Don't worry. Obama says economy is 'doing fine'
E. Thomas McClanahanPresident Obama’s latest verbal goof was the sort that will resonate for some time. In his news conference Friday, he said “the private economy is doing fine,” which would be news to the millions of people out of work.
The remark recalled the flap that surrounded the first President Bush in 1992, when he supposedly expressed astonishment at retail barcode scanning technology while visiting a grocers’ convention. Much of the media decided that this showed that the president was completely out of touch with the challenges facing American workers.
Like Obama, Bush was dealing with an anemic economy. He was also facing an aggressive challenger — Bill Clinton — who portrayed a less-than-zippy recovery as close to economic collapse. Bush got tagged as the fall guy for a “jobless recovery” and lost the election.
The difference here is that the rap on Bush was inaccurate. He was not unfamiliar with scanning technology and the whole flap was ginned up by a New York Times reporter, working from a pool report.
Obama’s quote, however, is not in doubt, and it’s revealing because he went on to say that while the private sector has created more than 4 million jobs over the last couple of years (he didn’t mention the 8 percent jobless rate), local and state government remains a weakness, because “governors or mayors … are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government…”
So, Treasury should borrow more from the Chinese so the feds can shovel more money to state and local governments? I think we already did that. It was called the stimulus package.
Obama seems to believe that economic growth stems mainly from government. Many people have wondered whether this president understands the basic process of wealth creation. Here’s another bit of evidence that on that score, he is clueless.
UPDATE: Commenters have pointed out that a word is wrong in the Obama quote. What he said: “The private sector is doing fine.”
Steven Fetter
66223
11 months, 1 week agoThe President may have many redeeming characteristics, but economic forecasting is not one of them.
From the promised “summer of recovery” in 2010 came higher unemployment rates (but claims of many jobs saved).
For the $800 billion stimulus came many government jobs but no shovel ready jobs.
We were promised a surge in green jobs, millions of electric cars, and lower sea levels. At least no islands have submerged yet.
And finally, Obama care promised to lower our health care premiums and not add 1 dollar to the deficit. Instead, the cost for insurance policies have surged (even for the public sector and unions!) and the cost of subsidizing health insurance is projected to add billions to the taxpayers.
I will take heed of President Obama’s words back in 2009; If the stimulus fails and the economy does not turn around, I will be a 1 term President.
For once, I agree with his forecast.
Kent Mueller
11 months, 1 week agoIn Saturday’s radio address, Obama referenced fewer teachers in two states by name. Both are swing states for this election. But, he forgot to mention there are fewer students in both of those states, also.
Chuck Gatson
11 months, 1 week agoYou know when a writer puts something in quotes the reader assumes the writer is quoting somone accurately. McClanahan, as usual, gets the quote incorrect, but then he is the most inaccurate editorial writer the Star publishes.
George Hunsucker
Northland
11 months, 1 week agoYep, everything is fine in the private sector. It is only those poor underpaid and overworked bureaucrats who are suffering…
NOT a thousand times!
http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politicsinvesting/7190-private-jobs-down-46-million-from-january-2008-federal-jobs-up-114
Phil Cardarella
11 months, 1 week agoOf course, those of us who watch actual news channels, not FOX SortaNews, actually got to see the whole statement. You know, in context?
The President was making a comparison of the job growth numbers in the private sector — which were “doing fine” in the sense of jobs being created, even at a slower rate than hoped — to the LOSS of jobs in the public sector. And to the construction industry — which relies on public expendatures on infrastructure to generate jobs.
It does the economy no good to create lots of minimum-wage jobs in the private sector at the expense of losing middle-class jobs in the private of public sector. CONSUMERS drive the economy with demand — and for that you need consumers with money to spend — like teachers and construction workers fixing bridges, etc.
Giving tax cuts to the wealthy in hopes that they will invest that money in something that might create a job (as opposed to the stock market, DUH!)is a much less efficient way to generate spendig, and create jobs.
Ask any ACTUAL capitalist — not the clown who make money only by shuffling money. Ask a guy with a business if he thinks it helps to have a customer who can pay him.
Charles Purvis
11 months, 1 week agoIt’s not the government’s responsibility to create jobs.
We understood that from 1776 to 1933. Maybe someday we’ll relearn it, after the government collapses from debt caused by trying to do that.
Bill Mccwiliams
11 months, 1 week agoNor do I think its the governments job to provide subsidies and incentives to the job creators.
George Hunsucker
Northland
11 months, 1 week agoso you were against the porkulus bill then Bill, correct?