Romney, in NH, again criticizes Obama on economy

Mitt Romney has shown that he can tap dance.

"HAMPTON, N.H.—Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney added another layer to his criticism of President Barack Obama’s handling of the economy, saying Tuesday that Obama made the recession “deeper and longer than it needed to be.”

In announcing his bid for the Republican nomination last month, the former Massachusetts governor said of Obama, “When he took office, the economy was in recession. He made it worse. And he made it last longer.” Last week, he said, “I didn’t say that things are worse,” but over the weekend he returned to saying “the recession is deeper because of our president.”

Though unemployment has worsened under Obama, the recession officially ended six months into his presidency. Obama has said U.S. innovation and adaptation will help the economy rebound with more gusto."

boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2011/07/05/romney_keeps_up_criticism_of_obama_on_economy/

When challenged, Romney dances:

"When NBC producer Sue Kroll asked the former Massachusetts governor why he believes that Obama’s policies have made the economy worse – when the economy is now growing (and not shrinking like it was in 2009), when the Dow is climbing (and no longer in a free-fall like it was in '09), and when the unemployment rate is down a full percentage point from where it was in Oct. '09 – Romney gave this answer:

I didn't say that things are worse."

firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/06/30/6984657-romney-backtracks-on-argument-that-obama-made-economy-worse

And the mainstream media defends Obama. The recession officially ended? Tell that to those who are still unemployed. The mainstream media are in Obama’s pocket just as liberal catholics are. They will defend his record in spite of all of his failures. And they will do what they can to help him get re-elected.

Ishii

The liberal defense is pathetic. Up to 19% of people are unemployed.

I thought we were talking about Romney?

Yes, about him criticizing Obama on the economy. So the economy is relevant.

Sorry your post backfired.:wink:

Wrong again.

Though unemployment has worsened under Obama, the recession officially ended six months into his presidency. Obama has said U.S. innovation and adaptation will help the economy rebound with more gusto."

Perhaps the president could show us some of that gusto instead of heading to golf course when there’s work to be done.

I am more concern with the state of the CC all around the world than wirh the economy itself.

I am more concern how people are running from God than any economy in the world.

Um, could you please cite this number? Unemployment is relatively high, but not 19%. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics it is 9.1. Unchanged from May.

The official unemployment index, based on a monthly survey of sample households, counts only people who reported looking for work in the past four weeks. It doesn’t account for part-time workers who want to work more hours but can’t, given the tight job market. And it doesn’t include those who have given up trying to find work.

When the underemployed and the discouraged are added to the numbers, the unemployment rate rises to 16.6%. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, a unit of the Labor Department, began tracking this alternative measure – known as the U-6 for its department classification – in 1995 after economists lobbied for a method comparable to the way Japan, Canada and Western Europe count their unemployed.

articles.moneycentral.msn.com/learn-how-to-invest/The-real-unemployment-rate.aspx

Do you want the “real” unemployment rate or the “official” unemployment rate?

The official unemployment index, based on a monthly survey of sample households, counts only people who reported looking for work in the past four weeks. It doesn’t account for part-time workers who want to work more hours but can’t, given the tight job market. And it doesn’t include those who have given up trying to find work.

When the underemployed and the discouraged are added to the numbers, the unemployment rate rises to 16.6%. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, a unit of the Labor Department, began tracking this alternative measure – known as the U-6 for its department classification – in 1995 after economists lobbied for a method comparable to the way Japan, Canada and Western Europe count their unemployed.

Do you want the “real” unemployment rate or the “official” unemployment rate?

So long as the statistic used is used consistently, by all means use the adjusted one. Most economists prefer it, as do I. But my fear as that someone will say the real unemployment rrate is 17% this year, then a couples years later say it’s 8%, but using different measures depending on how much they like the guy in office, like what is often done with national debt vs. budget deficit.

When someone says unemployment rate, most peopl, I imagine, think about 6% as average, and we’re at 9%. 19% (without clarification) sounds catastrophic, until we recall that the adjusted unemployment rate including discouraged workers and so forth was, say, 15% before. It’s a matter of consistency.

On a related note, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which also counts all particular employment subgroups, stated that as of May, the number of long term unemplyed workers had increased slightly since last year (361,000) while the number of discouraged workers decreased slightly (261,000 ).

bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

And that’s exactly why they do it.

The “current” official number that is supposed to be comparable to previous years and decades has also been massaged and adjusted several times. So trying to compare the current “official” unemployment rate to 1980s or even the 1990s is misleading because they were calcualted differently.

It’s not surprising that Mitt Romney is criticizing Obama on his handling of the economy. He’s not alone in this, and for good reason. Recall this Peter Wehner article:

“The Economy and the Record Obama Owns”
commentarymagazine.com/2011/06/30/the-economy-and-the-record-obama-owns/

This morning on NBC’s Today Show, Matt Lauer asked Obama senior adviser David Plouffe, “You would agree with that: He owns this economy?” To which Plouffe said, “”Of course he does.”

Plouffe said this on the day we learned unemployment claims this week were above 400,000 (428,000), meaning this is the 12th straight week unemployment claims have topped 400,000–yet one more sign of a struggling economy.

With ownership comes responsibility, of course, so let’s run through, one more time, some of what the president owns:

An unemployment rate of 9.1 percent;
28 straight months of unemployment being above 8 percent, a post-World War II record;
Chronic unemployment worse than during the Great Depression (about 6.2 million Americans, 45.1 percent of all unemployed workers in this country, have been jobless for more than six months);
A nation in which 2.5 million fewer people are employed than when the president was sworn in and which has seen only 600,000 jobs created during our two-year “recovery”;
A housing crisis that has recently entered a double dip and is now worse than the Great Depression;
A record $1.65 trillion deficit this year;
A record $14.3 trillion debt;
First quarter growth in 2011 of only 1.8 percent;
A presidency in which real annual growth in GDP averages 1.5 percent, just barely above what it was during the decade of the Great Depression (1.3 percent); and
Gas prices roughly doubled what they were when Obama took office.
That is the economy, and the record, David Plouffe proudly states Obama lays claim to.

Fine and good; now he can run on this economy and his record.

This morning on NBC’s Today Show, Matt Lauer asked Obama senior adviser David Plouffe, “You would agree with that: He owns this economy?” To which Plouffe said, “”Of course he does.”

I wouldn’t say that’s entirely true, especially regarding unemplyment, which is known to lag behind the rest of the economy, but every month the capacity to blame the previous admin dwindles. On July 8th the next Bureau of Labor Statistics report for June comes out and we’ll see if anything’s finallt changed. Foreboding if not. If there’s one single number will determine Obama’s chances of reelection, I think it will be the unemployment rate. If it doesn’t start moving soon, then he will likely see himself relegated “to the dustbin of history.”

I wish Romney (and all the other candidates) would be more specifc in their criticism, but of course politicians are experts at being vague, so I won’t expect anything.

Saw an article this morning on Investors Business Daily, explaining further concerning Mitt Romney’s statements, the press response, and the economy under President Obama.

“Romney’s Right: It Is Worse Now”

Politics: The Obama administration recently created a new White House post charged with rapidly responding to unfavorable stories. They could have spared the taxpayers $72,500, since the mainstream press is already doing that job free of charge.

A case in point is the media’s rapid and fierce response to Mitt Romney’s claim that President Obama’s economic policies have made the country worse off. Rather than investigate the claim, they’ve made it their mission to debunk it.

Reporters are challenging Romney at every stop, demanding that he square his talking point with the fact that, gosh, GDP is growing and the number of workers with jobs seems to be growing, too. And, look, the stock market is higher than when Obama took office. And so, too, are corporate profits. What right does he have to make such outlandish claims?

But — can you believe it? — Romney won’t stop! CBS News’ latest dispatch even complained in the headline that “Romney repeats disputed charge, says again that Obama made recession worse.” Sure, they noted, the economic numbers “aren’t stellar” but they “clearly paint a picture that shows improvement from a very weak starting point.” So there.

To be sure, Romney muddied his message a bit, seeming to backtrack at one point in response to a reporter challenging his claim. And, to be completely accurate, Obama hasn’t made the recession worse, since it was almost over by the time he got into office and before any of his policies had a chance to make a real impact.

But it’s clear he’s made the recovery worse. And there are, in fact, many economic indicators that are demonstrably worse since Obama took office. Here are a few we’ve noted in this space before:

There are 2 million fewer private-sector jobs now than when Obama was sworn in, and the unemployment rate is 1.5 percentage points higher.

• There are now more long-term unemployed than at any time since the government started keeping records.

• The U.S. dollar is more than 12% weaker.

• The number of Americans on food stamps has climbed 37%.

• The Misery Index (unemployment plus inflation) is up 62%.

• And the national debt is about 40% higher than it was in January 2009.

In fact, reporters who bother to look will discover that Obama has managed to produce the worst recovery on record.

By this point in the Reagan recovery after the 1981-82 recession, for example, unemployment had been knocked down to 7.4% from a peak of 10.8%, and quarterly GDP growth averaged a screaming 7%.

The rest can be seen at:

investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/577501/201107061854/Romneys-Right-It-Is-Worse-Now.htm

According to all standard measurements the recession ended in May 2009 - before any of the Obama measures to “combat” the recession were put in place and running. The “stimulus” program was passed in February but even the president admits the “shovel ready” projects were a fallacy and it wasn’t until the fall of 2009 before the money was being spent. In fact it wasn’t until the summer of 2010 (the proclaimed summer of recovery) that the bulk of the stimulus was to be felt. His economic policies have destroyed the recovery. It’s the worst “recovery” from a recession the nation has ever seen - including the depression.

The fact that Romney points it out simply means he knows how to read a newspaper and knows a little about history - to bad Obama and his supporters can’t.

There will be no recovery until Obama is gone. Companies will not hire in the uncertainty of what he will pull next. They will not invest in personnel, expansion or infrastructure unless forced to.

His healthcare plan is what scared everyone. Add on the additional taxation he has proposed and why should anyone expand their business? Toss in a drilling ban and he solidifies his anti-business, pro-government agenda.

No one knows what further damage he will/can do.

Romney is quite correct to criticize Obama on precisely this issue. Elected in a sharp economic downturn, the American people mandated Obama to take care of the economy, and delivered him both houses of congress for two years to give him full access to the gears of power to do just that.

He just didn’t deliver. The threat of a looming debt crisis is very real, and still he fiddles.

Obviously, Obama does not have the right stuff to deliver on the one thing that he was elected and mandated to do. This is quite correct that Romney points this out time and time again.

As long as Obama is there talking his class warfare about making the rich pay their fair share, there is no confidence for entrepreneurs to invest into getting the economy rolling again.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.