snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 27 January 2012, 03:31 AM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 108,876
Soapbox The Obama Economic Record

Comment: Could you please tell me the accuracy of this chart?

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 27 January 2012, 03:40 AM
wanderwoman's Avatar
wanderwoman wanderwoman is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2004
Location: Elkhart, IN
Posts: 7,396
Default

Just at first glance, a rise in unemployment rate from 7.8% to 8.5% is an increase of .7%, not 9%.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 27 January 2012, 03:48 AM
Dropbear's Avatar
Dropbear Dropbear is offline
 
Join Date: 03 June 2005
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 7,146
Australia

Quote:
Originally Posted by wanderwoman View Post
Just at first glance, a rise in unemployment rate from 7.8% to 8.5% is an increase of .7%, not 9%.
It would roughly be a 9% increase - which would be equal to .7%.

Dropbear
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 27 January 2012, 03:56 AM
Mickey Blue's Avatar
Mickey Blue Mickey Blue is offline
 
Join Date: 01 February 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,577
Default

I have no idea if its accurate or not but considering Bush and Co. threw us into a major depression due to their policymaking while engaging us in two expensive wars its not unexpected that the effort of digging us out (all the while with conservatives fighting him at every turn) may take a while and result us being worse off economically than we were at the beginning of the Bush/Republican caused recession.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 27 January 2012, 04:35 AM
rockland6674's Avatar
rockland6674 rockland6674 is offline
 
Join Date: 28 December 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,998
Icon106

When I tried to play The Obama Economic Record, it sounded scratchy and unmusical. Maybe I need a new needle?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 27 January 2012, 04:43 AM
wanderwoman's Avatar
wanderwoman wanderwoman is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2004
Location: Elkhart, IN
Posts: 7,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dropbear View Post
It would roughly be a 9% increase - which would be equal to .7%.

Dropbear
Ok, 'splain it to me. The straight percentage is .7%. How is it right to take a percentage of the percentage? Not being snarky or anything.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 27 January 2012, 05:10 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 19,465
Default

It makes a bit more sense if you look at unemployment as a number (for example number of unemployed) rather than a percentage. But it's not a good criticism of Obama. Unemployment was on a steep rise for all of 2008 (an increase of several hundred percents if you go by this method!). That rise stopped and began to fall during his first year in office. It's down from a high of just over 10% (at the end of 2009).
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 27 January 2012, 05:19 AM
wanderwoman's Avatar
wanderwoman wanderwoman is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2004
Location: Elkhart, IN
Posts: 7,396
Default

I guess I'm just math-challenged, then. Are we looking at it as a percentage change of the percentage change?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 27 January 2012, 05:31 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 19,465
Teacher

It doesn't matter whether you look at as a change in a raw number or a change in a percentage. The percentage change is still the same.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 27 January 2012, 05:43 AM
Roadie's Avatar
Roadie Roadie is offline
 
Join Date: 19 July 2005
Location: California
Posts: 8,536
Default

Really, the numbers don't matter. If they improve, Obama did it. If they worsen, it's Bush's fault.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 27 January 2012, 07:42 AM
Don Enrico's Avatar
Don Enrico Don Enrico is offline
 
Join Date: 05 October 2004
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 6,471
Teacher

Quote:
Originally Posted by wanderwoman View Post
Just at first glance, a rise in unemployment rate from 7.8% to 8.5% is an increase of .7%, not 9%.
The unemployment rate has risen by .7 percentage points, which is 9% of what it was before (7.8% of the employable population).
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 27 January 2012, 01:00 PM
damian's Avatar
damian damian is offline
 
Join Date: 14 April 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,271
Default

The chart does not include:
- the number of Osama Bin Ladens alive on Inauguration Day (1) compared with today (0).
- the number of wars the US is engaged in on Inauguration Day (2) compared with today (1).
- the number of Wall St investment bankers that have faced charges over their actions that led to the Global Financial Crisis on Inauguration Day (0) compared with today (0).
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 27 January 2012, 04:39 PM
BoKu's Avatar
BoKu BoKu is offline
 
Join Date: 20 February 2000
Location: Douglas Flat, CA
Posts: 3,692
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wanderwoman View Post
I guess I'm just math-challenged, then. Are we looking at it as a percentage change of the percentage change?


extra characters with that
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 27 January 2012, 05:23 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 67,503
Default

I swear some people think there's a dial in the Oval Office that POTUS uses to set gas prices.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 27 January 2012, 06:56 PM
Alarm's Avatar
Alarm Alarm is offline
 
Join Date: 26 May 2011
Location: Nepean, ON
Posts: 3,803
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lainie View Post
I swear some people think there's a dial in the Oval Office that POTUS uses to set gas prices.
And why do they think that he would set them for the entire world, too.

I can just see Obama pouring over a map "This place in Kenya, I don't want them to think I was born there, make the price higher... I'm going to hawaii next week, prices lower... Ottawa? What country's that in? Raise it! Raise it! Dang How I hate metric!"
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 27 January 2012, 07:06 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 108,876
Ponder

Gasoline prices were unusually low when Barack Obama took office due to a number of factors (weakened demand, bleak economic outlook, failure by OPEC members to cut production) that sent crude oil prices plummeting to their lowest level in several years at the end of 2008. The average price of a gallon of gasoline in the U.S. had topped $4.00 per gallon in mid-2008, a level it hasn't reached since.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 27 January 2012, 11:11 PM
wanderwoman's Avatar
wanderwoman wanderwoman is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2004
Location: Elkhart, IN
Posts: 7,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
It doesn't matter whether you look at as a change in a raw number or a change in a percentage. The percentage change is still the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Enrico View Post
The unemployment rate has risen by .7 percentage points, which is 9% of what it was before (7.8% of the employable population).
I understand that. What I'm trying to get at is that it seems to me to be a sneaky way to get a bigger number. Otherwise it's pretty meaningless.

I see now what I did in my earlier post. I meant to say a percentage change of a percentage.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 27 January 2012, 11:16 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 19,465
Default

It's sneaky. But only 9% as sneaky as the way it covers up the Obama administrations true record on jobs.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 27 January 2012, 11:29 PM
Saint James Saint James is offline
 
Join Date: 16 July 2007
Location: Ventura, CA
Posts: 1,259
Icon102

I'm working on a full analysis (with citations), and so far it looks like a case of "accurate but..." (AKA cherry picking statistics)

I also did the math for the three previous years to see where things were already headed. For example, there was a 9% increase in the unemployment rate between '09 and '12, but the increase between '06 and '09 was up by a whopping 66% (4.7 to 7.8%)

I also confirmed that that was a point of record lows for gas prices. In fact the highest price of the second Bush term (4.054) was higher than the highest under Obama (3.907). The average was slightly higher under Obama, but they were close (and I don't know if the tables I read were adjusted for inflation) - 2.87 vs 2.82.

More to come later...

Also, the unemployment rate peaked in October of 2009 at 10%, and has been headed down since then. Given that the economy doesn't turn on a dime, you can probably reach your own conclusions from there.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 27 January 2012, 11:37 PM
Amigone201's Avatar
Amigone201 Amigone201 is offline
 
Join Date: 11 March 2005
Location: Islip, NY
Posts: 5,853
Default

Yeah, the author of the graph doesn't seem to find relevant the direction that those economic indicators up there are headed in. It's all well and good to say things were at x when Obama took office and they're at 10x now. But so what? They were at 20x two years into Obama's first term. If they went from x, to 20x, and now back down to 10x, and they'll be at 5x by the end of the year, don't you think that's more relevant than "What were they then vs now?"?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Email Claims to Have Solution to Economic Crisis snopes Snopes Spotting 3 13 January 2010 12:55 AM
Men’s Underwear as an Economic Indicator snopes Business 3 20 October 2009 12:58 AM
Scams don’t stop in bad economic times snopes Crime 4 02 November 2008 03:36 AM
Economic stimulus rumors snopes Business 4 09 February 2008 07:56 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.