Mr. Boehner may possibly complain FOREVER into infinity about unemployment numbers, but what has he done to fix it? More the point, what has he and his crew done to prevent it being fixed?

GOP & the Norquistians voted NO to TWO MILLION JOBS IN THE AMERICAN JOBS ACT.

And they did it 3 times! They filibustered, as with every measure for the last 3 years, and would not allow the AJA to come up for debate.

Anything Boehner or McConnell says after that is completely empty and meaningless.

................................

243,000 Jobs created despite zero help from the Just-Kill-Jobs-GOP/Koch party for the last 36 months.

Fiesty,

My mama always said especially when I wanted new stylish shoes, if you are worried about having no shoes; look at the man with no feet. That is really spiritual.

As you know the GNOPee /Tea Potty are FAUX Christians!!!

Nobody but Obama

Obama/Biden 2012

B-S,

DrDrGimmeetheNews today on FT:

"First, this is just false. I don't care how many times you repeat it, the math simply doesn't add up. in January 2001, the debt stood at $5.7T. That was the amount contributed by EVERY president previous to GWB. During GWB's 8 years, the debt rose to $10.6T which means GWB increased the debt $4.9T. The debt today stands at $15.3T, of which, the portion that occurred under Obama, is NOT more than all other presidents combined like you folks like to keep saying. You can do the math yourself here:"

"http://www.savingsbonds.gov/NP/NPGateway"

Thanks DrDrGimmeetheNews!

This job number is what you'll call "in ya face" nay sayers.

Buck Naked Sr - Yes the deficit is crazy high but you can't do much now. The economy is still too fragile to go through the kind of cuts GOP is advocating.

This job number shows govt. spendings have worked. Let's get every sector working again then we tackle the deficit problem.

There was no bad news or indicators in the January report.

243,000 jobs added in Jan. Nov/Dec adjusted up 60,000 jobs and the annual prior year adjustment show an increase of 165,000 jobs.

Average hours worked increased. Average pay increased. Very few dropped out, quit looking for work.

A very positive indicator is the increase in hours worked because this is an indicator of future hiring.

Backhouse - didn't the senate vote overwhelmingly to defeat the AJA as originally proposed by obama?

Interesting that you like to bury your head in the ground since thed last jobs bill of any type received bipartisan support in december 2010. Speaking about obstructionist, when is senate majority reid going to stop ignoring house passed bills and FY budgets?

If the economy was turning around, why than did the FED promise not to raise rates until 2014... I mean come on you all have PHD's in eonomics you should know what that means!

Three point seven million private sector jobs created in the last twenty-three months.

Despite 600,000 public sector layoffs by newGOP/Koch Republican Governors like Kasich, Snyder and Scott. They cut budgets and moved those monies to the wealthy and corporations.

.................................................................................................................................

3.7 Million private sector jobs created in the last 23 months.

Job creation UP.

Construction UP.

Manufacturing UP.

And, feisty, IF it's coming down IN SPITE of Obama, not because of him. However, the work-force participation number (people available to work v who can find work) keeps dropping. The report today looks to me like something Mark Twain said -- "There are liars, damned liars, and then there are statisticians." The statisticians in the administration keep finding ways to make the numbers look better than they really are -- such as deciding that when a job is no longer available to be had (it went off-shore, for example), the person unemployed from that job is no longer unemployed. After all, the job no longer exists? Ever read about that? It's true. A good part of the "improvement" is the reduced universe of jobs available to be had.

By the way, Hillary also said during the '08 primary, "His only accomplishment is a good speech in 2004." Remember that? Still true, as far as I can tell.

Let's all remember Mr Romney likes to tout the the fact that he and Bain "saved" Staples. A company that mostly sells goods made in CHINA. Now there's a business model for the good ol' USA! Right Connies!

Nice work there Backhouse, it never ceases to amaze me, how many there are who cheer for the fact that the jobless number didn't go up, yet at the same time declare themselves to be so patriotic......somewhere there is a disconnect, I see it others see it, but the self declared patriots not so much.

Dennis, thanks for the post this morning and for the further details on the January Jobs Report....it is good news across the board and this citizen shares in the hopefulness it offers.

Boy the right wing haters just don't WANT any good news. I'm sure the increase in jobs will make them even more hate-filled and keep them up nights. They WANT people out of work - it's what they rely on. It's amazing they still call themselves Americans!

Obama/Biden 2012

Yes,

Republican Congressionals voted NO to the President's American Jobs Act three times.

And refused to bring it to the floor for Debate - 3 times. They turned down 2 million jobs laid out ABC.

Taxpayers are paying FOR A LOT OF OLD ROPE by putting up with these Norquistians.

Speaker Boehner works nine days per month. And yes, the House GOP spent that tiny amount of time they spend actually at work - creating some bills, re-creating In God We Trust and many measures they knew would never pass in the Senate -- because they were geared only for the benefit of GOP and their benefactors.

when is senate majority reid going to stop ignoring house passed bills and FY budgets?'

Considering the garbage legislation passed by the fascist majority in the House, hopefully never!

Obama is Guaranteed four more years, Lifelong Republicans who think the GOP Teapugs went to far are jumping the ship. Their support for the 1% will be their down fall.

Chip: Grasp at straws much?

Spider: as the economy gets better, the price of gas will go up. Get used to it

You keep trying, but we keep remembering.

You keep ignoring the facts:

The Great Bush Recession has been caused by unpaid-for TWO wars (first time ever unpaid-for), unpaid for high-end tax breaks (first time ever during war-time), and a sweet pharma deal (unpaid for).

The Bush tax cuts cost us $11.6Million per hour, every day.

The Bush tax cuts account for one-third of the deficit. Remember Cheney said "Deficits don't matter."

Your leadership is busy selling: "Tax cuts don't increase the deficit, tax cuts don't need to be off-set".

But according the Boehner, the middle class payroll tax and u.b. that stimulates the economy: DO need to be off-set. ???? Go figure.

One rule for them and one for us.

GOP used to support the payroll tax cut.

They are just useless for the middle-class. Useless.

Well, I'm sure this just warms the cockles of the little GOP heart. (The one they share between them.)

From another post this morning

Backhouse

Beverly, do you agree,

It's not as contentious as some would like to make it? People of all faiths, including Catholics, understand about contraception and the need for birth control.

It is not a big, dirty secret any more.

This includes Catholic women, young and old would do not shy away from the realities of keeping families at a manageable size.

Was chatting to a very elderly woman the other day on all the caffufles about it. Regarding the right wing noise and politicking about birth control she said

Backhouse,

As an ex-catholic I do struggle with the issue. When I was younger I was very pro-choice and an ex-catholic. However, since I've grown older I learned the beauty in life. Should a miracle happen and I become fertile again, I'd struggle with that decision. Depending on the options. I'd have to make so very tuff decisions. I remember having a patient whose baby was born with anencephaly (no brain). She went through so much turmoil during her pre-natal period. her counselor had advised her to abort.

I worked maternity the day she delivered. It was very, very painful for her since her baby did die while on my shift. That was was one of the most painful, emotional, periods in my career ; especially trying to console her.

This woman made her choice. Likewise, every woman should have a choice. Personally, if I had to make a choice as serious as hers I probably would abort. On the hand, if the prognosis is positive maybe I'd go full term and put the child up for adoption because I know so many women cannot conceive and would love a beautiful baby.

Essentially, I think the church and republicans should stay out of people lives when a choice such as life is so critical to one's self -determination and destiny.

GOP can't really come to terms with this job number and you're seeing it play out even on this blog. The high employment rate which once look like their only hope seems crushed.

The really good news here involves the trend represented in the numbers, and it is the word "trend" that gives the 'Wingers so much trouble. They just cannot comprehend the word since it involves another word they cannot comprehend, and that's "future". They just can't accept the concept since they only think in the past. Once again, the world is picking up speed as it zooms by them. BYE, BYE, 'wingers!

Speaker Boehner--and those "bi-partisan jobs bills" would be the ones defunding needed programs, the ones with little "GOP tidbits" for special interests, the ones cutting thousands of federal government jobs, etc? Why haven't you, Speaker Boehner, and your GOP caucus joined democrats to eliminate corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks to big oil, big coal, subsidies for corporate jets--you know, those loopholes that only the biggest "small" businesses get, only the wealthiest firms receive? President Obama signed into law some 16 different tax breaks for genuine "small businesses" back when the democrats were in charge. What have you done for the economy, Speaker Boehner, GOPers except help block every effort by democrats the past three years including the American Jobs Act that has an overwhelming support of voters.

sfcret

Backhouse, Do the math, under Bush the debt increased by 4.9T, remember that was in 8 yrs, under Obama the debt ceiling will exceed 16T after 4 yrs. (using your numbers currently 4.7T in 3 yrs, equals l.8T per yr compared to GWB's 6.1B per year).

But what you fail yoo realise is that the unfunded mandates such as medicade part D along with the war funding is causing it to go up and up. these cost that the president had nothing to do with is causing the debt to rise everyday that congress is not increasing and kind of tax to off set it. also when in a recession as people draw unemployment along with food stamps because they are NOT working, in addition to the baby boomers retiring 10k everyday is putting a real strain on the Debt.

so in the end if Bush funds the wars, Medicaid part d and does not cut tax as much as he did during war time(1st pres to ever do that) we would not be having this conversation, would we.

Bev, thank you for this story.

Later on today or tonight, will reply to you in the mail.

I'm glad to see the numbers improving even though I am not a fan of Obama's handling of the economy (I do like his stance on social issues like gay marriage).

Personally, I feel the economy is succeeding in spite of Obama's policies, but that's just me...I realize others feel differently, and with something as complex as the US economy, I don't think anyone can state definitively one way or another.

American, no the Senate did not vote to defeat the AJA as President Obama submitted it. Harry Reid made changes to it before putting it to the Senate. The GOP Senators filibustered it, and filibustered the very pieces of it (except one for Veterans, how could they filibuster that)--the legislation never made it to the Senate floor for a vote because of the filibuster. If no filibuster, AJA passed by majority vote.

Three point seven million private sector jobs created in the last twenty-three months.

That's more than during the entire eight years of the previous Administration.

Romney must be mad. "Investors" do better when times are tough and they can buy up companies and foreclosed houses on the cheap.

The last time the housing market crashed - the incumbent President was re-elected - several times. Our current 'recession' has more in common with 1936 than with 1984. The President of 1936 was in the midst of correcting a lot of bad policy that promoted making money from money. The President of 1984 abandoned support for creating wealth and again promoted Republican policies to make money from money - so he could be re-elected.

The Republicans are, indeed, worried that their policies to gamble our way to prosperity are under scrutiny. The country understands that subsidizing the 'idle rich' has not benefited the nation. The United States has become a smaller, weaker, divided nation by allowing Republican favoritism of the 'idle rich'.

Even if Obama loses the coming election - the spotlight of national outrage will continue to shine on the failed Republican economic policies of favoring the 'idle rich' - of gambling our way to prosperity. The Republican philosophy of 'take from the poor - give to the rich' cannot stand. President Obama - and the American people - have already won. The election is really not that important any longer.

This great news for ALL americans regardless of political party affiliation. When the unemployment rate drops Repugnicans complain that Obama isn't doing enough? this is great considering that in the last three months of 2008 (yes under BUSH 2) monthly job losses averaged ~590K which continued into 2009 (Jan '09 = 590K). I think Obama's and the Dem's initiatives, despite lockstep teaPublican obstructionism, have proven effective.

Economic policies (both bad and good) take time to show their effectiveness... it is not like switching on a light. I do not agree with all of the Dem's policies but atleast the job's picture is improving for Americans... How is that a bad thing?

AMF

Beverly, beautifully said. I think you express what many of us believe. I am pro-choice because I believe it is not up to me to decide what is best for someone else; I do not walk in that person's shoes. It is a very personal decision that should be between a woman, her God and her doctor.

Bev you and Feisty are gonna have to start your own talk show. Ya'll crack me up!!! Keep up the good fight.

OBAMA IN 2012

70+ SEATS DEMS IN THE SENATE

CONTROL OF THE HOUSE

Popcorn...Teapubs?

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

My Mama always said; "There are certain people who would cry they are hungry with a loaf of bread under each arm".

Perfect description of the modern day GNOP!

As Hillary famously said; 'President Obama could walk on water and the GNOP would complain he can't swim'!

Bottom line is - unemployment IS coming down ever so slowly, and we should ALL be thankful for that!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the very next post.....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Buck Naked Sr

yea, but the deficit is out of control, especially in Illinois.

Theres the proof to what you said right there..... Sad but so true feisty

Nice work there Backhouse, it never ceases to amaze me, how many there are who cheer for the fact that the jobless number didn't go up, yet at the same time declare themselves to be so patriotic......somewhere there is a disconnect, I see it others see it, but the self declared patriots not so much.

That's because of the illogical, blind hatred of Obama from the right. These people would rather see the entire country collapse than EVER give this man a shot at a second term. Patriots my ass.

lum, I am a registered DEM not gop.

Jeff,

The little word "if" if only this or that things might be different, we will never know. You have to play the hand dealt, and remember Obama said if he couldn't get the economy turned around he would be a one term president. Also remember Obama was a Senator during the last two years of the Bush presidency so he had an idea what was going on.

I have an old saying about the word 'IF', It goes like this " IF the dog had not stopped to take a crap, he would have caught the rabbit." So be very careful about that little word "if".

For you wanna be Teapub clowns on here that didn't get the memo and are still spouting talking points on how this President has increased the debt more than any president in US history here are some facts:

The first two full fiscal years of the Obama presidency have seen unprecedented decreases in deficits: more in two years, after adjusting for inflation, than in Truman's eight years, and twice as much as in Clinton's eight years. If this trend were to continue -- and I don't know how likely that is -- the Federal budget would run a substantial surplus in fiscal 2014-2015.

The first seven years of the G.W. Bush presidency increased the deficit by almost twice as much as the 32 years from JFK through G.H.W.Bush combined, and somewhat more than the 24 years from Harding through FDR combined (in inflation-adjusted dollars).

If one includes fiscal year 2008-2009 as part of the G.W. Bush administration (consistent with my treatment of all other administrations), that administration oversaw 3.5 times as much increase in Federal budget deficits as Presidents Kennedy through G.H.W.Bush put together.

Obviously, many of the reasons a deficit grows or shrinks are beyond the President's control: Congress, the economy, the beginning or ending of a war, the beginning or ending of a recession, etc. For example, the beginning of World War II can be blamed for much of FDR's increase in the deficit, just as the end of World War II and the start of the post-war economic boom can be credited for much of Truman's matching decrease. I'm not sure what happened to Ford: he faced an economic recession, but so have many Presidents.

At least in my lifetime, Republican Presidents have placed high priority on cutting taxes, and placed lower priority on (or had less success at) cutting spending. Democratic Presidents have perhaps had equal success at cutting spending (I haven't researched those numbers), but have not been bound by any promises to cut taxes.

OBAMA IN 2012

70+ SEATS FOR DEMS IN THE SENATE

CONTROL OF THE HOUSE

That sucking sound you hear are Teapubs being flush down the toilet.

american-2051576

Backhouse - didn't the senate vote overwhelmingly to defeat the AJA as originally proposed by obama?

Interesting that you like to bury your head in the ground since thed last jobs bill of any type received bipartisan support in december 2010. Speaking about obstructionist, when is senate majority reid going to stop ignoring house passed bills and FY budgets?

No, the AJA never came up for a vote. What "jobs bill" was that? Extension of the tax cuts? BTW, a budget was passed in December, try again.

sfcret

Backhouse, Do the math, under Bush the debt increased by 4.9T, remember that was in 8 yrs, under Obama the debt ceiling will exceed 16T after 4 yrs. (using your numbers currently 4.7T in 3 yrs, equals l.8T per yr compared to GWB's 6.1B per year).

You need to recheck your math. the debt under Bush increased by $6.1 Trillion. On 30 Sep 2001, at the end of Clinton's last budget the debt was $5.8 trillion, on 30 Sep 2009, the end of the last budget for Bush, it was $11.9 Trillion. The debt has increased by $3.4 Trillion under Obama in three years. Why do you wingnuts always want to pin the FY 2009 deficit on Obama? It was passed and signed a month before he was elected. And, the CBO estimated it the deficit caused by that budget would be $1.3 trillion, in Jan 2009, before Obama was sworn in.

You had to know that the right-wingers here would be doing anything to discredit the numbers.

I don't care. I only need 2 facts to know how to vote in November:

1. In the last 2 years there have been 2.8 million new jobs created.

2. In the last 2 months of Bush's administration America lost 1.5 million jobs. And it didn't stop there.

raddave - FY 2012 started oct 1, 2011 not december, or do you like CR's?

You deny that their wasn't a major piece of legislation that passed in december 2010? You remember the bush tax cuts were extended and became the obama tax cuts. Unemployment benefits were extended and payroll taxes were lowered. Then there were the tax cuts, incentives and credits given to businesses. All received bipartisan support and the bill was touted as a means to stimulate the economy and promote job growth.

From wikipedia...

On October 11, the bill was voted on in the Senate where it failed to garner the
necessary sixty votes to proceed.

Care to try again radave?

EEngineer, that's cool, but I do believe you have a short in your cicuits if that is all you are concerned about.

It is good to hear that some progress has been made regarding unemployment. To date this administration's performance has been much less than promised. What about our huge trade deficit? The President promised that the 2012 deficit will not exceed 229.27 billion dollars. How much progress is being made on the President's promise?

To be accurate, Bush didn't blow $6 trillion dollars off of the Treasury. The real damage is much more frightening. When Bush took office, he had an estimated $5.6 trillion dollar surplus (from 2000 to 2010). Even after the recession of 2001, Bush could still count on at least $4 trillion. Unfortunately, he blew off the surplus on tax cuts that weren't really necessarily (he could have simply spent $200 billion in expansionary spending during the recession over perhaps two years), an unfunded Medicare plan, AND two unnecessary wars. Essentially, Bush increased the debt by $6 trillion, but in actuality, he cost the United States over $10 trillion (with a "t") in tax cuts, costly wars, debt, interest, etc. That includes the reversal of the planned surplus. So if Obama spent about $3.7 trillion in his three years, he'd STILL beat Bush's $10 trillion plus in eight. So, to all those right wingers complaining that Obama is on track to spend more than Bush, you might need to check your math...

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS 2012

And Feisty, the popcorn is great!!!

Freshiee - come again? $5.6 trillion surplus? How droll...

Check the CBO estimates in 2000. The surplus was not for 2000 (obviously), but over the next 9 or 10 years.

Freshieee, You do know that estimates are not actual facts, don't you. The CBO estimates are just that, estimates, the CBO figures didn't fore see 9/11, Katrina and the wars.

Raddave, I was using the figures presented by Jeff, even using your figures Obama is increasing the debt by 1.3T a year and is on track to hit 2T per year, while Bush increased it by 7.6B a year. Get your facts straight.

Bush could not increase it by $7.6 billion a year and still have the debt skyrocket to $11 trillion in 2009 from $5 trillion in 2000. He increased the debt tremendously; at least $700 billion a year. Plus you have to add interest costs.

True, the CBO figures didn't foresee 9/11 (even though the costs unrelated to the two wars wouldn't have put us in a deficit), Katrina (nor would the damages and economic losses for that plunge us into the red alone, or even when added to 9/11 costs), or wars. Yet they do provide the American people with the frustrating concept that had Bush avoided making expensive mistakes concerning tax policy, healthcare, and foreign policy, we probably wouldn't be in this fiscal mess and we would have much more leeway in helping the economy through more stimulus bills and additional tax cuts for the middle class.

But now we must deal with the problems that the GOP created. And I highly doubt that Republicans have realized their erroneous ways are willing to adopt a more common-sense economic approach.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Anybody who believes any number that comes out of Washington is extremely naive, dont you people know that they dont count the same way that regular people do. Anybody who could spend 500 last year, and 1000 this year, and say that because they wanted to spend 1500 but only spent 1000, and calls it a 500 dollar cut doesnt balance their checkbook the way the rest of us do.

And this isnt even counting the 1.1 trillion for this year.

When President Obama took office two years ago, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. It now stands at $14.071 trillion — a staggering increase of $3.445 trillion in just 735 days (about $5 billion a day).

To put that into perspective, when President George W. Bush took office, our national debt was $5.768 trillion. By the time Bush left office, it had nearly doubled, to $10.626 trillion. So Bush's record on deficit spending was not good at all: During his presidency, the national debt rose by an average of $607 billion a year. How does that compare to Obama? During Obama's presidency to date, the national debt has risen by an average of $1.723 trillion a year — or by a jaw-dropping $1.116 trillion more, per year, than it rose even under Bush. Bush ran up an average of $410 billion in deficit spending per year, while Obama is running up an average of $1.413 trillion in deficit spending per year — or $1.003 trillion a year more than Bush.

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/25/133211508/the-weekly-standard-obama-vs-bush-on-debt

Then again, Obama's deficits were high mostly because of the recession, and we all know that balancing the budget during a recession is economic suicide. We learned that the hard way in 1937 with a DEMOCRATIC president. I wonder how come the GOP haven't learned that even though they criticized FDR for the 1937 recession and claim to be "experts" when it comes to the American economy.

And Feisty, the popcorn is great!!!

Freshiee - I am so glad you are enjoying it!

Here's a cold one to wash it down with! ;o)

As predicted, when the unemployment benefits run out people go back to work. If you subsidize unemployment, you get unemployment. If you pay the masses to do something, generally they will.

Chip D-2844144

If the economy was turning around, why than did the FED promise not to raise rates until 2014... I mean come on you all have PHD's in eonomics you should know what that means!

==========

...Yes, reasonalby astute people realize what that means, it means that perhaps, unlike you, they are intelligent enough to realize that they don't want to choke off a growing, yet still fragile, economy, the way the GOP Congress did in 1937. Maybe you are a PHD, but certainly not in economics nor history. Your obviously weak argument was quite disingenuous.

that's right Amy, even secretary of labor hilda solis was reserved on her take of the numbers when asked by bloombergTV for comment. We will just have to wait to see how it trends out.

Amy B. Portland, ME

I saw Larry Summers on a morning show, and he was surprisingly muted in his reaction. Summers was very cautious and stressed the long road ahead to recovery. Looks like the Obama administration doesn't want to overplay this, but these numbers are very good.

That is probably true. President Obama has a tendency to keep his accomplishments and plans close to his vest too. He did it with Bin Laden and the Somali pirates. He sat there through all the festivities in both cases.

Also...

Obama Keeps His Job Even If You Lose Yours

[snip]

But a high unemployment rate, by itself, isn't necessarily a problem for an incumbent president, according to Ray Fair, a Yale University economist who has analyzed the impact of the economy on presidential elections back to 1916.

"What the data show is that it's the change in the economy, primarily in the year of the election, that matters — not the level," he said.

So far, the trend is moving in the right direction. But it could easily be derailed by this fall.

Fair's current forecasts show a very close race. But his models show that Obama still stands a good chance of re-election even with a relatively modest drop in the unemployment rate by November.

"When they go to the booth, voters would see this as a positive sign: Obama's got the economy growing again," said Fair. "Even though the unemployment rate is higher than full employment, the trend is good and things are improving."

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/02/10291640-obama-may-keep-his-job-even-if-you-lose-yours

***************************************************************************

It is true in the wildest sense, as I see it, because the American people are tried of the Republican Congress as indicated by the polls. Most of American can see the President is trying and will give him the re-election. Plus, they like him and his beautiful family .

YES, ♥ ♥ ♥ it. Whoa-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh!!!

Nobody but Obama

Obama/ Biden2012

8.3% P-U-R, nice job with no thanks to the GOP Teapugs !!!!

Unemployment fell? How many dropped off the roles? Liberals can cheer on the president while those that dropped off the roles and no longer get unemployment benefits will not be cheering very soon. This president is still net negative on job creation... Liberals will blindly believe everything they hear as long as it comes out of the White House during this presidency.

Amy, taking this cautiously is the smart thing to do. There are too many risk factors that can change the job data. Housing is still in the gutters with a flood of foreclosures, so those new jobs do not necessarily mean higher income. If the job data proves to be stableand consumer spending ticks up that might be a better indicator of improvement. Let alone the external factors, such as crisis in the Euro zone, potential fluctuations in oil production, or a new conflict with Iran or Pakistan, just to name a few that can push us back into recession.

Brian,

The jobs report was probably the best in over 4 years. A very positive indicator is the increase in average hours worked because this is an indicator of future hiring. As many of the analysts discovered, very few dropped out of the job market. This time the drop was due to the correction to Nov, Dec and the annual correction to the prior year (2011) which accounted for the addition of an additional 225,000 jobs for a total of over 465,000 jobs added.

Part of the "no drama Obama" philosophy, Amy. I'm sure they know that there will be ups and downs as the recovery moves along, especially when the people who have left the job market re-enter. The trend is positive and that is heartening.

Patriotic American - You are praising 8.3% unemployment??? Weren't you complaining when the unemployment rate was 5.3% under Bush? Weren't you one of the liberals that said 5.3% was way too high? Now you think 8.3% deserves the praise of the president?

I think the liberals forget what we conservatives remember.

Dennis - While I am very happy for those that have obtained jobs... it is they that deserve the praise for sticking with it, keeping at it and finally winning entry into the positions they now hold. They are the ones that are praiseworthy. I understand how the system works.

The president deserves zero praise. He hasn't done anything to reverse any of his policies. This time, jobs are happening regardless of what the president does, other than establish his agenda... and so far his agenda has been net negative for a very long time. Unemployment is always attributed to the president, but so is the rate of inflation, the interest rates and many other indicators. The government has done everything they can to isolate the president from appearing like bad news is surrounding him. It's very typical in a re-election year.

Dennis,

I heard 1.2 million dropped out of the job market last month (largest absolute monthly increase ever), and the labor participation rate dropped to 63.7% (lowest in 30 years).

Here are the sources I found (btw, the second one is far too rightwing for me and I think their graphs are deceptive, but the numbers are the key point):

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/record-12-million-people-fall-out-labor-force-one-month-labor-force-participation-rate-tumbles-

The Republicans will continue to preach the big lies.

Ron,

Your second source is not adjusted for seasonality thus is not valid for the purpose of the official BLS unemployment report.

My account came from FOX Business, CNN and CNBC - they all used the adjusted numbers as they should.

Dennis,

Thanks for the info! It will be interesting to see how things play out over the rest of the year. Like I said in another post, I'm not a fan of Obama's economic policies, but I'll be happy if they work (I'm an independent, so that's all that really matters to me).

Republicans hate good news even more than they hate Preaident Obama.

I cant wait until we get to the general election, this place will make comedy central look like a piker palace.

Brian, Are you an American? Are you glad that American automakers are gaining market share and making profits? Are you glad that unemployment is dropping and employment is rising? Apparently, you are spouting statistics that you somehow interpret as negative. Is it only political victories that concern you? You somehow feel bad because fewer Americans are out of work. Is that about it?

Brianb-999 - as I said, the GOP will NEVER give Obama credit. Amazingly you credited him - not long ago with the loss of so many jobs. Yet today you say he is in no way responsible for the addition of jobs. Why does that not surprise me. He could totally get everyone jobs and you still would hate him. It's what you do. It's why you wake up each day. If you couldn't hate this man your life would have no purpose. Totally pathetic and so easy to see right through. Why don't you just go worship your Mitt or Newt - they hate everything too. You're a perfect fit!

I think the liberals forget what we conservatives remember.

Nope! I remember:

1. national debt doubling under Bush.

2. finding WMDs in Iraq - oh wait, no I don't!

3. economy tanking and Bush rushing through a $700B bailout of the very institutions that helped cause the mess in the first place.

4. losing 1.5 million jobs in the last two months of Bush's 2nd term

Do any conservatives remember these? Hell, I don't think they even know how to spell Bush anymore. They would be real happy if no one else could remember Bush either. But we do; we all do.

EE, Best put your memory hat back on...

1. national debt doubling under Bush.

Yet he had bipartisan support for afghanistan and iraq, especially after 9/11

His tax cuts were across the board for all income groups and were intended to counteract the 2000/2001 recession. They even had an expiration date attached. Interesting that congressional democrats didn't oppose it or seek to end it earlier, nor did obama.

Medicare part D, just try taking that away from those getting it. BTW - both the right and left up untill 2010 embraced the concept of "deficits don't matter" and obama still does.

2. finding WMDs in Iraq - oh wait, no I don't

Follow logic, Saddam used wmd's in the iraq-iran war, he used them against the kurds, he hindered inspection teams from doing a continuous and thorough search to verify that he no longer had them and his rhetoric against his neighbors and coalition forces implied that he would use wmd's again. Seems a safe assumption that they existed in 2002. Then again hindsight is always 20/20.

3. economy tanking and Bush rushing through a $700B bailout of the very institutions that helped cause the mess in the first place.

Yep, and the democrat controlled house and senate just let him do it. Shlt, the democrats wrote the legislation and bush signed it. We were lucky that he didn't threaten to veto it like obama threatens the right with a veto today.

I don't suppose you think that the housing bubble and easy consumer credit had anything to do with the economic downturn do you? The congressional democrats must have been on vacation right?

Don't you find it interesting that recessions are cyclical in nature and no one has developed a plan to avoid them?

4. losing 1.5 million jobs in the last two months of Bush's 2nd term

What recession doesn't create job loss?

Do any conservatives remember these?

Of course we do, we also remember...

someone campaigning on "hope and change"

shovel ready jobs

The laser focus on jobs and the economy that ended when the 2009 stimulas was passed.

Obama not consulting with congressional minority leaders at the WH untill 2010.

Obama ignoring his chief os staff emmanual on how to get healthcare reform with minimal objections. Who can forget pelosi telling the house it was so good that it didn't need to be read.

Who can forget obama forming a bipartisan debt commission and then ignoring it with an anemic $1.1 trillion 10 year debt reduction plan with his suggested FY 2012 budget? or his job creation committee of business leaders.

Then we have his campaigning (psuedo policy sells) since the 2010 midterms.

We remember his encouragement of civil chaos in sovereign nations with the famous phrase of "_____— must go!" or telling the russian populace that they need to protest the way the russian votes were carried out. Such diplomacy.

I wonder if our heelo didn't crash in the bin laden compound we would have heard obama publicly admit that the US violated a sovereign nations airspace to assassinate a truly despicable character? My guess would be no.

yep, obama ignored S&P's downgrade warning and proceeded with "business as usual" Such leadershio!

Yeh EE we remember as do many others

The thing is EE, that we need to move forward and address our debt.

Job1

The Republicans will continue to preach the big lies.

As will the democrats. They will tell you that Obama hasnt spent a dime, that Bush sneaked into the WH and ran the deficit up and then blamed it on Obama.

Saddam may have had WMDs, but he probably got rid of them before the UN inspectors came, probably by just using them. And what right did the United States have in invading Iraq??? Did the people ask for it??? Maybe, but then again we backed the Kurds in the 80s and then abandoned them to Saddam's vicious army. The war was unnecessary; in fact, I say that it was merely a grab at Iraq's oil.

Steve, even liberals know that the Democrats preach lies, as do all political parties. But the Republicans are more entrenched in lies then the Democrats, especially since the GOP cries class warfare while its party advocates major cuts in safety nets and entitlements while offering huge tax breaks to millionaires. That is the real class warfare. Its a pity the GOP's followers have been brainwashed by the Orwellian propaganda that is less taxes, less government, less bureaucracy.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

GOP DESTROYED 2012

I'd like to wake up and learn all Republicans migrated to TX and the entire state slid southward.

Especially since that 2,200,000 jobs were created while they've controlled the house... and we lost 6,700,000 during the 4 years the Dem's controlled the house.

The kicker is that we created more jobs the last 13 months with the GOP controlling the house at a cost of $0, than the total number of jobs created by the Stimulus that will cost us $1,000,000,000,000 of debt.

Chip D - I can dispute your numbers, but your underlying premise of your second paragraph is kind of right. I will present the caveat though that after the 2009 stimulus funds ran out in 2010, the only stimulus offered in 2010 was the year end payroll tax cuts, extension of the bush tax cuts and the misc business tax credits that were passed with bipartisan support.

With the 2011 gridlock between obama and congress, I would be hesitant to give either side or obama credit for growth in 2012. Seems far more likely that if we have continued growth in 2012 it will because the gridlock kept the politicians from meddling in the recovery. IE, keep the government out of the way.

Wow! Listen to the liberals now.

::ROLL TAPE BACKWARD 5 YEARS::

Impeach Bush

Illegal Wars created by Bush

Worst economy in history - ALL Bush's fault

Iraq war is a failed war

Bush sucks

Now we are complaining about how Obama is hurting this country, a couple of small things happen and the liberals want us to praise Obama, after listening to them complain for over 7 years. Ain't gonna happen liberals. Obama is the worst president we've had... will continue to be the worst president and he is responsible for the current state of the economy... suck it up.. it's reality!

Chip,,your either real dumb or your're living in another country,,,wow!!

With the 2011 gridlock between obama and congress, I would be hesitant to give either side or obama credit for growth in 2012.

Hey american 205 - A pretty fair post. For whatever reason, I am happy that the economy has improved and there is less unemployment. Perhaps this is just a cyclical timing phenomena, a long needed uptick.

For all those that keep crowing about where are the jobs and who created the jobs something to consider. None of Obama's policies where enacted in the AJA. No new stimulus, no new infrastructure repair, no new spending due to GOP blocking. The only thing that passed were additional tax cuts. Tax cuts the solution to every problem per the GOP mantra. Tax cuts that are not sustainable and tax cuts that will bloat our deficit. Tax cuts that will swell our debt. The idea that Obama is a far left socialist that the GOP claim is absurd. He is relying too much on a GOP plan that while possibly a short term fix, will be a long term wreck.

These tax cuts will be our undoing, not just talking about the ones on the rich. In the short run perhaps tax cuts have bribed business into hiring, however they will continue to demand more tax cuts to keep hiring.

What comes next? Both sides will say we have to keep these cuts in place to not hurt the economy. Next will be another drive to continue the 2 month social security tax holiday to make them permanent and continue to short change the SS fund. In addition, to shore up the base Obama will pledge to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, again. The only difference will be Obama will want to tax the 1%, while Romney will not. Both don't get it, we all, everyone, need to lose our tax cuts.

The right always says once spending on an entitlement is put in place it never goes away. It could be said the same about tax cuts. Once a tax cut goes into effect even if it is temporary it is never rescinded. To make an analogy, the tax cuts are like pain killers at first they may be beneficial but if continued forever they become a bane for a recovering addict. Perhaps they were once needed to relieve pain, but now the addict needs more and more to function.

Ready for your next pain pill?

Yea......American got it right!

BrianB- it just kills you to realize President Obama will be listed in history as one of our best President's ever while little George will always be the worst. I would so hate to be someone like you!

Comment author avatarBrianb-999431

Wow! Listen to the liberals now.

::ROLL TAPE BACKWARD 5 YEARS::

Impeach Bush

Illegal Wars created by Bush

Worst economy in history - ALL Bush's fault

Iraq war is a failed war

Bush sucks

Now we are complaining about how Obama is hurting this country, a couple of small things happen and the liberals want us to praise Obama, after listening to them complain for over 7 years. Ain't gonna happen liberals. Obama is the worst president we've had... will continue to be the worst president and he is responsible for the current state of the economy... suck it up.. it's reality

Bush should have been impeached, after it was revealed that he had lied about WMDs in Iraq and about the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda. And, it was an illegal war and should have been brought up on war crime charges. In 2006, the economy wasn't sucking and no one was calling it the worst economy ever. And, how can Obama be responsible for the current state of the economy when he inherited a sinking ship from Bush?

Brianb:

A couple of small things...really. There is nothing small about a financial recession much much worst than an economic recession and much harder to recover.

Or may be it is about "A couple of small things" like:

Osama Bin Laden is no longer a threat to the US

He committed to phasing out unnecessary and outdated weapons systems, and also signed the Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act to stop waste, fraud and abuse in the defense procurement and contracting system. http://bit.ly/hOw1t1 http://bit.ly/fz8GAd

Through an executive order, he created the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. http://bit.ly/hwKhKa

*Improving the Economy, Preventing Depression

He pushed through and signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, otherwise known as “the stimulus package,” despite the fact that not one Republican voted for that bill. In addition, he launched recovery.gov, so that taxpayers could track spending from the Act. http://1.usa.gov/ibiFSs http://1.usa.gov/e3BJMk

In his first year, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act created and sustained 2.1 million jobs and stimulated the economy 3.5%. http://reut.rs/i46CEE

He completed the massive TARP financial and banking rescue plan, and recovered virtually all of its costs. http://1.usa.gov/eA5jVS http://bit.ly/eCNrD6

He created the Making Home Affordable home refinancing plan. http://1.usa.gov/goy6zl

He also doubled funding for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership which is designed to improve manufacturing efficiency. http://bit.ly/eYD4nf

He signed the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act giving the federal government more tools to investigate and prosecute fraud in every corner of the financial system. It also created a bipartisan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission to investigate the financial fraud that led to the economic meltdown. http://abcn.ws/g18Fe7

He signed the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act, which was designed to to protect consumers from unfair and deceptive credit card practices. http://1.usa.gov/gIaNcS

He signed the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, expanding on the Making Home Affordable Program to help millions of Americans avoid preventable foreclosures. The bill also provided $2.2 billion to help combat homelessness, and to stabilize the housing market. http://bit.ly/eEpLFn

Through the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009, he and Congressional Democrats provided tax credits to first-time home buyers, which helped the U.S. housing market recovery. http://bit.ly/dZgXXw http://bit.ly/gORYfL

He initiated a $15 billion plan designed to encourage increased lending to small businesses.
http://1.usa.gov/eu0u0b

He created a $60 billion bank to fund infrastructure improvements such as roads and bridges. http://bit.ly/e1SSaQ

He implemented an auto industry rescue plan, and saved as many as 1 million jobs. http://bit.ly/ibhpxr Many are of the opinion that he saved the entire auto industry, and even the economy of the entire Midwest. http://bit.ly/gj7mt5

Through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, he saved at least 300,000 education jobs, such as teachers, principals, librarians, and counselors that would have otherwise been lost. http://1.usa.gov/ez30Dc

Provided funding to states and the Department of Homeland Security to save thousands of police and firefighter jobs from being cut during the recession. http://bit.ly/g0IKWR

*Wall Street Reforms and Consumer Protection

Ordered 65 executives who took bailout money to cut their own pay until they paid back all bailout money. http://huff.to/eAi9Qq

He pushed through and got passed Dodd-Frank, one of the largest and most comprehensive Wall Street reforms since the Great Depression. http://bit.ly/hWCPg0 http://bit.ly/geHpcD

He made it so that banks could no longer use YOUR money to invest in high-risk financial instruments that work against their own customers’ interests. http://bit.ly/fnTayj

Way too many to list here.

OBAMA IN 2012

70+ SEATS FOR DEMS IN THE SENATE

CONTROL OF THE HOUSE

Hey Brianb....POPCORN?

Ron in Seattle - nice post!

Greetings yellowdog and thanks.

I know we agree on not extending the Obama (bush) tax cuts, ie, let them die across the board. At least I recall you saying this awhile back. I could even be persuaded to let them expire over 2 -3 years, but not more, and not without real spending cuts. Again your pain killer analogy can easily be applied to cuts as well. I would start with the discretionary part of the budget first before moving onto entitlements.

You are right in recognizing that our debt (vis a vie tax cuts) is becoming a problem and that politicians don't want to tell the populace the truth of what lies ahead.

We can either have a hard landing or a soft one.

I too am happy with todays report and hope that a positive trend develops.

--------------------

off topic - I see that texas is again projected to have a draught this year, even iowa may have one. I hope not, not fun at all. regards to you and yours.

jollyoldsoul, thanks.

Right

Just take a look at the end result of all those kind of policies you are so proud of. Can you see Europe?Just in case you haven't noticed, the EU is on the verge of Financial collapse. There are riots in the streets of Italy and Greece because niether of those governments can keep the promises they have made to their citizenry in order to purchase their votes. Spain, that wonderful example of how a green energy policy could transform a country and create millions of jobs now has 20% unemployment and the government is unable to pay it's bills. Why is it that you and Obama think you can do the same thing that has been done in the EU but have a different outcome. Do you not understand that is dillisional? Doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of Insanity.

If the EU were successful you could point to the recent small improvements in unemployment as encouraging news. But because we have the real world example of the EU for us to learn from. We can see clearly that any improvement Obama creates is only going to be temporary. The long term impact of these policies is clearly visable in Spain, Italy, Greece and France. The real issue is not unemployment it is DEBT. Anybody can purchase a temporary rise in unemployment. The course Obama has us on is NOT SUSTAINABLE. Europe which has been pursuing these socialist polcies the longest is absolute proof of that. Stop believing the LIE obama is telling you. Take a look around and the real world and discover what is happening.

yep phine, neither side wants to address those who are long term unemployed.

Nor can obama or any politician take credit for these numbers, both congress and the WH were in lockdown during 2011 and likely to be in 2012 as well. I give the credit to the bipartisan supported stimulus passed in dec 2010 and the consumer

american,

And a lot of those unemployed are over 50. They are going to have a hard time getting hired (shhh, age discrimination).

phine - True, it will be hard to prove age discrimination when there are 4 or more applicants per job and many jobs require skill sets that those over 50 don't have. Those in their early 60's have an even worse dilema, accept lower SS payback with early retirement or spend their savings in hope of employment down the road..

Always glad to hear good job numbers and I hope this continues. Still concerned about the unemployed in my area. Manufacturing still losing jobs here. Company did manufacturing for Chrysler.

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/harman-becker-plant-in-washington-mo-to-close-costing-jobs/article_408f2f5a-3ac0-11e1-a263-0019bb30f31a.html

A lot of those long termed unemployed no longer have the skills to compete in the jobs market. Some are unable to swivel in a fast moving world and learn a new skill. Some become discouraged, especially if they are near retirement. Some can't afford to move for many reasons, not just that their home maybe underwater, kids in school, a spouse in a job that has good prospects for them.

In the end, there are signs that the future is becoming better, it is helping to improve lives, and for the fortunate, we should be happy.

It is up to each of us to help things get better, contact your representative, ask them to do better, ask them to stop playing politics with the lives of every day Americans. Take what happened in the past few days regarding the Komen Foundation, public pressure works....when many push back, they too have to respond. Or, we vote them out.

phine ... I lost my job two weeks after my 61st birthday. Corporate raider The Janas Group (aka Jana's Piranhas) bought into the company for which I worked and within a few months thousands of jobs disappeared from here and reappeared in India, the Philippines, and Colombia. Even with a depth of experience and appropriate skill sets, the unspoken "age/overqualified" bias was obvious.

Proud of you for not "biting" on the earlier posts. Hope you didn't bite a hole in your tongue.

Phine...... I am agreeing with you again, I just recommended a interviewee for a position and hope he is hired. He has been out of work for 2 years and never mentioned one negitive thing about it. He also did not brag about how smart he was and never mentioned his university (Michigan State) once in the interview. And the kicker......he is older than I am. I hope his background checks out. This guys a real team player and does not have a chip on his shoulder.

That's the problem in America: while the rest of the world values age and seniority (in a candidate for a job), we don't. It's probably because we want young people with fresh ideas and a vigorous stamina. Not that people advanced in age don't have that, but employers are just not that open. Does it hurt America, slightly. But it is not a major problem. Still, I can remember the days when my father tried applying for a transfer to a better position, but was turned down in favor of a more "youthful" candidate.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

So noid, don't you think we can do better? Weren't we in a virtual gridlock last year between obama and congress?

And we will remain so even if Obama is re-elected. Assuming he wins, one cannot believe that magic pixie dust is going to get sprinkled on Congress and they magically begin to pass his reforms. On the other side of the coin, I don't beleive Romney is going to do any better job. Until the debt is brought back into manageability, it will take a heck of a lot more created jobs to turn it all around.

Just what were we in last year american? There is a big difference between gridlock and obstruction. I understand how you guys love to revise history but the truth is Obama can take most of the credit for the improvement. remember the Americans Jobs Act and expansion of the payroll tax cuts in 2011? That was Obama.

We can definitely do better, but not by going back to the Republican rule that broke the economy in the first place. Get Democratic control of the House back, get a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and then I'd believe we can really (and finally) see policies that push this country forwards. The fact that job losses during this administration all occurred at the beginning, while the coutnry was still reeling from the Bush recession, and have been improving since the President's policies that he has gotten through have been able to take effect should say a lot.

Thirty consecutive months of growth, in spite of the Republicans. Yeah, it could have been better.

king - I see no difference in definition between gridlock or obstruction. Nor do I think that obamas arrogance towards the right helped America to move forward in 2011.

Let's review shall we...

4th qtr 2010, a stimulas plan was passed with bipartisanship support that extended the bush tax cuts, that gave taxpayers a little more pocket money and tax incentives/credits/cuts for business.

Senate majority reid basically tabled (ignored) a lot of legislation passed by the house, including a FY2012 budget. Only a fool would argue that reid wasn't an obstructionist. There is nothing that dictates that the senate can't present alternatives to what the house proposes or vice versa.

Obama threatening veto action of house passed legislation didn't contribute to gridlock? Or publicly chastising the right on numerous occasions didn't as well?

The AJA, wasn't that rejected by a large bipartisan senate vote? Even democrats didn't like obamas plan, so what is your point?

Expanded 2011 payroll tax cuts.. oh yeh, the senate and obama wanted a two month extension the house wanted a full year. Looks like obama and the senate were more interested in a vacation than taking care of America.

FYI - The economy is not a light switch and no obama doesn't get credit for bipartisan supported legislation other than his signing the legislation. Regardless, the private sector gets the lions share of the credit, not the politicians.

SBparrothead - Oh yes, lets return to the democrat controlled house and senate of 2007 to 2011. We all know how well that worked out for America don't we?

American, only 3 Democrats voted against AJA, and two of them were DINOs. Reid voted against it so it could be fixed, to no avail. Maybe if your party would stop all of the obstructionism MAYBE we could get a deal on the damn fiscal and economic crisis. If Obama can summon up the courage to put entitlements and spending cuts on the table, why can't the GOP do the same thing with revenue increases??? And not paltry ones; revenue increases of at least $1 trillion??? I think it would be mighty fair to simply eliminate the Bush tax cuts FOR EVERYONE, match them with perhaps $2.5 trillion in cuts, and we have $6 trillion in deficit reduction. This could probably give us a surplus by at least 2015. Or is your party so beholden to the 1% that they can't even stand up to their constituents???

Oh, and at least during Obama's presidency Congress was getting things done, instead of now.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

DEMOCRATS 2012

It is so because we can clearly see the end result of Obama policies as they are achieving their long term consequences in Europe. If Eurpope were healthy and successful you could actually argue intelligently that we should give Obama more time. However since we can see where a longer period of time in pursuit of socialist policy has taken the EU, then it is time to actually deal with the reality that promising people free stuff to buy their votes is not a pathway to success. There are riots in the streets of Italy and Greece because the governments can not longer keep their promises. Spain has 20%+ unemployment (you remember Spain of course it was the example Obama held up in 2008 of how a country could transform itself by pursuing green energy policies....WELL he was exactly right, it is the example of what happens to a country that engages in these fantasyland policies. It is bankrupt. I am amazed that so many of you don't seem to be able to deal with reality. Stop beliveing the lie that Obama is telling you and take a look around at the real world. Even the Communist government in China learned that the way to have a successful economy and a healthy middle class was to encourage investment from the one Percenters, not to demonize them and confiscate their money but actually make it posssible for them to invest, make money and create jobs in the process.

There was no middle class in China prior to capitalist investment, there was no middle class in the USSR. There was universal poverty in both of those completely socialist countries. The EU is on the verge of financial collapse and the result of the collapse will be the destrution of the middle class and surprise surprise---universal poverty.

Obama is openly taking you down the road we can all see the end of. He can't do the same thing that was done in Europe and have different results, the fact that he thinks he can is very disturbing. Doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of Insanity.

Boyd, Spain doesn't have the same economy or population that we have. The US government raises more revenue than the entire Spanish GDP. That, and we have 10 times the population and a more diversified economy. That, and Spain used to prosper until the 2008 recession. Yes, I admit, the European welfare state has its drawbacks, but that doesn't mean that the welfare itself is a failed concept. I mean, if the United States invested more in green energy (both public and private capital), we could create tens of thousands of jobs. But it would require incentives and cracking down on the Chinese and their practices.

How is Obama and the Democrats taking us on the road to socialism??? The reason China is profiting is because foreign countries have moved much of their assets over there. That, and the Chinese have a huge saving stock, allowing them to invest huge amounts in technology. But back to the point: how are liberals like me taking America down the road to Communism??? I am gonna bet that you don't even know the basic concepts of communism. And we have been "encouraged" investment from the 1% for over 40 years. We have had our ups and downs, and now its time to change. You wanna know why our debt is so huge??? Because of stupid right-wing actions like massive tax cuts, unfunded spending binges, deregulation that damaged the economy, and trickle down economics!!!! Meanwhile, the 1% have started to invest LESS in America and more in China because Chinese workers are practically slaves with rough working conditions and low pay. You want us to go back to the working conditions of the 1920s??? With child labor??? How come you say the welfare state and progressive institutions are obsolete, and yet you still encourage trickle-down economics and it has failed??? And yet we STILL offer tax cuts that don't work because our tax rates are so damn low!!!!

At least Obama is admitting that the trickle-down theory is a failure??? And at least he is offering ideas that will actually work. Like tax incentives for companies to invest IN America, not to invest in general. And reforming the tax code to make it FAIR, so the middle class can grow again instead of being constrained by the upper class. The middle class is shrinking because our nation has neglected our safety nets, our healthcare, and our education in favor of reckless foreign adventures. Once we strengthen our safety net, reform healthcare to keep costs low, and improve our education, the companies will come back because the demand will be here and hopefully our nation won't tolerate more outsourcing. Apple doesn't employ a lot of people here because our education system SUCKS. But instead of fixing it and hopefully improving the economy, your buddy Bush wasted the surplus we had on some godforsaken nation in the Middle East!!!!!!

If you combined the progressive worker and social welfare-oriented welfare state with American capitalism (more regulation, innovative markets, domestic production), our economy will be stronger and our nation will improve. But if we keep following the antiquated trickle-down policies, within 30 years we won't have a middle class. We will have an oligarchy where the rich prosper while the remaining 90% of Americans struggle to live by in a right-wing Orwellian dystopia. That is what the GOP is proposing. If you want that, then fine. Watch while America dies. But if you want to middle class to grow, stop buying the right-wing crap and reject the failed concepts of low taxes, deregulated economies, small governments, and trickle-down economics.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

NO TO TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS

DEMOCRATS 2012

AMERICA 2012

MIDDLE CLASS 2012

WE ARE THE 99%

I am looking forward to improvement also. But beware statistics in an election year. If they aren't already, both parties should be very much aware of what you can do with statistics. The voting public should also be very much aware.

Look, we all know that this just chaps the GOP/TPer axxes. Their only hope of regaining the White House has always been about a bad economy and thats why they've done so much to keep unemployment high and the economy in the tank... We all know it was done purposefully by the GOP/TP, in an effort to regain the White House... Sorry, but we've all been watching you guys do this for 3 years,We aren't stupid (Well, the FOX tards are pretty ignorant to believe that propaganda). The point is, we all want to see what happens when we kick out all the Republican obstructionists from office. When the Democrats have a super-majority... We want to see how far we can go once we remove the obstruction. We are sick and tired of the far right/GOP/TP...we want you gone so we can get on with taking this country forward...OBAMA 2012.

Amen Tim + numbers, amen.

LMAO voting independent, it takes both sides and the WH to have gridlock. The only thing continued growth will show is that the private sector can recover best if government stays out of the way.

Anyone can temporarily create jobs by incurring $5 trillion in increased government debt. But because we now have $15 trillion in debt and none of us including the 1% has $15 trillion laying around to pay it back any improvement in this economy is only temporary. It isn't sustainable becuse eventually we have to pay back what is now so large we have no ability to pay. LOOK AT EUROPE. The financial collapse there is the inevitable result of continuing down the path that Obama has us on. He can't do the same thing that has been done in Europe and have a different result. Stop believing the lie he is telling you.

You are right. Trickle down didn't work for Reagan. It won't work now or ever.

What evidence do you have to back that statement up? By lowering tax rates on the producers we created the economic boom of the 90's. Come on, do you really think about this stuff or do you just repeat what you are told? The tech boom in the 90's was created during the 80's, when did Microsoft, and Apple start? When did HP, Intel, and others get involved in the PC manufacturing process? Where were these companies based? Then look at the 90's when Clinton sold us out to the Chinese and look where these companies are at now.

You have to think of it this way:

When the auto industry bailouts went through; it also saved dealerships, auto part makers/stores, and all positions related to autos. If the auto industry went under, so would all of those other businesses. Obama himself even said so.

That's trickle down economics.

If trickle down economics doesn't work, why is obama channeling it?

Think of what the basic premise of trickle down is and then think of how cash flows thru the economy.

Trickle down economics excludes involvement of the government. It assumes that private business and individuals will share their wealth by investment in the country. That is why it does not work, and never will. There is no benefit to do that other than to try to create more wealth for those that already have it. It is simply a notion that greed begets more greed for the benefit of the person with the money in the first place. At least when the government reinvests in the country it can be for the benefit of the people and not for the benefit of the government. Investors or job creators only do it, when they know it will benefit them. They are not in business for altruistic reasons. It is a phony Republican, right wing talking point.

Beyond.

Spending, taxation, and regulation affect the economy. A net increase of the sum of the three will mean less employment. What has happened is the full steam ahead of increasing regulation was stopped when the republicans gained control of the house in January 2011. We still are working through the batch of increased regulations that was passed before that. The new regulations will not be in full effect until the last installments of the HCL in 2014.

I think the better numbers are there because of the stop in creating further regulations. At the same time, I see other things that will crash what gains we think we have.

Many Teapublicans like DB Akron assert that there has been an explosion of regulations under Obama that impedes investment in the United States. This is utter hogwash.

An economist who was a senior advisor to both Reagan and Bush 1, Bruce Bartlett, reviewed several surveys of businesses in America that had either fired workers or weren't hiring them back and concluded that neither high taxes nor uncertainty about governmental regulation have strongly affected private investment and the jobs it produced during Obama's presidency, "Republicans . . . embrace the idea that government regulation is the principal factor holding back unemployment. They assert that Barack Obama has unleashed a tidal wave of new regulations, which has created uncertainty among businesses and prevents them from investing and hiring. No hard evidence is offered for this claim; it is simply asserted as self-evident and repeated endlessly throughout the conservative echo chamber. . . . [R]egulatory uncertainty is a canard invented by Republicans that allows them to use current economic problems to pursue an agenda supported by the business community year in and year out. In other words, it is a simple case of political opportunism, not a serious effort to deal with high unemployment."

Teapublicans keep repeating the same unfounded propaganda over and over again as if repeating it often enough will make it come true. The truth is that the Milton Friedman economic hoax has been shown to be a wealth transfer mechanism that enriches the upper class at the expense of everyone else. Despite the lofty rhetoric of "freedom," "liberty," and "responsible individuals," when fully implemented, deregulation, privatization and "trickle down" were always hoaxes.

Golly mike...

in both the 2011 and 2012 SOTU messages from obama he said he found over 500 regulations that would impede economic growth.

Nice that you think what obama says is hogwash...lol! If obama and company can find 500 regs that impede growth isn't it reasonable to identify 1000? 5000? Or more?

You do realize that 2 thousand pages of passed legislation translates into many, many thousands of pages of regulations, right? To think that obamacare and the financial reform act won't affect the way business does business is ludicrous, and the regs are still being written.

Regarding the tea party, you really don't expect us to believe that they are all in the 1% do you? Isn't the word TEA an acronym for Taxed Enough Already?

The TEA acronym is Taliban Enters America.

Excellent post Michael! I have also heard at least one report that Obama has promulgated fewer regulations in the first three years of his term than W. did in his first three years. Also, it appears that some industries were overdue for some painful regulations. For instance, over the past few years the mining industry seems hellbent to determine how many people will die if methane levels in coal mines are not monitored. It's an interesting experiment - with many deaths resulting. Moreover, the mortgage industry, with many misleading forms and unethical practitioners, was also overdue for some interference in the rampant fraud. Some fly by night medical firms, like one Romney's Bain Capital purchased, very much liked defrauding the government with phoney medicare claims. Of course, more regulation was needed - along with more pesky enforcement. Without all that "guvment interference" we could just let business steal and kill.

CORRECTION:

The RATE of unemployment DECREASE during economic recovery (from peak unemployment to minimum unemployment) is FASTER for Obama (0.745% / yr) than for Bush (0.570% / yr).

(I mis-calculated the days to years conversion)

John,

I am no economics professor, nor am I a statistician... but it sounds to me like you are talking all about "rates of change" rather than actual actual change in unemployment.

All I got from your post was that there is more volatility in the jobs numbers during Obama's term than during Bush's term and MORE VOLATILITY IS NOT GOOD. It speaks to uncertainty in the economy.

When you consider the fact that during Bush's term unemployment numbers were generally lower and there was less swing in those numbers vs. the larger unemployment numbers and more swing during Obama's time running the show... I think it speaks poorly of Obama's overall performance on this issue.

Your tactic of using rates of change to prove a point holds no water. Lower unemployment numbers that don't swing wildly are much better than higher numbers that do. A constant rate of change is much more preferred.

I am sorry sir, but I am not buying your argument.

volatility says that there is underlying problems, that leave investers a bit skittish, even thought they are starved for a long term solid outlook.

John, those that are underemployed or unemployed don't give a shlt on past statistics, their focus is on getting work.

DB - of course, which is why the stock market is up today! Do you even think before you type????

Rubbing salt in the wound is so great isn't it. Obama/Biden 2012

But what kind of jobs are being created? High tech, manufacturing, or service sector? Are many of these jobs being created as a result of highly skilled people just taking whatever they can to survive? Do not look at just the numbers but the substance in the decrease in unemployment. I suspect a lot of these jobs are being created by private companies re-absorbing jobs that are traditionally out sourced to other countries. Once the standard of living goes up for these foreign workers, its just cheaper to move those jobs back to the U.S. These are private companies that the governement has very little direct influence over so giving Obama the credit for this, is short sighted.

ChuckinOlathe - it has been reported that these are good middle to high level jobs. You gave Obama the credit when jobs were lost but refuse to when jobs are added. Do you not see the stupidity in that??? No of course you don't - totally pathetic!

What we believe is that the recovery could have been faster and more robust with the President's proposals.

So REALLY the president did nothing... yet you claim it as a victory... hmmm...

And your speculation that his 'policies' (if passed) would have made things better... are just that... speculations.

(The funny part is that conservatives believe the president's doing nothing is a victory too! So can't we all just get along? hahahah)

AAaaaah, but you cannot prove it because it didn't happen.

fair enough

Answer...If congress had passed all of the American Jobs Act, we would be seeing even more jobs created.

Again Thermen... SPECULATION on your part. (no facts. just feelings. go figure)

Sickof theBickering, here are some facts: Presidents Bush and Obama supported bailing out GM and Chrysler with out tax money. Many opposed this action and completely blamed it all on President Obama. GM is again the world's #1 auto maker, Chrysler just earned $183 million in profits and Ford made nearly $2 billion. (All three were aided by the bailout because it kept parts suppliers in business). US auto sales are up, employment is rising and coporate profits are up.

Since President Obama was at fault for supporting the bailouts, does he now get credit for the turn-around? (Particularly in the US auto industry)...

Crickets...

NB820-001 - are you kidding? Of course he doesn't. And, in Illinois Chrysler just announced the addition of 1500 jobs at a plant in Berwyn while another company announced another 3000 jobs. GOP eat your hearts out!!!!

therman - sorry, the economy and jobs are not like a light switch. Look at new infrastructure work, environmental studies have to be done before jobs are created. The XL piopeline project was before the WH for over 3 years, yet obama still quashed it.

american - he quashed it as he should have done. There were even GOP governors who are opposed to the pipeline and the damage it will do. Those jobs were temporary - at best. And, it will be revisited when it is revised to address concerns.

Bela Ghostly - drinking the GOP hate aid? And, ignorance soda?

Bela Ghostly---Who is obombo?

How can you with a straight face call anyone ignorant who can actully look around at the real world and see what is happening in Europe. The fact that you don't seem to undersand that is EXACTLY what will happen here if you continue to believe the lie that Obama is telling you is disturbing. The end result of promising people free stuff in order to buy their votes is bankruptcy and poverty. EUROPE is PROOF. I didn't make it up, you can't blame it on republicans or Fox news. The entire European Union is on the verge of financial collapse because of socialist policy. Stop believing the lie, you have concrete evidence in Greece, Italy, and Spain that it is in fact a lie.

Why wish ill for the Alaska economy?

U3 is not an accurate indicator of unemployment. There are many people who want a job but they do not qualify for benefits and they are not counted! It is a lie that unemployment is getting any better, because the percentage of people who are actually employed is going down!

Google for "unemployment kondratieff wave" to see a chart that counts people who are employed.

franku - did you understand that 243,000 jobs were added last month? Were those words too big for you? Did you understand that we have added jobs now for several months in a row? Do you need to have someone explain this to you? Yes, unemployment is still high but the only way to bring that down is to continually add jobs - you do understand that, right?

I understand that. Do YOU understand that Obama has borrowed $5 trillion dollars and has the FED pumping trillions more into this economy to create that small improvement? Do you understand what the end result of pursuing these kind of policies is???? Do you think a temporary improvement so that Obama can get himself re-elected and continue the same policies that have produced a financial collapse in Europe is worth it? Take a look around at the real world. ITALY, SPAIN, GREECE--that is our future if we have 4 more years of Obama. The temporary improvement is nice, but since we have concrete proof now in Europe of the end result of Obama type policies this isn't great news it is only the calm before the storm.

Did you know that Bush borrowed $5 trillion plus for stupid tax cuts and foreign adventures??? At least Obama borrowed the money for AMERICA, instead of fighting with enemies in a godforsaken country. And Obama offered plan to create 2 million jobs AND cut the debt by $4 trillion. But the obstructionist GOP said no to EITHER of them, and now we are stuck with 8% unemployment. Stop focusing your frustration on Obama and start aiming it at the real problem: the do-nothing Congress and the obstructionist GOP.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012