Obama Stimulus Failure: Economy Sheds More Jobs

Posted on Jul 3 2010 - 10:10am by Harrison

Despite the $1 trillion Obama and the Democrats have thrown into the economy, the private sector remains very weak: 

The size of the US labour force has shrunk since May by 652,000, the second largest monthly fall since 1995, as fears that the US economic recovery may be fizzling out took hold. 

US jobs data released  on Friday showed that businesses created a modest 83,000 jobs in June. The government’s monthly jobs report disappointed economists and confirmed that the labour market had lost momentum since April, when private payrolls grew by 241,000. 

On the surface, one bright spot in Friday’s report was the decline in the unemployment rate, which fell from 9.7 per cent in May to 9.5 per cent last month – its lowest level since July 2009. 

But economists were quick to point out that the fall was driven by the fact that the labour force shrank by 652,000 people last month. This suggests that many people who came back into the workforce this year have now been sidelined. 

The only “answers” we’ve seen from Democrats has been to throw away taxpayer dollars on “stimulus” which has doubled our debt in 15 months or to raise taxes.  No wonder businesses aren’t too eager to take on new employees.  Just Politics..? has said over and over that the best way to create jobs are to let the kinks work themselves out of the marketplace naturally, reduce taxes, and take the politics out of areas like the banking industries which pushed for home loans to be made to those who obviously didn’t qualify. 

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell sums it up best: 

The two things that are growing fastest in this Democrat economy are the size of the federal government and the crushing burden of the national debt 

When America truly begins creating lasting private sector jobs that help our economy grow, it will be despite the government, not because of it. 

Infecting the economy with the big hand of government only does harm.

Democrats are spending our future and unemployment continues to rise because of it.




31 Comments so far. Feel free to join this conversation.

  1. LD Jackson July 3, 2010 at 11:01 AM -

    Good article, Harrison. I have tried to point out on my own blog, how the debt was growing under the Obama administration, with no discernible, positive results. The comments I received from my more liberal readers always suggested that the growing debt was still the fault of George W. Bush. They would like us to believe that the spending that has been going on has nothing to do with how great the debt really is.

    All the while, the only thing that is growing is the government and the biggest majority of the jobs that have been added to the workforce are public sector jobs. They can not seem to realize that the only way our economy is really going to recover is for the private sector to start growing and adding jobs. Until that happens, our economy is going to stay weak.

    • Harrison July 3, 2010 at 11:07 AM -

      Thanks for your comments and I agree. It took 200 years for our nation’s debt to grow to the levels it stood in 2008. In less than 2 years that debt has doubled. In 10 years it will double again thanks to Obama. Liberals will always blame Bush even as the Democrats bring our economy to its knees and we see a Greek-like flame-out on our shores.

  2. David W. Walters July 3, 2010 at 11:17 AM -

    uh, the economy was on its knees when Obama took office. We have a long way to go to right the wrongs of the previous eight years.

    • Harrison July 3, 2010 at 4:46 PM -

      The last time this government spent this kind of “stimulus” money was when a recession turned into the Great Depression. It didn’t work then and it won’t work now. Contrast that approach with the 1980s when taxes were lowered and Federal spending reduced and we set off on the longest period of growth this country has seen in the last 100 years.

      • David W. Walters July 3, 2010 at 6:22 PM -

        What history book did you read Harrison? The New Deal had a great effect on turning around another republican screw up that cost wage earners dearly. The man won 4 terms and was perhaps the greatest president we have had in the 20th century.
        I remember the “Trickle Down” era of the 80’s…..my wages stagnated, while the rich got richer off my labor and the labor of my co-workers. This once great nation has been in a slow, downward spiral since 1980, which quickened when the republicans won the white house & congress 10 years. That set the stage for the collapse of 2008.

        • Harrison July 3, 2010 at 6:40 PM -

          I read the history written by economists (but one example of many):

          Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

          After scrutinizing Roosevelt’s record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

          “The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes,” Cole said. “Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened.


          And I guess you forgot Jimmy Carter’s policies of the 70s.

          A robust private sector is what makes economies strong, not government spending.

  3. David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 6:34 AM -

    “Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened.”
    Oh really?
    Hoover had three years to improve the economy, and what did he do? Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and the Mexican Repatriation program were his solutions and the economy continued to tank. Then came the New Deal and the Glass-Stegall Act which addressed the casino style stock market trading that was endemic of the ’29 stock market AND the ’08 stock market. Remember, it was Phil Gramm’s Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed the sanctions on this casino style stock market which seems to be beloved by republicans yet leads to disaster.
    Overall, soon after Roosevelt took office, the economy slowly began to improve until 1937 when some New Deal policies were rolled back and the economy instantly tanked again. As to government intervention, it WAS government spending in the form of military rearmament which finally broke the back of the Great Republican Depression of 1929, leading us to prosperity. Why do you think Roosevelt won 4 terms?
    Your history is revisionist AND wrong. But like Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels, my friends on the right keep repeating this lie in hopes of calling it truth…..keep on my friend. Perhaps you think being jobless is character building.

    • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 7:34 AM -

      David, WWII is what saved the economy from FDR’s terrible economic policies, not massive Federal spending. I never said Hoover did a good job with things, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act being one of his biggest failures.

      There are numerous studies showing that the more money government spends on the economy the worse things get but it does not appear you are interested in facts or studies but rather ideology.

      • David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 9:48 AM -

        -So how do the revisionist economic “historians” account for a ROBUST recovery from 1933-1936? Yes there was a recession in 1937 due to a CUT in government spending. Increased government spending for the war effort is what finally brought us out of the great depression. So federal spending IS essential to solve the failures of the “free” market…(free for some, yet costly to ALL wage earners).
        Just thought i’d give you some pause for thought, thanx!

        • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 10:57 AM -

          Yes, WWII “helped” the country out of the depression. Before WWII U.S. debt stood at $43 billion after it stood at $269.5 billion. The only thing that allowed us to grow was the fact that America was the only country left standing with a fully functional manufacturing infrastructure. I won’t even go into all the reasons why this wasn’t a real solution, much less something we should repeat.

          Was FDR a great “wartime” president? Yes. He was a lousy economist though.

          • David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 11:15 AM -

            -But you didn’t answer the fact that the economy IMPROVED substantially from 1933-1936 from the implementation of the NEW DEAL.

            • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 11:34 AM -

              The economy didn’t improve during that time however.

              In the 12 months after the October 1929 stock market crash unemployment never reached double digits. When Hoover starting “stimulating” the economy unemployment shot above 20% in 1932 and stayed that high for 2 years. In fact, during the 1930s, unemployment never fell below 14.5%.

  4. David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 6:45 AM -

    Oh, by the way, the economic woes of the 70’s was due to our dependence on oil. Reagan set us up for a fall by NOT continuing Carter’s policy of weaning us off of oil.
    I remember the Reagan years. My wages rose very slowly even though i was a technically skill worker…Keep it up Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels Jr.!

    • David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 11:52 AM -

      “The economy didn’t improve during that time however.”
      -Wrong…..the economy improved dramatically soon after Roosevelt took office and continued to improve until June 1937, when the Roosevelt administration cut spending.

      • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 12:13 PM -

        If you call 15%+ unemployment for almost a decade an “improvement” versus sub-10% unemployment before government “stimulus” then I suggest there may be a job for you in the Obama administration.

        Good luck on that interview.

  5. David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 12:26 PM -

    -Nice rhetoric, but again, no facts. Unemployment was at around 25%…..Yes, that IS way worse than 15%. GNP, employment all improved dramatically AFTER 1933, until Roosevelt was forced to CUT the budget in 1937, and we again dipped into another recession. Again, it was increased federal spending(war spending is federal spending) that finally ended the depression.

  6. David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 1:00 PM -

    We can be creative with charts, but the shedding of jobs began in 1929. They peaked shortly AFTER Roosevelt took office.
    (Bureau of Labor Statistics….i don’t know where your graph came from)
    Unemployment peaked in 1933 at 24.9%, falling to 14.3% in 1937…..a considerable improvement, no?
    The facts that “intelligent” people go by? I’ll let that one slide…..who knows i may be “unintelligent”(whatever that means to you), but i am no fool my friend. 😉

    • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 1:06 PM -

      David, what you appear to not want to understand is that in the 12 months following the 1929 stock market crash (when history “tells” us the Great Depression began, unemployment did not reach double digits. Once Herbert Hoover (and later FDR) began injecting massive amounts of government “stimulus” into the economy unemployment increased rapidly. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment went from 3.3% from 1923-1929 to 8.9% in 1930 peaking in 1933 at 24.9%. Though unemployment did began to decrease, it did so very slowly even as FDR wasted more and more money on “stimulus.”

      The facts are the “stimulus” made a bad economy much worse and prolonged that bad economy far beyond what it would have been had no “stimulus” been applied.

      The key word here is “prolonged.”

      As I have said many times, only WWII saved the economy from FDR’s foolish economic policies.

      • David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 1:20 PM -

        I understand perfectly well. Unemployment had a LONG way to go to fall from 3.3% in 1929, to its peak in 1933 when it was 24.9%. It doesn’t just happen overnight my friend. It is a log, steady spiral DOWNWARD. By 1930 unemployment rose to 8.9%.
        Other than the Hoover Dam, i am unaware of any substantial injection be stimulated our economy with. Your facts are just wrong. Your chart didn’t even have any notation as to its source. How reliable is that? My facts come from the U.S. Dept. of Labor. Did you make that silly bar graph?

        • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 1:32 PM -

          “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. We have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot!”
          – Henry Morgenthau (FDR’s Sec. of Treasury) in 1939

  7. David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 1:46 PM -

    Henery Morgenthau economic policies were quite conservative. He believed in balanced budgets, stable currency, reduction of the national debt, and the need for more private investment, all ideas that republicans share. So in this he is more of a republican than a democrat. But that doesn’t make him correct in his assessment. As the “real” graphs show, the New Deal did improve the economy.(address that fact, will ya?) Some folks (Morganthal and others….) just have a hard time digesting facts that run counter to their preconceived notions.

    • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 1:56 PM -

      It’s been fun but all the facts have been presented. You can lead a horse to water…

      Take care.

      • David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 2:01 PM -

        I’m still waiting for the facts to be presented by your side…..everything was simply made up! Mine came from the Dept. of Labor, how ’bout yours?
        I’ll be back to check on your factual content (or lack thereof) in the future. Keep it honest, will ya?

        • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 3:15 PM -

          As quoted above:

          “According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment went from 3.3% from 1923-1929 to 8.9% in 1930 peaking in 1933 at 24.9%.”

          • David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 3:18 PM -

            YES! and then it went down AFTER the New Deal was instituted! Do you see your folly now?

            • Harrison July 4, 2010 at 3:54 PM -

              Again… FDR’s policies PROLONGED economic problems.


            • David W. Walters July 4, 2010 at 4:02 PM -

              >>”Again… FDR’s policies PROLONGED economic problems.”
              -if you say so, but that still does not constitute a fact nor the truth of the matter. The facts show the direct opposite.
              On a side note, happy 4th of July, especially to my sons and daughters serving in war zones far from home!

  8. dean July 6, 2010 at 9:48 AM -

    One double-dip coming up!

    $1.8 trillion setting on the balance sheets of America’s 500 largest non-financial companies. A nearly unprecendented corporate America rainy day fund that sees rocky times ahead due to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the impending Obama regulatory regime.

    Blessings upon you and your children, David.

    • David W. Walters July 6, 2010 at 9:59 AM -

      So what should we do, specifically?