I hate when people say Obama hasn't created jobs. Like he could actually, really do something. And they don't give him credit for all the flexibility the new part-timers have or all the leisure time those who have completely given up looking have.<quoted text>
In January we were still on a growing trend of increasing job losses losing 750,000 jobs. It took just 8 months for Obama to stop that trend thanks to his stimulus bill.
And I hate when they say things like
Falling down on the jobs
Barack Obama just can't crack the unemployment problem
The latest abysmal report on the American workplace makes clear that President Obama hasn’t a prayer of talking his way to robust job creation. He’ll have to do a whole lot more than give speeches.
Thud, the government’s numbers went Friday.
The economy added just 162,000 jobs in July, the lowest monthly total since January, and the counts for the previous two months were revised downward. At this pace, the U.S. would languish for more than a decade before returning to pre-Great Recession employment levels.
And the news was worse than that. Hidden in the statistics was the fact that America has gotten most proficient at creating part-time rather than full-time jobs. This helped put a falsely happy face on an ever so slight decline in the unemployment rate to 7.4%.
Fully 8.25 million Americans who would rather have full-time work are now part-timers. And another 1.2 million are marginally attached to the labor force.
In July, the average work week and average hourly earnings fell. The number of people officially in the workforce dropped, by some 40,000. The labor participation rate is at a 34-year low.
Obama has begun to talk about some of the wreckage — kind of.
After running a reelection campaign in which he purported to see progress in the comeback from the collapse he inherited in 2008, the President is delivering addresses aimed, he says, at pushing Washington to move on a job-creation agenda.
Despite the economy’s persistent, debilitating weakness, he asks the country to accept the premise that “we’ve started to lay a new foundation for a stronger, more durable America” and then he says that, of course, more must be done.
Never does he squarely assess the emergency, an evasion that undermines a sense of urgency while sparing him from having to defend his failure to deliver more for the U.S. worker.
Although he has put constructive ideas on the table — including corporate tax reform and infrastructure spending — the President has heated his pitch with populist appeals on income inequality and attacks on congressional Republicans. None of which will get Obama any closer to a job-creation program than he got to gun control.
Like it or not, if he is going to remedy the declining standard of living of America’s working and middle classes, Obama must partner more constructively with his GOP adversaries.
In a recent interview with The New York Times, he signaled that he might head in that direction, saying:“I want to make sure that all of us in Washington are investing as much time, as much energy, as much debate on how we grow the economy and grow the middle class as we’ve spent over the last two to three years arguing about how we reduce the deficits.” Then he was asked about his legacy should America remain stalled. He answered:
“I think if I’m arguing for entirely different policies and Congress ends up pursuing policies that I think don’t make sense and we get a bad result, it’s hard to argue that’d be my legacy.”
He was wrong. His legacy would be a two-term President who just couldn’t get things done, but played the most golf and wifey had the best vacations.