Home > . > President Obama’s Hockey Stick Graph

President Obama’s Hockey Stick Graph

September 21, 2012

Flat-out: Empirical evidence illustrates that President Obama is undeserving of re-election.

What do you think? Does Barack Obama deserve to be re-elected? Not based on what I see. (The following information was mostly gleaned from the Nuclear Counterarguments 22-Essay Series.)

Obama was elected to steer the economy toward recovery and he has not done so. Instead of learning from history where the Roaring Twenties teach us that austerity brings about a quick, robust and lasting recovery, he instead has followed FDRHoover’s Dirty Thirties strategy of stimulus spending, with the same failed results of a malaise without foreseeable end. (See #11 Austerity Versus Stimulus – What Is the History? for a comparison between the Roaring Twenties and the Dirty Thirties.)

When Obama took over the presidency and immediately implemented his FDRHoover-style stimulus plan in February of 2009, there were a total of 132.8M (million) jobs in America. His Chair of Economic Advisers, Christina Romer projected that there would be 133.9M jobs by the fourth quarter of 2010 if his stimulus plan was not implemented (defined by him as a “second depression” – dealt with One Out of Four Ain’t Bad – for a Psychogump). But with the stimulus plan, she projected a total of 137.6M jobs by Q4 2010. See for yourself what happened:

• • • • • • • • • • • •
Liberals Are Drowning & Dragging America Down With Them
Throw Them A Lifeline: Nuclear Counterarguments
• • • • • • • • • • • •

Stimulus

Remember all of that nonsense about “3.6 million jobs saved or created”? It was all lies. It is just as useless a term as the unemployment rate. Neither tell you anything of value. All that matters is net jobs. The net is what you get when you adjust a time period by adding jobs created and subtracting jobs lost (elements of what is known as churn). That is what the above chart illustrates. Even if the supposed “3.6 million jobs saved or created” is accurate (which is very dubious), there were obviously up to 6.1M jobs lost at the same time for a total net jobs of 130.3M. Now, three years later in January of 2012, there are a total of 132.4M net jobs in America, still less than when Obama first implemented his supposed plan of salvation.

Can you spell F A I L U R E and L I A R in capital letters?

Don’t think that the net jobs number tells the whole story. This next link is a real kick to the side of the head. Investor’s Business Daily provides a comparison of the labor force participation rate with nine previous recessions. In every previous recession since the mid-fifties the amount of workers looking for jobs had increased by this amount of time after the recession. Here’s another graph from Business Insider that correlates with the IBD graph. Those two graphs are confirmed in this next chart that I call the Obama Hockey Stick Graph:

Weeks Unemployed

Here is another link from Investor’s Business Daily that nicely sums up the failures of the Obama administration. I’ll only quibble with their 6% climb of the GDP between Q1 2009 and Q4 2011. They seemed to have rounded up the Nominal GDP rate. From  #11 Austerity Versus Stimulus – What Is the History?:

This is what I found with Real GDP numbers (inflation adjusted – considered more precise); an utterly dismal 1.2% GDP increase in three years. [7aj6bng] [53] If we compare that to Bush’s tax cuts recovery plan, from 2003 to 2005 (Democrats resisted allowing Bush to fully implement his plan until 2003) there was a 9.1% GDP rise, a rate 7.5 times greater than Obama’s! [6r3sc4c] [54] Looking at Reagan’s tax cut recovery plan, from 1983 to 1985 (as with Bush, Democrats would not allow Reagan to fully implement his plan until 1983) it produced a 15.8% GDP increase, an astounding 13 times greater than Obama’s!!! [78qg6hc] [55]

GDP Comparison

We could call this one President Obama’s Little Wee-Wee Graph, because it would seem that Obama needs to get “wee-weed up” to catch up with the big boys.

Really, it does not matter whether there is now some barely discernible recovery. There was a mild recovery for most of the Dirty Thirties as well, but it was considered a malaise, certainly not prosperity. That is what we are in right now – a long-term malaise. And the jobs situation is even much worse than those numbers above indicate. Remind me to explain about population growth, and the terms off the books economy and permatemp jobs, some time.

President Obama is now pleading and begging for forgiveness with a whining, “We didn’t know how bad it was”, implying that more stimulus was needed. However, in #12 Can Governance Indicators Tell You Who Governs Best? Absolutely! I illustrate that by the administration’s own definitions the stimulus was actually worth $2.6T when including Income Security payments and other claimed stimulus. If that wasn’t enough, no amount would be.

The only reasonable response left to Obama’s claim that he didn’t know how bad it was, is to change course, because his current course of stimulus spending has been an utter failure. Obviously, implementing his ideology is more important to him than an actual recovery. The above graphs virtually SCREAM out for a new President in November!

Update: Here’s another chart that confirms the utter failure of Barack Obama as President: U.S. Homeownership Hits Decade Low

And one more: Monitoring the So-Called Recovery

Update 2: Another turning point graph: Has Obama’s Loot-and-Plunder Theory Worked?

[Comments on this post at Free Republic: President Obama’s Hockey Stick Graph]

[Also posted at Free Republic: Tell Me Again How 2012 Won’t Be Another “Shellacking”? and October Surprise: The Barack Obama Scoundrels List]

• • • • • • • • • • • •
Liberals Are Drowning & Dragging America Down With Them
Throw Them A Lifeline: Nuclear Counterarguments
• • • • • • • • • • • •

Advertisements