&met=unemployment_rate&tdim=true&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+rate

And this is from Google, a non-partisan source, not the Obama media spin.