After the Reagan Revolution of the early-80s, there were only two recessions an, d both were extraordinarily mild (the early 1990s and early 2000s). That is why the Democrats think they can get away with claiming that the 2007-09 recession was "different, worse than every other recession".
Americans over 50 have an obligation to tell young people, that no, the recent recession was not substantially worse than either the 1973-75 or the 1980-82 ones. The difference is that those recessions were followed by ROBUST recoveries. GDP growth in 1976-78 averaged 5.5% and in 1983-85 averaged 6.0%. Obama's GDP growth, 2010-12 (with two quarters left to go) has averaged a miserable 1.9%
1.) The early 90s recession started because of the end of the Cold War, which saw the demise of a lot of defense industry jobs. 90s prosperity was due to the computer revolution and the dot.com bubble.
2.) The dot.com bubble recession saw the demise of most dot.com companies, and was mainly a market recession, though unemployment breifly reached 6%. Unlike the 90s, wages and family income never increased all that much. Not to mention the housing bubble was in it's infancy, which helped the market a lot.
3.) This recession alomst saw the demise of AIG and major investment banks. Without the bailouts and federal takeovers, it would have been another depression. There's a reason people and economists called it the worse financial collapse since the Great Depression, and this was before Obama became president.
Please continue to spin though.
