To analyise the idea of whether or not this recovery is slower then other recoveries you would actually have to compare it to other recoveries.
Unemployment rates != strength of recovery, which in turn != relative strength of recovery.
Also the measured rates range from 2.3 to 26.6 percent. That doesn't say much. The overall rate isn't bad at 5.6 but
1 - It took forever to get there, in large part because the recovery was so week.
and
2 - That's in the context of a large decline in workforce participation (and not just because of demographic reasons).
No for some actual comparisons. If you think they are wrong, please address the claims or arguments rather than engaging in ad-hominem by attacking the sources.
----------------
- Private-sector Jobs Gap. Compared with the average of other post-1960 recoveries lasting longer than one year, the private sector jobs gap increased to 5,798,000 from 5,772,000. Compared with the Reagan recovery of the 1980s, the gap increased to 12,765,000 from 12,577,000.
- Closing the Gap. Eliminating the Obama recovery's private-sector jobs gap with the average of other post-1960 recoveries by the end of 2016 would require the addition of 487,000 private sector jobs in each of the next 16 months. Closing the gap compared with the Reagan recovery would require the addition of 970,000 private sector jobs in each of the next 16 months.
- At This Pace. Private-sector job gains have averaged 190,000 over the past six months. At that pace the private-sector jobs gap compared with the average of other post-1960 recoveries would be reduced by 18 percent (1,043,000) to 4,755,000 by the end of 2016.
- Labor Force Participation Rate. The labor force participation rate remained unchanged at 62.6 percent. The labor force participation rate was 66.0 percent when the recession began in December 2007 and 65.7 percent when the recession ended in June 2009.
- Employment-to-Population Ratio. The employment-to-population ratio increased to 59.4 but remains significantly below its December 2007 level of 62.7 percent when the recession began.
texasgopvote.com
But this is a long-term pattern under Obama, not a seasonal blip. Back in 2009, Vice President Biden promised us a “Summer of Recovery” and nearly six years later we are all still eagerly waiting for it.
The tepid growth rate so far in 2015 merely extends the track record of the 23 quarter post-Great Recession recovery. The annualized growth rate of 2.24 percent dead last compared to the six other recoveries since 1960, which averaged 3.97 percent after 23 quarters. This translates into nearly $1.7 trillion (in constant 2009 dollars) in absent economic growth.
But the more amazing comparison is that of the Reagan—which trounces this current so-called recovery. That recovery’s sizzling 4.8 percent annualized growth through 23 quarters was more than twice the rate of the current recovery.
dailysignal.com
Similarly, in the 11 post depression recessions before President Obama, the economy recovered the lost GDP during the recession within an average of 4.5 quarters after the recession started. But it took Obama’s recovery 16 quarters, or 4 years, to reach that point. Today, 5½ years, or 22 quarters, after the recession started, the economy (real GDP) has grown only about 3% above where it was when the recession started. By sharp contrast, at this point in the Reagan recovery, the economy had boomed by about 20%, or one fifth.
forbes.com |
