> > > More people have been hired in the past three years than in all
> > > eight years of the Bush administration.
> > This stat is too absurd to even check. We've lost 3 million jobs since Obama
> > took over.
> Here is the employment data.
> There are about 600K more people employed now than in January 2009.
> As you can see, employment peaked in December 2007, and we are not
> back up to that value. But Obama was not president until a year
> later, January 2009, and at that time we were losing 750K jobs per
> You can also see that employment has been rising fairly steadily
> since September 2009, which was the low point of the employment.
Since over 100,000 new jobs a month are needed just to keep up with population growth, having
600K more jobs now than in Jan 2009 means we are way worse off than we should be if we were
even just treading water.
> > > > Obama promised to cut the deficit in half - instead he's doubled it,
> > > > running up a
> > > > staggering $5 trillion in debt with very little to show for it.
> > > The deficit was $1.4 trillion in fy2009, the last year of Bush. That
> > > included TARP, but it did ***not*** include funding for the wars in
> > > Iraq and Afghanistan (which Bush did not include in the budgets).
> > Bush's average deficit was about $350 billion. Too high but not
> > catestrophic.
> As I pointed out before, that does not include Iraq and Afganistan
> war funding. That funding increased the public debt, but it did not
> count as part of the budget deficit because it was not part of the
> budget. The current numbers do include war funding.
This article compares different presidents and their deficits as a percentage of GDP. Bush
average was 2.7%. Obama: 8.9% He's exploded the deficit and made this level of spending the
baseline norm which is reckless beyond words.
Look at the author comment at the end too:
"Mr. Skipper is dead wrong in his contention that my deficit-to-GDP and spending-to-GDP
ratios omit costs of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is true that some of those costs
were included in supplementals ? a time-honored tradition ? but ALL government expenses are
subsumed under the heading ?outlays,? and these are the figures I used, from Table B-79 of
the Economic Report of the President from 2012. In other words, in figuring deficits, I used
the dollars the government actually spent and received."
> > We cannot run
> > trillion plus dollar deficits indefinitely. We can't even do it for very
> > long.
> I agree with all of this, but the fact is that Obama did not double
> the deficit, he has reduced it.
Absurd. The 09 TARP bailout was a one time deal. Only a lunatic would expand government to
make that level of unsustainable spending the new baseline budget going forward. I don't
think Hillary or Bill Clinton for example would have been even in the ballpark of that kind
of fiscal irresponsibility.