Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Could this be true?

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/09/06/its-official-president-obama-is-the-best-economic-president-in-modern-times/

A new economic report, published by Forbes.com on September 6, 2014, clearly shows that President Obama is the best economic president in modern times. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact, based on all of typical the economic indicators, including jobs, investments, growth and expansion, even the rate of inflation. In all of these areas President Obama’s record outperforms that of every other modern president, including conservative idol, Ronald Reagan.

Under President Obama’s leadership, the unemployment rate has now decreased to 6.1 percent, the lowest it’s been since 2007, when the economy began gushing jobs under the failed leadership of then president George W. Bush.

There is more...both there and at the Forbes article:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2014/09/05/obama-outperforms-reagan-on-jobs-growth-and-investing/

Well, as they say, numbers never lie.

I admit, I'm rather surprised by this, and I think the reason for the surprise is twofold:

One, it was not a magic cure that fixed the economy (now I say fixed, but there's still problems), but instead it was a long, gradual correction. That sort of slow change rarely gets noticed when it is happening, and only tends to bear fruit after a good long time of cooking. Which is apparently what is happening now.

Two, the political culture of the US is as toxic as ever. It's so easy to get snowed under all of the bickering nonsense to look at the numbers, but there they are.

Well this thread is certainly going to go well.

Would you allow me to retort?

Actually its patently false: The economy went from Depression to greatest economic power in the world under FDR. Now some might say that all had to do with WWII, but hey if Presidents are going to take credit for economies then FDR was Da Bomb (literally).

 curran12 wrote:
Well, as they say, numbers never lie.

They can be fudged though.

Honestly this presidency has been a resounding Meh.

Can't say everything's fine, but at least things are better than the were.

Can't say how politics will handle this, but there will be ignorance, ignorance and blood.

I don't disagree on the meh (though I imagine we have differing opinions as to why that is) but where are the fudged numbers here? I'm a poor economist at the best of times and I'd love some more clarity.

 curran12 wrote:
I don't disagree on the meh (though I imagine we have differing opinions as to why that is) but where are the fudged numbers here? I'm a poor economist at the best of times and I'd love some more clarity.

Im not saying it was fudged. Im saying it can be.

 Frazzled wrote:
Actually its patently false: The economy went from Depression to greatest economic power in the world under FDR. Now some might say that all had to do with WWII, but hey if Presidents are going to take credit for economies then FDR was Da Bomb (literally).

Some people hate him, but he got stuff done. I believe him to be the best president we have ever had.

Edit: random layperson

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/06/the-incredible-shrinking-labor-force-again/

"If the same percentage of adults were in the workforce today as when Barack Obama took office, the unemployment rate would be 10.8 percent."

Unemployment rate is dropping, but number of people working isn't changing much. People who give up looking for a job don't count as unemployed even if they are physically health and should be working. So while the main jobs number looks good, hiding in the weeds is a disturbing situation where the number of people working isn't really improving.

yeah, some of those numbers are fudged like Gwaihirsbrother pointed out, however that isnt anything new. Reagans numbers are (officially) fudged as well, meaning an accurate comparison of the two isnt really poasible or feasible unless youre willing to dig deep for real data.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Actually its patently false: The economy went from Depression to greatest economic power in the world under FDR. Now some might say that all had to do with WWII, but hey if Presidents are going to take credit for economies then FDR was Da Bomb (literally).

Some people hate him, but he got stuff done. I layperson believe him to be the best president we have ever had.

He definitely got stuff done.

Though to be realistic for a moment, the economic problem is less the government and more politics and businesses working against the people.

when the economy began gushing jobs under the failed leadership of then president George W. Bush.

The way this was phrased makes me pretty leery of the conclusions.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Actually its patently false: The economy went from Depression to greatest economic power in the world under FDR. Now some might say that all had to do with WWII, but hey if Presidents are going to take credit for economies then FDR was Da Bomb (literally).

Some people hate him, but he got stuff done. I layperson believe him to be the best president we have ever had.

"the best president we have ever had"???

Only if you're in the top 1% wealthiest folks in the US.

The numbers don't lie... but, like everything else, you need to dig deeper.


Take that unemployment number... seems reminisce of that "drop" right before the 2012 election.

The real unemployment is closer to 23 percent.


Those are not great unemployment numbers during the Obama administrations...

Also, more than double of college graduates are working minimum wage jobs under the Obama years than Bush:


Here's something enlightening... from the New York Times:
The Typical Household, Now Worth a Third Less


So... in looking at the raw overall data, it's no question that the US economy is rocking...

But, diving deeper in analyzing the data, can you really say that "Joe & Jane Schmoe™" of the world is truly better off during the Obama years???

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Some people hate him, but he got stuff done. I layperson believe him to be the best president we have ever had.

I voted for the dude but I think this is a bit of a reach. I think he did more good then bad, so far.. but greatest ever? Not while Guantanamo Bay is open, not in my book.

I think he was talking about FDR.

 whembly wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Actually its patently false: The economy went from Depression to greatest economic power in the world under FDR. Now some might say that all had to do with WWII, but hey if Presidents are going to take credit for economies then FDR was Da Bomb (literally).

Some people hate him, but he got stuff done. I layperson believe him to be the best president we have ever had.

"the best president we have ever had"???

Only if you're in the top 1% wealthiest folks in the US.

The numbers don't lie... but, like everything else, you need to dig deeper.


Take that unemployment number... seems reminisce of that "drop" right before the 2012 election.

The real unemployment is closer to 23 percent.


Those are not great unemployment numbers during the Obama administrations...

Also, more than double of college graduates are working minimum wage jobs under the Obama years than Bush:


Here's something enlightening... from the New York Times:
The Typical Household, Now Worth a Third Less


So... in looking at the raw overall data, it's no question that the US economy is rocking...

But, diving deeper in analyzing the data, can you really say that "Joe & Jane Schmoe™" of the world is truly better off during the Obama years???

I was talking about FDR silly !


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Some people hate him, but he got stuff done. I layperson believe him to be the best president we have ever had.

I voted for the dude but I think this is a bit of a reach. I think he did more good then bad, so far.. but greatest ever? Not while Guantanamo Bay is open, not in my book.

I was talking about FDR

Well, don't I feel stupid :/

Oops... my bad Co'tor.

It's just that we all need to understand that Politicians (of all stripes) are quick to claim good economic fortunes and quick to deflect economic criticisms.

EDIT: Ouze and I need to slow down reading these threads these days....

I'll agree on that, Whem'.

 Ouze wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Some people hate him, but he got stuff done. I layperson believe him to be the best president we have ever had.

I voted for the dude but I think this is a bit of a reach. I think he did more good then bad, so far.. but greatest ever? Not while Guantanamo Bay is open, not in my book.

I THIIIINK he's talking about FDR not BHO.
EDIT: Good to see I can pile on after seven other people. Dog Pile Makes Frazzled...HAPPY!

BHO sounds like a tv network. Or an irritated grunt.
"Bho!"

Atleast one number speaking against Obama's economic prowness, is the amount of government dept increase.

How many depts did we add?

 Ouze wrote:
How many depts did we add?

And more importantly, even if we added 100 new departments, if all other metrics are good is this a bad thing?

 Ouze wrote:
How many depts did we add?

Not sure...

The Czars???

Presidents are rarely in office long enough, or effective enough in leadership, to have any realistic claim on fixing the economy. Simply because economic cycles are longer than the typical 2 presidential terms.

FDR was certainly a great president, but he cannot take credit for getting us out of the Great Depression, WW2 did that.

Obama on the other hand, is somewhere between poor and meh as a president. He's basically a whipped cream president. Lots of hype and fluffiness, but almost no real substance. He certainly didn't make the economy recover, it did that on its own.

How would people feel about the President getting one six-year term instead of a four year term, much of which is taken up by trying to figure out how to get a one time four year extension?