Predictions

Dad,

Since you asked, I sent the graph to hear how you would interpret it. To my eye, the graph seemed oddly symmetric around the Obama inauguration, with the rate of job losses increasing though the end of the Bush presidency then abruptly retreating under the Obama administration. While this could be a coincidence, it seemed worthy of some analysis. I thought you might be able to shed some light on how to interpret the data, but I didn't find anything particulary convincing in your response. From what I gathered, your points were:

• The recession had already run its course and the economy was turning around when he came in.

That is simply incorrect. Obama's inauguration was January 20th 2009. The financial crisis peaked in early March.

• He should have just left things alone.

I'm not sure many people agree that the correct response to the global financial crisis would have been to do nothing. We were on the brink of financial collapse and there is broad consensus that doing nothing would have forced the global economy into a deep depression. Like it or not, swift (Obama administration) goverment response saved our economy.

You did however make a comparison between Obama and Regan. Little sis brought to my attention that Regan also faced 10% unemployment in his early presidency. The similarities do not end with the fact that Obama and Regan inherited the two worst economies since the Depression. According to this article, the presidents had similar approaches to dealing with the problem.

Take Regan's quote: "Now, so there will be no misunderstanding, it is not my intention to do away with government. It is, rather, to make it work — work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back. Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it."

And compare it to Obama's when he says it's not about the size of government: "but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. Those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account."


It's no suprise that many key Regan advisors are now Obama supporters such as Colin Powell and former Reagan Chief of Staff Ken Duberstein. Perhaps you would consider a change with this new evidence?

The rest of your email focused on predictions for the future. Making predictions is easy. You don't need to back up your beliefs with evidence, and you certainly don't have to worry about someone challenging your hopes and dreams with data. But, if we are making predictions, I will predict that the similarities between Regan and Obama will strengthen in the future:

• Both Obama and Regan will be credited for fixing the worst economies since the Depression
• Both Obama and Regan will serve for 2 terms
• Both Obama and Regan will be credited for building a powerful political coalition that will last for decades
• Both Obama and Regan will run large deficits through their presidency as a result of political, economic, and military externalities.
  
• Both Obama and Regan will be credited with critical victories over the era's two most serious threats to the American way of life: Communism and Terrorism. While both challenges threatened America from the outside, the real danger was loosing what America stood for from within (with Dick Cheney filling in for McCarthy there).