RECENT POSTS
- President Obama: Asia Trip Helped Usher in a New Era of American Engagement
- Secretary Sebelius Celebrates the Tenth Anniversary of National Adoption Day
- Organizing for America Targets Sarah Palin
- Obama Administration Starts to Publicly Raise Issue of Detained US Citizen Xue Feng
- President Obama Gives Interview (of Sorts) to Dissident Cuban Blogger
- "You Guys Make a Pretty Good Photo Op," President Obama Jokes to Troops at Osan Air Base
- Did the Chinese Government Crack Down on an Obama Interview?
- Our Trip to the DMZ
- President Obama Greets U.S. Troops in South Korea, Wraps Up Week in Asia
- White House: We’re Not in the “Immediate Gratification Business”
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Expects Unemployment Figures to “Tick Up for Several Months,” Despite Economy Stabilizing
July 14, 2009 1:01 PM
ABC News’ Karen Travers and Sarah Tobianski report:
President Obama said today that while there has been “some stabilization in the financial markets” he expects unemployment figures to “tick up for several months.”
“The challenge for this administration is to make sure that even as we are stabilizing the financial system, we understand that the most important thing in the economy is, are people able to find good jobs that pay good wages,” he said after a meeting with Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende of the Netherlands.
Obama travels to Michigan today, a state he said has been “battered” not just in this recession but in the years leading up to it. He said that without government action on General Motors and Chrysler, “the situation in Michigan, I think it's fair to say would be far worse.”
The President said the same goes for the stimulus package. “We've made investments that early on have allowed a state like Michigan to lay off fewer teachers, fewer cops, fewer firefighters. Those are all jobs that would have been lost in the absence of the recovery package.”
In spite of that, he said it is not enough and that the biggest challenge for the U.S. and nations all around world is creating good paying jobs.
Obama said he has invited Prime Minister Balkenende to the G20 summit in Pittsburgh in September.
“We think that the Netherlands not only is one of the world's largest economies and most active internationally, but the prime minister has very specific expertise and experience in working with a whole range of world leaders, and I think his contribution will be greatly appreciated,” he said.
The president also said there will be a ceremony this year to commemorate the 400th anniversary of Henry Hudson exploring Manhattan on behalf of the Netherlands.
-Karen Travers and Sarah Tobianski
July 14, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (139)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Nice email to Sanford's folks. Carry water for the GOP much?
Posted by: Jeebus | Jul 15, 2009 2:42:26 PM
You mean we can't spend our way out of another problem? Heresy!
Posted by: hmn | Jul 15, 2009 2:27:03 PM
At Least President Obama is being Honest more then i can say about that Idiot before him Bush Lied to us about the Economy Iraq etc Lying worthless President Bush was!
Posted by: ANGIE IN PA | Jul 15, 2009 9:21:26 AM
at least he's being honest about it. During the last election season we had George Bush still trying to convince us that the economy was OK. Somehow that was better than being given the bad news up front?
I'd be amazed by you poeple but 8 years of the Bush adminstration proved that you roll right through life with a smile after being lied to. I guess your disdain now proves you prefer it that way.
Posted by: dk | Jul 15, 2009 6:13:52 AM
More like surging up - watch for the Revised June figures...
Posted by: Terry | Jul 15, 2009 1:18:18 AM
Yes Mr President the economy is
"stabilizing".
Just like the Titanic "stabilized"
before it sunk to the bottom of
the ocean!
Posted by: reaganfan | Jul 14, 2009 11:16:55 PM
And the Cap-and-Trade bill will cause even more unemployment due to more manufacturing going off-shore to get away from the restictions. Yes, this is change we can believe in...good job idiot Democrats. You morons are really showing us Neocons up alright.
Posted by: Bill | Jul 14, 2009 11:08:14 PM
This joker will never quit, will he? I am so looking forward to 2012!
Posted by: cgw | Jul 14, 2009 10:53:13 PM
That's why you rushed your stimulus bill through so fast without reading it. You said it would cease unemployment and create jobs, tons of jobs.
Well????
You're a thief and a liar!
Posted by: Makayla | Jul 14, 2009 8:56:51 PM
Congressional U.S. Federal Budget Approvals:
2009 - $3.10 trillion
2008 - $2.90 trillion
2007 - $2.77 trillion
A Democratically-controlled Congress could have voted against any of the 2007-2009 budgets but they didn't. Maybe Rove and Bush have been setting them up all along for the 2010 election. ;-)
2006 - $2.7 trillion
2005 - $2.4 trillion
2004 - $2.3 trillion
2003 - $2.2 trillion
2002 - $2.0 trillion
2000-2001 budgets were submitted by Clinton.
And the grand prize goes to the Big Kahuna himself!
2010 - $3.60 trillion (submitted 2009 by President Obama)
Aloha Mr. President!
Posted by: Traffic Cop Timmy | Jul 14, 2009 8:19:59 PM
How fast can the federal reseve print money any way?Do we need to buy more printing presses.Is it ok to cut down more trees and is the ink environmentally friendly.Or will this be the next crisis.Everything seems to be a crisis to OB,no time to think or study,hire a speed reader,just do it!If OB realy wants to work on something how about medicare or social security.Medicare is in such good shape let have the goverment run all the health care.Oh and would one of you libs pass me the coolaid. latter
Posted by: hiskooldropowt | Jul 14, 2009 8:14:10 PM
No I think FoxNews would have lied just as much about Hillary as they did Obama.
Maybe even more so.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jul 14, 2009 7:35:20 PM
___________________________________
Yes, I'm sure... (rolls eyes)
Posted by: Traffic Cop Timmy | Jul 14, 2009 7:57:15 PM
"Over 400,000 filed new unemployment claims in June. You call that leveling off, just because it is lower than the 700,000 a month earlier this year?"
Yes, that would be leveling off.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jul 14, 2009 3:44:25 PM
_____________________________________
Uh no, that would be businesses taking a breather to see where their at. There will be evaluation and watching of the bottom line for at least one more quarter. If they are losing money still, they will start laying off again.
Don't be surprised if there is a "leveling off" in the 2nd quarter quarterly reports (due to the massive layoffs so far), which will be proclaimed from the mountain tops as the stimulus plan is working. There will be a lot of "Gracious God! Thank you President Obama!" going on.
3rd & 4th quarter reports will tell the tale for more layoffs.
Posted by: Traffic Cop Timmy | Jul 14, 2009 7:49:58 PM
"I was talking about the media - nice try though."
No I think FoxNews would have lied just as much about Hillary as they did Obama.
Maybe even more so.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jul 14, 2009 7:35:20 PM
Posted by: Ryan C | Jul 14, 2009 7:21:19 PM
I was talking about the media - nice try though.
Posted by: Traffic Cop Timmy | Jul 14, 2009 7:32:28 PM
"Maybe not, but at least it might have been a fair fight (leg tingling-wise that is)."
A fair fight between the Clinton and anyone else?
Why do you think the Obama campaign took whatever the McCain campaign had?
They were tempered in the fires of the primary vs the Clintons.
Democrats for the most part liked Hillary but independents did not.
She had the same issue as Obama in regards to experience when measured against McCain (who undercut his own argument with the selection of Palin).
But her biggest prob from the start were her high negatives.
It did not help that the Hsu scandal happened this cycle.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jul 14, 2009 7:21:19 PM
"GOOD ONE!" Traffic Cop.... "Good one!"
Posted by: X-Republican Because of Bush | Jul 14, 2009 7:18:10 PM
I do not think Hillary could have won the general election had she won the Democratic nomination.
Too many hard feelings towards her.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jul 14, 2009 5:17:39 PM
_______________________________
Maybe not, but at least it might have been a fair fight (leg tingling-wise that is).
Posted by: Traffic Cop Timmy | Jul 14, 2009 7:15:32 PM
Bush was not a lame duck until after the economy was in full blown meltdown.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jul 14, 2009 5:16:42 PM
___________________________________
I thought Bush was a lame duck for 8 years? And before that he was a lame duck governor, and before that he was a lame duck businessman, and before that he was a lame duck AF pilot, and before that he was a lame duck kid, and before that... oh, wait we don't know "with any specificity" what Bush was before that.
Posted by: Traffic Cop Timmy | Jul 14, 2009 7:13:34 PM
1. When President Carter left the White House (Jan 1981), the National Unemployment Rate (NUR) that month was at 7.5%.
2. For the next 21 months after assuming office, President Reagan struggled to bring the monthly NUR under 7%, but could not.
3. Between November 1981 and November 1983 (2 whole years under Ronald Reagan), the monthly National Unemployment Rate hovered above 8.3%, climbing to 9% and climbing even further to 10.8% (November & December 1982).
4. Finally, in September 1984 (3 years and 8 months after Ronald Reagan was inaugurated)… the Monthly National Unemployment Rate dropped below 7.5% (the monthly national unemployment rate that President Carter left him with).
The Moral of the Story: It took Ronald Reagan 3 years and 8 months to turn the monthly National Unemployment Rate around, and unemployment actually got worse before it got better.
If YOU really think that the National Unemployment Rate is going to turn around on a “dime”, in a matter of 6, 7, 8 months… or even 1 year, you don’t understand economics, and you sure don’t understand how “unemployment” is a lagging economic indicator.
CHECK IT OUT: … Goog: “U.S. Misery Index” and click on the left column "historical MONTHLY unemployment rate".
Posted by: X-Republican Because of Bush | Jul 14, 2009 7:13:29 PM
Post a comment
