Average Unemployment by President

[Bo]

In case anyone is wondering, I found data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Congressional Budget Office (as well as some old unemployment projections) and calculated the average unemployment rate for every President since Harding. Here is what I got:

                                         FDR (D) 12.95%
                                    Hoover (R) 12.90%
                                        Ford (R)   7.78%
                                   Reagan (R)   7.51%   
Obama (projected until 2016) (D)   6.99%
                                  Harding (R)   6.93%
                                    Carter (D)   6.56%
                                 Bush Sr. (R)   6.32%
                                         JFK (D)   5.98%
                                  Bush Jr. (R)   5.30%
                                   Clinton (D)   5.19%
                                     Nixon (R)   5.01%
                           Eisenhower (R)   4.91%
                                Johnson (D)   4.20%
                                 Truman (D)   3.87%
                               Coolidge (R)   3.30%

What do you guys think? It shows that the average unemployment rate varies between Democratic and Republican Presidents--there is no clear pattern (unlike in job creation rates). It's also interesting that Obama is poised to have the highest average unemployment rate for a Democratic President since FDR (and this is assuming the economy significantly recovers in 2010 & 2011).

[Bo]

Anyone? This took a lot of work to compile. I would appreciate at least some comments. Thank you.

[phk]

The correlation would be fairly close to zero. That's all. You can go ahead and plug them into regression software like STATA for a more conclusive result.

[opebo]

One wonders to what extent these numbers are based on different schemes of calculation.  Certainly it seems likely that changes have been made over the years which have increased the overstatement of employment...

[bullmoose88]

Carter's is a full point below Ford's...wow.

[memphis]

How the hell can you project Obama based on less than a year?

[Bo]

How the hell can you project Obama based on less than a year?

I looked at the data from the Congressional Budget Office (they have projections up until 2019). Then, I added the unemployment for each of the years from 2009 to 2016 and divded the total by 8 (since there are 8 years total).

[memphis]

How the hell can you project Obama based on less than a year?

I looked at the data from the Congressional Budget Office (they have projections up until 2019). Then, I added the unemployment for each of the years from 2009 to 2016 and divded the total by 8 (since there are 8 years total).

The same people who in the 90s projected surpluses forever...

[Bo]

How the hell can you project Obama based on less than a year?

I looked at the data from the Congressional Budget Office (they have projections up until 2019). Then, I added the unemployment for each of the years from 2009 to 2016 and divded the total by 8 (since there are 8 years total).

The same people who in the 90s projected surpluses forever...

Unemployment is typically much easier to project than surpluses/deficits. There are exceptions though. Still, I think their projections for the unemployment rate are pretty rational:

2009: 9.3% (almost perfectly correct)
2010:10.2%
2011:9.1%
2012:7.2%
2013:5.6%
2014:4.9%
2015:4.8%
2016:4.8%

[memphis]

How the hell can you project Obama based on less than a year?

I looked at the data from the Congressional Budget Office (they have projections up until 2019). Then, I added the unemployment for each of the years from 2009 to 2016 and divded the total by 8 (since there are 8 years total).

The same people who in the 90s projected surpluses forever...

Unemployment is typically much easier to project than surpluses/deficits. There are exceptions though. Still, I think their projections for the unemployment rate are pretty rational:

2009: 9.3% (almost perfectly correct)
2010:10.2%
2011:9.1%
2012:7.2%
2013:5.6%
2014:4.9%
2015:4.8%
2016:4.8%

Not especially irrational, but who the hell knows? We could very well see another recession by 2016. It just seems rather absurd to pretend to know what the future holds.

[Bo]

How the hell can you project Obama based on less than a year?

I looked at the data from the Congressional Budget Office (they have projections up until 2019). Then, I added the unemployment for each of the years from 2009 to 2016 and divded the total by 8 (since there are 8 years total).

The same people who in the 90s projected surpluses forever...

Unemployment is typically much easier to project than surpluses/deficits. There are exceptions though. Still, I think their projections for the unemployment rate are pretty rational:

2009: 9.3% (almost perfectly correct)
2010:10.2%
2011:9.1%
2012:7.2%
2013:5.6%
2014:4.9%
2015:4.8%
2016:4.8%

Not especially irrational, but who the hell knows? We could very well see another recession by 2016. It just seems rather absurd to pretend to know what the future holds.

Yes we could be in another recession before the end of Obama's Presidency. However, we could recover even faster than is projected. If you disagree with the figures for Obama, just ignore them for now and focus on those of all the other Presidents.

[Psychic Octopus]

Oh please. It is way to early for them to project unemployment levels until 2016. A lot can happen.

[Mr.Phips]

Oh please. It is way to early for them to project unemployment levels until 2016. A lot can happen.

Kind of like how back in 2005, it was projected that unemployment would be around five percent well into the 2010's. 

[Bo]

Oh please. It is way to early for them to project unemployment levels until 2016. A lot can happen.

Kind of like how back in 2005, it was projected that unemployment would be around five percent well into the 2010's. 

I agree with you about that. The financial crisis (and resulting Great Recession) really screwed a lot of predictions. However, the financial crisis is more like a once-twice in a lifetime event.

[opebo]

Carter's is a full point below Ford's...wow.

Its just right wing propaganda that the economy was so bad in the Carter years, or the Seventies as a whole.

One thing's for sure - it has been all downhill for working-class people ever since.

[Bo]

Carter's is a full point below Ford's...wow.

Its just right wing propaganda that the economy was so bad in the Carter years, or the Seventies as a whole.

One thing's for sure - it has been all downhill for working-class people ever since.

As a Democratic-leaning independent, I will tell you that it is partially, but not compeletely right wing propaganda that the economy was poor under Carter. 6.6% unemployment on average is pretty high in my opinion (anything over 6.5% would be considered high), and even though the unemployment rate under Carter was smaller than under Ford and Reagan, the average annual inflation rate under Carter was about 9.5%, which is very high (anything above 5.0% would be considered high). Thus even though the unemployment rate under Carter was not the highest, inflation was a very serious matter under his Presidency.