AP's Raum suggested Obama at fault for mounting job losses, but even Larry Kudlow disagrees
SUMMARY: In an AP "analysis," Tom Raum suggested that President Obama is to blame for job losses since he took office -- an argument rejected even by conservative CNBC host and National Review Online economics editor Larry Kudlow.
In a March 7 Associated Press "analysis," Tom Raum suggested that President Obama is to blame for job losses since he took office -- an argument rejected even by conservative CNBC host and National Review Online economics editor Larry Kudlow, who is reportedly considering running for the United States Senate as a Republican.
In his AP analysis, Raum wrote:
And while his personal popularity remains high, some economists and lawmakers are beginning to question whether Obama's agenda of increased government activism is helping, or hurting, by sowing uncertainty among businesses, investors and consumers that could prolong the recession.
Although the administration likes to say it "inherited" the recession and trillion-dollar deficits, the economic wreckage has worsened on Obama's still-young watch.
Every day, the economy is becoming more and more an Obama economy.
More than 4 million jobs have been lost since the recession began in December 2007 -- roughly half in the past three months.
Raum's suggestion that Obama is to blame for roughly 2 million job losses "in the past three months" is undermined by the fact that Obama has been in office for only the past month-and-a-half. Moreover, at least one conservative economic commentator has rejected the notion that Obama is at fault for the mounting job losses. Kudlow -- while advancing the unfounded claim that Obama is responsible for the falling stock market -- said on the March 6 edition of CNBC's The Kudlow Report: "I will not blame [Obama] for the recession or the high unemployment rate. All of that ... began before his watch. Mr. Bush has got to take the rap for that in the last year of his administration."
The job losses are a result of 20 of the last 28 years being it is ok to send your jobs out of the US and we do not care about the US worker. Clinton was the 8 year exception for you right wingers out there.
Interesting......how many jobs were sent over seas under Clintion, and oh yea....NAFTA that was clinton as well. Do you have any idea what you are talking about??
NAFTA was put together and started through the Senate by Gorge H. W. Bush and fewer jobs left under Clinton than under GHWB.
More and higher paying US jobs were created under Clinton than any other post WWII President.
Yeah, it wasn't until Clinton that they staretd outsourcing jobs for engineers, computer programers, customer service and tech support to India. But that had as much to do with the technological innovation than policy. NAFTA was meant to avoid the tarifs on GOODS and only directlly affected blue collar (though still decent paying) manufacturing jobs. After all... How do put a tariff on "Welcome to Dell, how can I help you today?" ;)
http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2009/03/going-galt-present-and-past.html
Economic growth ratings for US Presidents.
WRONG. For all 28 of the past 28 years it's been OK, possibly longer. Clinton was NO exception - NAFTA (legislation he signed) accelerated this process. We've never truly had protectiuonism becasue we've never needed it. Until recently (the last 30-40 years) the developing word didn't have the technology of infrastructure to supprot industry. They do now, but they still have billons of straving, unwashed masses ready to work for next to nothing. Somehow the conservative economists call this a "competetive advantage" and think it's fair. (Mainly becasuse in the short run, it makes them more money.) I called it exploitation and say it's criminal. (ANd in the long run dooms this country's economy.) But our gov't doesn't agree with me - and that included BILL CLINTON. So don't fool yourself.
IMHO burying your head in the sand is definately not the same as not fooling yourself. The sand was deep during 8 of those 28 years and we should allow all to remember what they remember as they remember it. Besides, NAFTA has worked just fine. All those car parts made in foriegn countries aren't affecting how the auto business is doing. Everyone can see how strong our auto industry is, all the jobs they produce in America. It's too big to allow to flounder. And by-god our government won't let that happen!
The Republicans feel an absolute loyalty to the rich and affluent! That is that 5 % that our president has been talking about! The Rich "Wanna Bees" join right in with them furthering that primise of lower taxes solves all problems! After All, Rush Limbaugh is a multi-millionaire! A college drop-out that that stumbled into an area that finally paid out for him during the Clinton Years! He has made some absolute horrendous accusations over the years without any penalties to pay for saying what he has asserted: Liberals wanted kids to die in the Columbine Incident, the Clintons are murderers, and the most recent one, he said he expects Senator KENNEDY TO DIE BEFORE ANY HEALTH BILL IS PAST AND THEY WILL NAME IT AFTER HIM...."WHAT A DOPE ADDICT WITH NO SHAME!
The loss of US manufacturing jobs is not really talked about so much. I wonder how can our economy recover without more US manufacturing jobs, Perhaps green technology can help, but all tax laws that encourage off shoring of jobs must be repealed. Also no state should be allowed to offer tax breaks to a company to move their location.
I agree, Putt, it's not nearly as prominent a subject as it should be. We've spent a few decades floating on a phony economy of a small minority getting rich by moving play money around, while the U.S. produces less and less. I know a couple of people personally who were doing very well for themselves under this system, but were candid enough to admit to me that they were just waiting for it to blow up. They were taking the money, but at the same time, they understood that as an economic model, it was as sustainable as a pyramid scheme.
That's it exactly Colonel.
And this Ponzi scheme is far from over. There are still trillions in bad financial instruments out there that the banks are holding. Our financial geniuses have packaged and repacked, sold and resold so much bad debt that we'll be lucky to pull out of this crisis in years.
And it's not something that you can blame on the president. Christ, I might go so far as to say that you can't even blame Bush.
It's the people who figured out how to sell stink for a profit and created a market in which it became a sought after commodity.
As smart as Obama seems and as dumb as Bush seemed, neither is capable of pulling off something on this scale.
I do not know who this guy Raum is but I do know that he cannot be very intellectual...in fact...I think he is an ignorant FOOL! Where was he when Bush destroyed our economy? AIRHEAD!
Unfortunately for most of you, the American economic empire is on the way down. Life will go on, but at a reduced level of consumption and standard of living. The idea that we can get back to where we once were is hopelessly false optimism. The rich have spent the last thirty years gutting this country like a strung up deer carcuss; it has been the greatest cashing in of chips in human history.
I will probably not be around to see it, but most of you will. While I agree with what this site is trying to do, it seems fairly obvious that it is up against a juggernaut of media power designed to make the mostly ignorant public think what it wants them to, and so they continue to commit economic suicide.
For those who would like a very good historical analysis of what has taken place and what we can look forward to in the future, I strongly recommend the book Wealth and Democracy by Kevin Phillips (Random House, 2002). He warned about the growth of the finance sector and what it would probably lead to, and unfortunately, he was correct.
wow kudlow himself saying this isn't president obama's fault......can't beat that
It's funny how everything bad that happened in Bush's Presidency was somehow Clinton's fault. There were even people saying the current recession was his fault. A recession that started 7 1/2 years after he left office. But 7 weeks in to Obama's Presidency and the economic free fall that started under Bush is his fault. Of course. That makes perfect sense. If Obama was doing what he "promised" everything would've turned around on Jan 20 and we would now be in an era of unprecidented peace and prosperity.