Obama report: 95,000 jobs each month
By ConnPolitics.tv Editor on Feb 11, 2010 | In News, President Barack Obama | 26 feedbacks »
By PHILIP ELLIOTT
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) – The United States is likely to average 95,000 more jobs each month this year, while personal savings will remain high as credit remains tight, according to a White House report released Thursday.
The Council of Economic Advisers also trumpeted the $787 billion economic stimulus package, which it said has saved or created about 2 million jobs.
In a message to Congress, President Barack Obama pointed out that the economy he inherited was losing 700,000 jobs each month.
“I can report that over the past year, this work has begun. In the coming year, this work continues,” Obama said in a letter he sent to the Capitol attached to his economic update to lawmakers. “But to understand where we must go in the next year and beyond, it is important to remember where we began one year ago.”
Casting its first year as positive, the administration’s 462-page report served as a summary of its logic and a pitch for Obama’s future agenda.
Recognizing voters were likely to hold Obama to account for the economy, the White House team cast blame on their predecessors and unpopular Wall Street bankers.
“I think there’s just no way to understate how huge the economic challenges facing the country have been this past year,” said Christina Romer, head the Council of Economic Advisers. “So everything obviously from the financial crisis, the terrible recession, but the longer-run problems – the stagnating middle-class incomes, soaring health care costs, the failure to invest in education, innovation, clean energy – we certainly inherited an economy with a number of economic problems.”
It’s not clear whether the it-didn’t-break-on-my-watch message would resonate with voters. Republicans were quick to describe the document as propaganda masquerading as governing.
“The Obama administration’s report is full of blame for the policies of years past, praise for its own failed policies of the past year and promises about their ideological agenda to grow government,” said Republican House Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia.
“Instead of praising themselves and blaming others, a greater focus on small businesses and smart solutions to reduce uncertainty and create jobs would be welcomed and is long overdue,” Cantor said.
Indeed, even adding an average of 95,000 jobs each month, unemployment is likely to remain around 10 percent through this year and not fall below 6 percent until 2015. And while Americans are likely to save more for big-ticket items such as homes or cars, it means a slower recovery for a nation that has lost 8.4 million net jobs since this recession began in December 2007.
Obama’s economic report predicts the economy could grow at a rate of 2.5 percent, in line with what the administration’s economists predicted last year.
Mark Zandi, founder of Moody’s Economy.com and a frequent adviser to lawmakers, said the White House economic projections track his own. A jobs bill worth $100 billion to $150 billion, he said, would accelerate a decrease in unemployment.
That also lines up with a bipartisan Senate proposal that promises to add 80,000 to 180,000 jobs over a year.
“If we go back into recession it will be very difficult to get out of it,” said Zandi, who advised Obama’s rival, John McCain, in the 2008 presidential election.
It will be even tougher if Americans continue to save at high rates – somewhere in the 4 percent to 7 percent range – as the White House report predicts they will until the financial services sector eases lending.
The report put it more bluntly: “A full economic recovery is unlikely until and unless the financial system is repaired.”
That pressures Congress to take action on the regulatory changes Obama has pushed to address weaknesses in the financial system that led to the 2008 financial crisis. The legislation aims to increase consumer protections on loans and credit cards, add restrictions to previously unregulated financial products and find ways to dismantle failing firms without resorting to taxpayer bailouts.
——
Associated Press writer Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.
26 comments
If government would stop wasting our money, and ease up on the massive confiscatory taxation, and end the threat consome private business into the government with this "healthcare" crap, we'd be much better off.
That is right, Dad, Bush never destroyed the economy, he inherited the deficit and balanced budget from Clinton which destroyed the economy.
"faslsely claims to be 'creating jobs"?
How do you know he isn't creating jobs with government money?
"If government would stop wasting our money, and ease up on the massive confiscatory taxation,"
Supply Side Tax Cuts Failed to Deliver Jobs and Growth Between 2001 and 2007
Which party controlled both the executive and legislative branches of the government between 2000-2008? The Republicans. They didn't do much to stop big spending nor did they stop "massive confiscatory taxation."
"and end the threat consome [sic.]private business into the government"
Business was consumed through the provisions of T.A.R.P. Something the last president supported.
"Neal. Under George Bush unemployment peaked at 5%."
The recession started under Bush. Did you forget that he was president in 2007? And was the result of many complicated factors, lets get that straight, ok?
In 2008 as a result of the financial climate, unemployment was expected to top 10% in 2009. I'm not saying this is Bush's or Obama's fault. It is the result of economic trends. Could the last administration done something to stop this? Sure. But, they were focused on war and fear, rather than on the people they were elected to serve.
Note to the doorknobs on both sides of the political spectrum... We, the people are getting sick and tired of it.
Barack Obama calls for national unity. This is the deception; the progressive liberal calls for cooperation between classes, but actually promotes division to conceal the tensions between the corporation leaders and their employees.
The only thing Obama knows how to stimulate is himself.
The democrats took control of Congress in 2006 and will lose it in 2010. The democrats also foiled any attempt by the Republicans to reform fannie mae and freedy mac in 2004.
And I see you are still shrilling for the bitter conservatives.
My mistake, bill, I meant to write 2006.
This goes to prove that even the "grand old party" lies, deceives, and refuses to practice what it preaches.
Unemployment rate by year.
Jan 2000 4.1%
Jan 2001 4.0%
Jan 2002 5.8%
Jan 2003 6.0%
Jan 2004 5.7% Jobs added 2.2 million
Jan 2005 5.4% Jobs added 2.0 million
Jan 2006 4.9% Jobs added 1.8 million
Jan 2007 4.5 %Jobs added 1.3 million
Jan 2008 5.0% Jobs lost 2.6 million
Hard to dispute these facts... Check for yourself.
The economy as a whole will work itself out over the long term and certainly not by this administrations futile efforts to fix it. If anything it will dampen any recovery by inflation by the unconscionable printing of money.
Whatever this idiot administration throws into the mix will not make a hill beans of difference and be detrimental overall.
Remember one thing. The US economy is based on energy. When GWB left office the cost for a barrel of crude was $38.00/barrel. Today it is $79.00/barrel, more than doubled, one year later. How's that hope and change working for you?
-779,000
That's the peak in monthly job losses reached during this recession. That mark was reached in January 2009. Remind me again. Who was the President for the first 20 days of that month; a month that capped 12 months of steadily increasing monthly job loss rates? Weren't the Bush tax cuts still in effect then?
On behalf of all the enlightened progressive minds here in Connecticut, I'd like to say Thanks for leaving.
I find that hard to believe as you admitted in the past that you hate all Democrats.
Not once have you criticized or, used your meager intellectual capacity to insult, degrade or attack any republican policy. However, you attack anyone who you consider a "lib" an anyone who doesn't agree with your narrow view of current events.
Who was in charge of congress then?
Also, the government created this mess not by overspending, not by cutting taxes, but by creating the housing disaster. Take a look at the Community Reinvestment Act. it was "designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods." Earlier in the decade the Democrats pushed banks to lend money to people that could not afford it -- a popular "liberal' notion. This program, coupled with the huge increase in energy costs began the downward spiral that we all are feeling now.
You can't blame any administration for creating it, (though we CAN blame congress) but we can blame the current one for not taking proper steps to help correct it. Stimulating the economy by cutting taxes and creating incentives for businesses. Not selectively based on ideology, but across the board.
That is true, but it was also a result of the policies the president and the republican controlled legislative branch which could have prevented all of this. Rather, the just "rubber stamped" the Bush policy...
Amazing how you are revising history to leave out details...
"We can put light where there's darkness, and hope where there's despondency in this country. And part of it is working together as a nation to encourage folks to own their own home."
- President George W. Bush, Oct. 15, 2002"
"From his earliest days in office, Bush paired his belief that Americans do best when they own their own homes with his conviction that markets do best when left alone. Bush pushed hard to expand home ownership, especially among minority groups, an initiative that dovetailed with both his ambition to expand Republican appeal and the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards."
So, you can blame it on democrats if you like, but...
"The president spent years pushing a recalcitrant Congress to toughen regulation of the companies, but was unwilling to compromise when his former Treasury secretary wanted to cut a deal."
"As early as 2006, top advisers to Bush dismissed warnings from people inside and outside the White House that housing prices were inflated and that a foreclosure crisis was looming."
"There is no question we did not recognize the severity of the problems," said Al Hubbard, Bush's former chief economic adviser, who left the White House in December 2007. "Had we, we would have attacked them."
"No one wanted to stop that bubble," [Lawrence]Lindsay said. "It would have conflicted with the president's own policies."
Comment feed for this postLeave a comment
| « Dodd talks bank bill w/GOP Sen Corker | Amann to formally quit » |
