Image 01 Image 03

The Obama Great Failed Recovery

The Obama Great Failed Recovery

What is known in the media and Obama campaign speak as The Worst Recession Since The Great Depression, or The Great Recession, is Obama’s excuse for everything.

It’s Bush’s fault, Obama inherited all our problems, etc.

The Bush Great Recession is Obama’s pass to pass the buck.

So keep in mind, and repeat endlessly through November 6, the recession which started under George Bush ended in June 2009 just five months after Obama took office:

The National Bureau of Economic Research, the arbiter of the start and end dates of a recession, determined that the recession that began in December 2007 ended in June 2009.

The business-cycle dating committee met by phone on Sunday and came to the determination. “In determining that a trough occurred in June 2009, the committee did not conclude that economic conditions since that month have been favorable or that the economy has returned to operating at normal capacity. Rather, the committee determined only that the recession ended and a recovery began in that month,” the committee said in a statement. The 2007-2009 recession is the longest in the post-WWII period.

The risk of a double-dip recession led the NBER to warn of weakness, but that a second dip would not be part of the prior recession:

The committee decided that any future downturn of the economy would be a new recession and not a continuation of the recession that began in December 2007. The basis for this decision was the length and strength of the recovery to date.

This means two things.

First, Obama’s economic policies had nothing to do with the end of the Bush recession, since the recession ended 5 months after Obama took office and before any of his policies, including the February 2009 Stimulus Bil, had come into effect.  So Obama gets zero credit for the end of the Bush  Great Recession.

Second, Obama owns the failed recovery from the recession.  It took place entirely on his watch, and during a time period when Obama’s policies and threatened policies were a factor.

Obama’s failed policies have created the impression in a majority of people that the recession continues, but what we need to get people to understand is that they are experiencing Obama’s Great Failed Recovery, not Bush’s Great Recession.

So repeat this endlessly.  The Bush Great Recession ended June 2009.

The Obama Great Failed Recovery is the problem.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


JimMtnViewCaUSA | April 15, 2012 at 1:18 pm

Bush inherited a bad recession too.
When Gore started contesting the election I had a bunch of DotCom stock options which had not vested yet, but which were worth big bucks on paper.
By the time the election aftermath had played out, I was back in the working class 🙂 The stock market and the job situation continued to suck for quite some time.

The fair question for Obama supporters to answer is “have things gotten better?”.
I guess they’re living large in DC, but here on Main Street I have to say “no way”.

    Frank Scarn in reply to JimMtnViewCaUSA. | April 15, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    Don’t remember Bush 43 complaining about the dot com bust handed to him. Or Reagan about the inflation/interest rate mess handed to him.

    Even the high priest of liberals, FDR, didn’t complain about the mess handed to him.

      GrumpyOne in reply to Frank Scarn. | April 15, 2012 at 4:57 pm

      The most singular liberal point of view is to blame someone else for what they actually caused while not advancing any substantial options of remedy.

      The recession that Bush II inherited actually started in May of 2000 and yes, it was a combination of the bust and the end of Y2K activities that were the primary causes.

      By the time that 9/11 occurred, the recovery was well established. Liberals have very selective short term memory functions…

As I’ve noted elsewhere…

Cloward-Piven was a real strategy for “fundamental transformation” of the U.S.

It was limited, however. It ONLY addressed the demand side.

I darkly believe that the Obamabanana Republic was designed to correct that by attacking the SUPPLY side, as well.

I damn sure have nothing to counter that observation.

    Browndog in reply to Ragspierre. | April 15, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    You are absolutley correct, if not understating the reality-

    It’s been noted on this blog before how Obama is creating the need for government.

    -food stamps
    -news, information, and entertainment are a work in progress

    Everything a human being needs

    Except, of coarse, the most basic of all human needs:

    The need to be free.

      Ragspierre in reply to Browndog. | April 15, 2012 at 2:11 pm

      “…the most basic of all human needs: The need to be free.”

      Wish I could agree, but don’t

      For too many (for my taste) freedom is entirely optional. History says that is basic to human nature, I am afraid.

LukeHandCool | April 15, 2012 at 1:23 pm

Wasn’t Reagan known as “The Great Whiner” because he always went around whining and blaming Jimmy Carter for the awful economic state he inherited?

Poor Obama. The first president to inherit problems. George Washington never had to deal with inherited problems. Obama is greater than George Washington (who, wooden-toothed, wig-wearing elitist that he was, never took the time to share his basketball bracket picks with the common folk).

    Ragspierre in reply to LukeHandCool. | April 15, 2012 at 1:32 pm

    “The Great Whine-a-cator”, I think…

    “The Happy Schnorrer” was another Reagan appellation.

    Or is that Appalachian…???

To quote Col. Hackworth, slightly out of context yet very appropriately: Obama would be simply another in a long line of perfumed princes except for that crown he likes to wear and sceptre he often carries in his right hand! The difference here is Obama is wearing Eau du Marx and that causes curvature of his spine when he meets his masters!

Yet, like so many other PPs, Obama is causing not only the death of many of his underlings but also the nation.

That cannot stand!

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | April 15, 2012 at 2:20 pm

The comment I’m about to make is off-topic, but I wonder what you guys think about it.

You know how sometimes when a company gets into financial distress, the CEO will announce that he’s going to work for $1 per year until some important milestone is reached.

Assuming Willard is the nominee, what if late in the race, such as during one of the presidential debates or maybe at the convention — sometime when a big chunk of the country is paying attention — Willard announces that he will work for $1 per year until _________. Put some tangible target on the milestone that can’t be manipulated, like reducing the national debt to $x trillion, or whatever.

Too gimmicky? Do you think people would respond favorably? Or would they think Willard is so rich he’s willing to work for free so he doesn’t know what the average Joe is going through?

While it is generally undesirable to socialize risk, the policies pursued in 2008 to address extraordinary systemic risk did stabilize the system. The failure occurred thereafter when socialization became progressive and underlying causes remained unresolved. The risk is now not only systemic but comprehensive.

    GrumpyOne in reply to n.n. | April 15, 2012 at 5:07 pm

    Yes, as I recall it, the Treasury Department took extraordinary action somewhere in the August, 2008 time frame.

    When the democrat inspired stimulus was put together in 2009 and instead of focusing on real job creation like infrastructure improvement, they chose instead to include every liberal wet dream that result in huge sums of money being expended with practically no bang for those buck spent.

    I think that well informed fifth graders could have done a better job.

Please someone tell Romney to repeat this endlessly

[…] The Bush Great Recession ended June 2009. The Obama Great Failed Recovery is the problem. […]

[…] Professor William Jacobson reminds us that the recession which started under George W. Bush ended in June 2009. The National Bureau of Economic Research which decides start and end dates of a recession, […]

By its own standards and projections its hard for the Administration to call its handling of the Recovery dismal so far as results go.

See the job creation numbers here:

A casual reader might consider: Thats a pile of money for so few jobs.
And yes..they’d be correct.

On the tax cut portions of the stimulus package? I wont argue the reasoning yet at the same time the administration refers to tax cuts as “failed policies of the past” when they are a republican iniative. I might also caution that tax cuts that diminish the value of social security is opening another can of worms.
The tax cuts for payroll taxes were quickly washed away by rising gas/fuel prices. Net benefit to taxpayers? Probably a wash.

The weakest portion of the stimulus was in looking back. loans and grants to untested industry.
Lets reduce that to terms we all understand.
If our jobs as head of households is to make ends meet on a weekly/monthly basis, would we risk the rent on some shakey solar investment?
Reasonable people avoid risky investments during a time of poor economic conditions. We put them off in favor of what we know works. We put aside ideologically driven spending for another day.
Another factor that has hampered the recovery…altho hard to quantify, is what economists like Higgs call “regime uncertainty” If I had to point at the largest factor that caused businesses to clam up?
During a recession/recovery time frame? Are we serious?
Saddle business with some unquantifiable down the road cost and fines to boot? Doesnt hit me as great timing.

And good work Prof J. Lets remember when the Bush recession ended and point out the silly magic act done by Obama to misdirect his mess. And failure.

“anything but dismal” mistype.

Lemme add..from PJ Media article. This isnt Recovery Mr President no matter how often its repeated:

1.Obama running up the stairs to speak to a crowd with his sleeves rolled up. (It’s good to know he is rolling up his sleeves to solve America’s problems.)
2.“This is a make-or-break moment for the middle class.” (If we adopt the Buffet rule, it’s a good bet it will be a “make” moment).
3.“Everyone needs to pay their fair share.” (Everyone except for the half of all Americans who do not pay any income tax and will not be asked to by the president.)
4.“The rich need to pay their fare share.” (Presumably 10% of taxpayers paying 70% of all income taxes, greater than their share of income, is not a fair share and needs to be substantially higher.)
5.“Corporations need to play by the rules.” (Of course, we presumably need more of them.)
6.“All Americans should get a fair shot.” (At what exactly is unclear — opportunity to succeed, or an opportunity to share in the fruits of the labor of others? What is Obama’s plan for those who get a “fair” chance to compete, and fail? )
7.“We need to build an economy that can last.” (All countries have economies that “last,” even Greece. The test is whether the economy is growing, and if so, whether that rate of growth is sufficient. Is Obama concerned about growth — the size of the pie — or only about how a pie of whatever size is distributed?)