We all wanna compare; we wanna know. How is one team vs. another? How am I compared to my peers? So, it’s only natural that we do the same thing for the economy and how we’re managing our way out of it.
So. How is Mr. Obama doing?
Well, let’s look.
The quick and dirty:
But as Rational Republican argues, there is more to the story:
As Sean mentioned:
Again, the point of this argument is not to assess blame on either administrations’ policy. It simply puts the left’s claims into perspective.
What about if we compare not Obama to Dubya, but rather compared Obama’s recovery to the recovery of the LAST big recession, the one Reagan oversaw?
This one’s not even close. The first 7 quarters after the recession ended saw massive growth under Reagan. Under Obama? Tepid growth at best. In fact, Obama’s biggest quarter of growth isn’t even as large as Reagan’s smallest quarter of growth once the recovery took hold.
Now, as Dan Mitchell points out:
To be sure, we have no idea what would have happened in the early 1980s without Reaganomics, just like we have no idea what would have happened the past few years if America had taken a different approach.
But when theory and evidence both point in a certain direction, perhaps it’s a good idea to at least consider the possibility that small government is better for prosperity than big government.
Reagan marked an ushering of small government, easing regulations and an embracing of free and open markets. Obama? Not so much. He insists on larger government, more and more regulation and a skeptical [to say the least] eye towards markets and freedom.
Reagan welcomed capitalism. Obama hates capitalism.
One President felt that government hurts the economy. Another President feels that government is the ANSWER to the economy.
YOU pick ’em.