The truth about the presidents and their politics, as only hard numbers can demonstrate.
But first, here are some facts about the numbers. While one or two indicators separately cannot be reliable as applied to the office of the president, here, I am using several indicators combined to give a better view into the general impact of the policies of the period. It is important to remember that rates like unemployment, inflation and GDP growth are always going to have some level of activity, but the fluctuations and their severity can be analyzed.
Unemployment Rate; this is the percentage of the able-bodied working age people over 16 years old in the U.S. who are not at some time during the year employed. While some people use the monthly or periodic estimates of the unemployment rate, the purpose is generally for keeping track of the current rate. For the purposes of historic analysis and comparison, I have used the annualized rates only. NOTE: The month-to-month unemployment rate is a poor indicator of anything more than the current rate, and the impact of those unemployed for one, two or three months is nominal overall but the annual average rate is a better indicator as prolonged unemployment has a much more devastating effect on people.
Budget Deficit or Surplus; this is the amount of money the government possessed for the purposes of funding the expenditures planned under the federal budget created by the President’s office and adjusted and approved by Congress. A deficit is an insufficient amount of required funds available and usually causes the government to borrow and add to the National Debt. A surplus is an amount of money available in excess of the required funds for the budget. Surpluses can be accumulated by the government each year and be used to fund unexpected and unplanned expenditures in future or to pay-off the National Debt.
National Debt; also called the "Federal Debt", is increased by the accumulation of budget deficits and is an outstanding amount of total borrowed money that the government owes. Those entities that loaned money to the government generally hold an interest stock in the government. That means three things; (1) those loaning entities often charge a percent of the loaned amount as interest, thus increasing the actual debt and (2) that demands may be made by the loaning entities for accommodations in such things as trade relations and (3) that such loaning entities may assume control or ownership of some properties or other assets in lieu of direct payments. The debt also grows with adjustment for annual inflations. One way to look at the problem posed by the National Debt is that it amounts to a government promise to tax the people the amount of the existing debt. Sometimes increases to the National Debt is necessary in that a specific case may be justifiable, for example the costs to fight World War II. But most times the things that increase our nation's debt are not so justifiable. Additionally, honest budgeting can reduce the deficit and thus the growth of the debt. Sadly, the only way that we can possibly lessen our Federal Debt is by increasing tax revenue, the question is if we wait until it breaks our backs or do we start making a serious effort to get out from under debt?
Gross Domestic Product; is a measure of the total size of an economy. The total market value of all products and services produced in the course of the year, including the sum of the addition of value to a product through its various stages is what is measured. The GDP is “gross” as opposed to “net” which means all investments but not returns, sale price but not production cost and etc. GDP is calculated as C+I+G+NX=GDP, which is consumption + investment (I) + government spending (G) + net exports (NX, exports made in the nation but not including parts imported for production purposes) = GDP. Generally the economy is considered to be healthier when the GDP grows by a significant amount. Persistent major slowing of the growth rate of the GDP is often considered a depression, while a recession is a temporary short-term slowing.
Percent of Change in GDP Growth; is a quick and easy indicator to the growth rate calculated as total GDP of year X (latest year) divided by the total GDP of year Y (previous year) = percent of growth. (Example: $150 divided by $100 = 1.5 or 50%). The lower the percent is the closer to a recession the economy was for that year. Generally we could say that, as an average, less than 4% is slow economic growth, 4% to 6% is moderately good growth, 6% to 7% is good growth and that more than 7% is very good growth. This is just my estimation though.
Inflation Rate; is the percent of decrease in the purchasing power of the dollar. This is fairly easy to apply to practical personal experiences in that a 10% inflation equals a change in costs from $1 in year Y to $1.10 in the following year. That is that generally things cost more as each year passes. This is often calculated using the CPI (consumer price index) or the CPI and “GDP deflator” combined.
Year Avg. Nat’l. Fed. Budget National Gross GDP % Inflation
Unemploy. Deficit (-) / Debt Domestic Change Rate
Rate (#) Surplus (+) Product + / -
John F. Kennedy (democrat)
1961 6.7 - $1.2 billion $288 bil $544 bil + 3.5%* 1.0%
1962 5.5 - $7 billion $298 bil $585 bil + 7.5% 1.0%
1963 5.7 - $5 billion $305 bil $617 bil + 5.5% 1.0%
Lyndon B. Johnson (democrat)
1964 5.2 - $6 billion $311 bil $663 bil + 7.4% 1.0%
1965 4.5 - $1 billion $317 bil $719 bil + 8.4% 2.0%
1966 3.8 - $4 billion $319 bil $787 bil + 9.5% 3.0%
1967 3.8 - $9 billion $326 bil $832 bil + 5.7% 3.0%
1968 3.6 - $25 billion $347 bil $910 bil + 9.3% 4.0%
Richard M. Nixon (republican)
1969 3.5 + $3 billion (SUR!) $353 bil $984 bil + 8.2% 5.0%
1970 4.9 - $3 billion $370 bil $1.03 tril + 5.5% 6.0%
1971 5.9 - $23 billion $398 bil $1.12 tril + 8.5% 4.0%
1972 5.6 - $23 billion $427 bil $1.23 tril + 9.9% 3.0%
1973 4.9 - $15 billion $458 bil $1.38 tril + 11.7% 6.0%
Nixon first 3/4 – Ford last 1/4 of this year
1974 5.6 - $6 billion $475 bil $1.50 tril + 8.5% 11.0%
Gerald R. Ford, Jr. (republican)
1975 8.5 - $53 billion $533 bil $1.63 tril + 9.2% 9.0%
1976 7.7 - $74 billion $620 bil $1.82 tril + 11.4% 6.0%
James E. Carter, Jr. (democrat)
1977 7.1 - $54 billion $698 bil $2.03 tril + 11.3% 7.0%
1978 6.1 - $59 billion $771 bil $2.29 tril + 13.0% 8.0%
1979 5.8 - $41 billion $826 bil $2.56 tril + 11.7% 11.0%
1980 7.1 - $74 billion $907 bil $2.78 tril + 8.8% 13.0%**
Ronald W. Reagan (republican)
1981 7.6 - $79 billion $997 bil $3.12 tril + 12.2% 10.0%
1982 9.7*** - $128 billion $1.14 tril $3.25 tril + 4.0% 6.0%
1983 9.6 - $208 billion $1.37 tril $3.53 tril + 8.7% 3.0%
1984 7.5 - $185 billion $1.57 tril $3.93 tril + 11.2% 4.0%
1985 7.2 - $212 billion $1.82 tril $4.22 tril + 7.3% 4.0%
1986 7.0 - $221 billion $2.12 tril $4.46 tril + 5.7% 2.0%
1987 6.2 - $150 billion $2.35 tril $4.73 tril + 6.2% 4.0%
1988 5.5 - $155 billion $2.60 tril $5.10 tril + 7.7% 4.0%
George H.W. Bush (republican)
1989 5.3 - $152 billion $2.85 tril $5.48 tril + 7.5% 5.0%
1990 5.6 - $221 billion $3.23 tril $5.80 tril + 5.8% 5.0%
1991 6.8 - $269 billion $3.66 tril $5.99 tril + 3.3% 4.0%
1992 7.5 - $290 billion $4.06 tril $6.33 tril + 5.7% 3.0%
William J. Clinton (democrat)^
1993 6.9 - $255 billion $4.41 tril $6.65 tril + 5.0% 3.0%
1994 6.1 - $203 billion $4.69 tril $7.07 tril + 6.2% 3.0%
1995 5.6 - $164 billion $4.97 tril $7.39 tril + 4.6% 3.0%
1996 5.4 - $107 billion $5.22 tril $7.81 tril + 5.7% 3.0%
1997 4.9 - $22 billion $5.41 tril $8.30 tril + 6.2% 2.0%
1998 4.5 + $69 billion $5.52 tril $8.74 tril + 5.3% 2.0%
1999 4.2 + $126 billion $5.65 tril $9.26 tril + 6.0% 2.0%
2000 3.97 + $236 billion $5.67 tril $9.81 tril + 5.9% 3.0%
George W. Bush (republican)
2001 4.7 + $127 billion $5.80 tril $10.1 tril + 3.2% 3.0%
2002 5.8 - $158 billion $6.22 tril $10.4 tril + 3.4% 2.0%
2003 6.0 - $375 billion $6.78 tril $10.9 tril + 4.7% 2.0%
2004 5.5 - $521 billion $7.37 tril $11.6 tril + 6.6% 3.0%
2005 5.1 - $318 billion $7.93 tril $12.4 tril + 6.4% 3.0%
2006 4.6 - $423 billion $8.50 tril $13.1 tril + 6.1% 3.0%
2007 4.6 - $459 billion $9.23 tril $13.8 tril + 5.3% 6.0%
2008 5.8 - $342 billion $10.70 tril $14.4 tril + 2.6% 4.0%
Barack H Obama, Jr. (democrat)
2009 ? + $??? billion $??? tril $??? tril + ??% ??%
(as of 23 December, 2009) the National Debt is currently $12.102 Trillion
Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Public Debt
When the unemployment rate is averaged for the 11 months so far in 2009 the annual average is 9.19%. If December's rate is also 10%, the true annual average for 2009 will be 9.3%, which is just lower than under Reagan's second and third years in office at 9.7% and 9.6%.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics
Information on the inflation rate. (Usually the current year appears to have no inflation from the previous year. However, this is because the staff have yet to analyze and input the data into the calculator, i.e.: 2009's inflation rate will be available in 2010.)
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics
* Percent change in GDP from preceding year’s GDP, 1960 isn’t listed here but 1961’s change is given from 1960.
** All time high inflation rate for this data set (1961 to 2006).
*** All-time high unemployment rate for this data set (1961 to 2006).
(#) Note; these unemployment rates are for the whole year, averaging all periods in the year.
^ This subset of data (1993 to 2000) is unique in that it shows a distinct pattern of matching trends in each category of information.
JOHN F. KENNEDY;
Term: 3 3/4 years. Avg. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $4.4 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 5.9%
Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $13.2 Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $25 Bil. Avg. Inflation Rate: 1%
Tot. Growth of GDP: $92 Bil. Tot. Inflation: 3% (1963’s $1.03 equals 1960’s $1)
Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 16.5% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 5.5%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LYNDON B. JOHNSON
Term: 5 1/4 years. Avg. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $9 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 4.18% Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $45 Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $38 Bil. Avg. Inflation Rate: 2.6% Tot. Growth of GDP: $293 Bil. Tot. Inflation: 13% (1968’s $1.13 equals 1963’s $1)Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 40.3% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 8.06%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD M. NIXON
Term: 5 3/4 years. Avg. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $11.65 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 5.29% Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $67 Bil.Tot. Accrued Debt: $138 Bil. Avg. Inflation Rate: 6.09% Tot. Growth of GDP: $590 Bil. Tot. Inflation: 35% (1974’s $1.35 equals 1968’s $1)
Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 52.3% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 9.09%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GERALD FORD
Term: 2 1/4 years. Avg. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $63.5 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 7.2% Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $127 Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $159.5 Bil. Avg. Inflation Rate: 7.5% Tot. Growth of GDP: $320 Bil. Tot. Inflation: 15% (1976’s $1.15 equals 1974’s $1) Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 20.6% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 10.3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JIMMY CARTER
Term: 4 years. Avg. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $57 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 6.52% Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $228 Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $287 Bil. Avg. Inflation Rate: 9.75% Tot. Growth of GDP: $960 Bil. Tot. Inflation: 39% (1980’s $1.39 equals 1976’s $1)Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 44.8% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 11.2%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Term: 8 years. Avg. Budget Deficit /Surplus: - $167.25 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 7.54% Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $1.34 TRILLION. Tot. Accrued Debt: $1.69 TRILLION Avg. Inflation Rate: 4.62% Tot. Growth of GDP: $2.32 TRIL. Tot. Inflation: 37% (1988’s $1.37 equals 1980’s $1)
Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 63% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 7.87%
Despite Reagan’s tremendous borrowing to try to grow the GDP we see a demonstration of an interesting phenomenon. While Reagan increased the GDP according to his much touted “Trickle Down Economics” he increased it less than Clinton did without using that approach. Also Reagan added much more national debt while Clinton’s approach added significantly less debt. Reagan’s plan only worked for big business, as indicated by the contrast between the increased GDP while his term saw a seriously higher unemployment rate average combined with dramatically more devaluation of the dollar. All-in-all, Reagan’s “Trickle-Down” plan proved to be a very inefficient approach.
Reagan also has the distinction of having some extreme numbers not matched by any other president as explained here.
- The highest unemployment rate 9.7% followed by 9.6% in the next year. Gerald Ford had the next highest rate at 8.5%. (NOTE: this is for an entire year, not for any given month.)
- The most debt added to the national debt. Though it is speculated that George W Bush may exceed that. But those numbers are not yet published in any searchable authentic material.
- The most “out-of-control” federal budget”, having the most deficit of any president.
- Reagan is also the first president to make the national debt exceed one trillion dollars.
- He is also only one of three presidents, out of the nine listed here, to see an inflation rate in the “double-digits”.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE H.W. BUSH
Term: 4 years. Avg. Budget Deficit /Surplus: - $233 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 6.3%
Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $932 Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $1.46 TRIL. Avg. Inflation Rate: 4.25% Tot. Growth of GDP: $1.23 TRIL. Tot. Inflation: 17% (1992’s $1.17 equals 1988’s $1)
Term: 4 years. Avg. Budget Deficit /Surplus: - $233 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 6.3%
Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $932 Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $1.46 TRIL. Avg. Inflation Rate: 4.25% Tot. Growth of GDP: $1.23 TRIL. Tot. Inflation: 17% (1992’s $1.17 equals 1988’s $1)
Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 22.3% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 5.57%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Term: 8 years. Avg. Budget Deficit /Surplus: - $40 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 5.2%
Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $320 Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $1.26 TRIL. Avg. Inflation Rate: 2.62% Tot. Growth of GDP: $3.48 TRIL. Tot. Inflation: 21% (2000’s $1.21 equals 1992’s $1)
Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $320 Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $1.26 TRIL. Avg. Inflation Rate: 2.62% Tot. Growth of GDP: $3.48 TRIL. Tot. Inflation: 21% (2000’s $1.21 equals 1992’s $1)
Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 44.9% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 5.61%
To properly understand Clinton’s presidency we must take a serious look at several issues. What is the story the numbers are trying to tell us? I will, here, enumerate the particular points that should be considered.
- While this president’s average unemployment rate was 5.2% for his entire term, we can see a linear decline in the unemployment rate. Reaching back to the last year of Bush’s term, which ended with 7.5% unemployment rate and Clinton started his term with 6.9%. The nation’s unemployment rate declined significantly each year, never increasing or stagnating and his presidency ended with a rate of 4.0% an overall improvement of 2.9%. This suggests, since a clear pattern is evident, that among other things the improvement is probably due to programs instituted by this president. This is significant in that no other president's tenure, in this data set, shows such a pattern. Unlike Clinton's pattern of steady decline in unemployment rate other presidents' patterns are up-and-down and up-and-down again.
- Also Clinton’s first year saw the highest unemployment rate of his presidency, which was itself down significantly from the last year of his predecessor’s term. That high rate clearly seems to be an inherited legacy of the previous president’s term in office. The import of a low unemployment rate is all too often not fully recognized. The lower that rate the more people there are participating in the workforce. This means more people are earning a living and so have the money to spend on bills and on other consumer goods. This in turn contributes to growth in the markets, businesses earn more and are then able to employ more people. This becomes an interlocked cycle, because when people are not earning money they will "tighten" their belts and so spend less. Businesses earn less and lay-off some of their workers who then must follow suit and further contribute to a declining economy. All sectors of the economy becomes affected. The size of the American workforce is probably around 100 million people, and the unemployment rate is a direct percentage of this workforce. So at 4% there are 4 million people in our nation who are not participating in the economy, and at 30% that means there are 30 million not spending their money with the various companies. Or we could also say that at a 30% unemployment rate only 70 million people out of a potential of 100 million have money to spend. Imagine if we can figure that the average person has $36,000 to spend each year that is a loss of potential income for all businesses of trillions of dollars each year, or at least $1.08 trillion for this example. Bear in mind that the total current GDP is about $14.4 trillion.
- Much like the unemployment rate decline, Clinton also vigorously pursued the reversal of the federal budget deficit. This is also evident in the pattern, in which each year the budget deficit became less and less, until ’98, in which the first budget surplus was established since 1969, and thereafter the budget surplus grew each year. And though we see his total deficit was $320 billion, it is in reality less because the accumulated total $558 billion budget surplus created by Clinton was given as a legacy to Bush Jr. The first year of Bush’s term saw the residual of Clinton's policy in the form of a surplus of $127 billion for that year. Unfortunately, George W Bush ordered that the surplus money be issued back to the people in the form of an across-the-board "tax rebate" check for all Americans. Accounting for this fact, we adjust his budget deficit to credit him properly. So his total deficit for all 8 years is only $193 billion and thus his annual average budget deficit is lowered to $24.12 billion. This is justifiable as Bush’s first year was his only year with a surplus and at that it was a lower surplus than Clinton’s last year, considering that in the previous years budget surpluses were consistently increasing. So Clinton is the only president in 29 years to actually balance the federal budget.And unlike other presidents he was the first to maintain a budget surplus. The value of having a budget surplus is that with a surplus the government has excess money at hand to be able to pay-off the national debt, to fund emergency spending needs such as disasters and the like. While a deficit, which is our tradition sadly, means that the government must find ways to acquire more money by increasing taxes and by borrowing from lenders including foreign interests. But borrowing increases the national debt, which is a promise to be taxed later and the debt incurs interest, so that $100 billion borrowed today will be $500 billion we must pay tomorrow. This is simply not a smart approach.
- The Gross Domestic Product gained more in Clinton’s 8 years than in any other president’s term (including Reagan’s $2.32 trillion when adjusted for inflation). Now it is granted that when adjusted it is only a difference of about $100 billion, but the point is that the increase of the GDP is a good thing for our economy. Source: http://www.bls.gov/bls/inflation.htm, just enter $232 (Reagan’s amount) and his last year 1988, then enter Clinton’s last year 2000. On the BLS Inflation page to use the inflation calculator, a quick and easy application, just click on "CPI inflation calculator", a "pop-up" window will appear.
- After Lyndon Johnson and John Kennedy, Clinton’s term had a very low currency inflation rate. And unlike most of the other presidents (except Kennedy) Clinton also had a very steady inflation rate. Most years under Clinton the inflation rate was just 3% and several saw it as low as 2%. This is important to note as it indicates that the markets were really stable and the presiding economic policies were sound. Combined with the other indicators, a steadily decreasing unemployment rate, an increasing federal budget surplus, a reversing growth in federal debt and a vigorous growth in Gross Domestic Production, it seems fair to assume this point.
- Additionally each year of Clinton’s term saw a fairly significant growth rate in the Gross Domestic Product. The growth rate remained fairly steady from year to year, which is better than a “boom” year (or two) because shortly afterward a drastic “down-swing” year (or two) is usually seen. It does not matter if the following year is at a “medium” or “good” growth rate if it is a few percent less, because the effect on the businesses is that they may have planned on the higher rate and thus become over-extended. A "vigorous" growth in GDP cannot be considered one or a few years of dramatic growth but rater is a stable healthy increase each year. Volatility is indicated by sharp ups and downs as opposed to smooth or minor fluctuations in growth.
- The accumulation of national debt also declined under Clinton. The annual contribution of debt to our National Debt was; for the year 1993 +$35 Bil; ’94 = +$ 28 Bil; ’95 = +$28 Bil; ’96 = +$25 Bil; ’97 = +$19 Bil; ’98 = +$11 Bil; ’99 = +$13 Bil; ’00 = +$2 Bil. Apart from a brief “level-out” in 1995 (same amount as previous year) and a “bump” upward by a small amount in 1999, followed by a dramatic drop in the next year, the decline in the growth of the National Debt was fairly steady year-after-year. The average annual decrease in National Debt accumulation was about 4.13 billion dollars. This means that the National Debt grew (on average) each year by 4.13 billion dollars less than each previous year. The National Debt as a “runaway train” was coming to a stop and was destined to be in decline. We see that if Clinton’s policies had been as vigorously pursued by the next president the following year (2001) would have seen either no additional debt or a negative debt growth (i.e.: actually starting to pay-off the debt). If the next president had pursued his budget plan we would likely have a high budget surplus. We would also, just now, be starting to see the national debt being paid-off. The thing to remember is that the accumulation of national debt is rather like a runaway freight train, first we must apply the brakes and it is going to take some time before it comes to a stop. This means that to actually pay-off our debt we need several presidents who are willing to cooperate for the good of our nation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE W. BUSH
GEORGE W. BUSH
Term: 8 years. Avg. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $309 Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: 5.26%
Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $2.60 TRIL. Tot. Accrued Debt: $5.03 TRIL. Avg. Inflation Rate: 3.25% Tot. Growth of GDP: $4.59 TRIL. Tot. Inflation: 26% (2008’s $1.26 equals 2000’s $1)
Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $2.60 TRIL. Tot. Accrued Debt: $5.03 TRIL. Avg. Inflation Rate: 3.25% Tot. Growth of GDP: $4.59 TRIL. Tot. Inflation: 26% (2008’s $1.26 equals 2000’s $1)
Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: 38.3% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: 4.79%
Clinton's policies left a total accrued federal budget surplus of $558 billion (over half of a trillion), in Bush's second year the budget had already gone into deficit, and the record-setting national debt growth that marked Bush's presidency began. Unemployment increased to 4.7% from 4.0% after 8 straight years of steady improvement that immediately preceded Bush’s term. Then it increased the next year to 5.8% and again a year later peaking at 6.0%. Inflation also peaked at 6% in Bush's second to last year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barack H. Obama, Jr.
(NOTE: In the future the information will be compiled, as for now it is really too early to draw any conclusions.)
Term: 11 months. Avg. Budget Deficit /Surplus: - $? Bil. Avg. Unemployment Rate: ?%
Tot. Budget Deficit / Surplus: - $? Bil. Tot. Accrued Debt: $? Bil. Avg. Inflation Rate: ?%
Tot. Growth of GDP: $? Bil. Tot. Inflation: ?% (2010’s $1.? equals 2009’s $1)
Tot. Percent of GDP Growth: ?% Avg. Percent of GDP Growth: ?%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a simple question. Do you like having a job? The lower the unemployment rate, the more people participating in the workforce! Try paying your bills, keeping the electricity on, the roof over your head, gas in your car, food on your table and water flowing into your toilet when you have no job. Jobs pay money, money that you can earn and use to do things! It is important for the economy that the unemployment rate stays low. If too many people aren’t earning enough or any money at all, then the businesses must “tighten their belts”. Because fewer people are buying or people are buying less, companies are earning less. Sometimes this means laying-off more workers, which only exacerbates the problem, it is a vicious circle! The unemployment rate is a percentage of the workforce. If, for example, there are 100 million people who are able to work and the unemployment rate is 9% that mean that there are 9 million Americans who are jobless.
Did you know that higher inflation rates lessen the increase in the nation’s GDP? It’s true, because if the economy’s total value increases but inflation is high around the same time (a year or two before or after that increase) the inflation reduces that actual gain in the economy. Here’s an example if you earned 10% more this year but the inflation rate is 10% more than last year then the increase in income is negated. You’re actual increase is 0%, your financial standing stayed stagnant!
Sources:
For unemployment rates by year; U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics;
www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm
www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm
For each president (you can see exactly what date each took office and left office);
For the Budget Deficit / Surplus, by year;
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy07/browse.html select “Summary Tables PDF”
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/browse.html select “Summary Tables PDF”
For National Debt by year; U.S. Department of Justice, Department of The Treasury
www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm (select; 2000 – 2006 & 1950 – 1999)
For the Gross Domestic Product by year;
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
www.bea.gov/azindex/index.htm (Select; “H”, “current-dollar and “real” GDP” downloadable .xls type file.)
For Percent Change in GDP from previous year, each year;
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
www.bea.gov/azindex/index.htm (select; “H”, “percent change from preceding period” downloadable .xls type file.)
On how monetary inflation works;
J. Michail
No comments:
Post a Comment