|
|
|
When Obama
took office |
As Trump
takes office |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unemployment | December’s unemployment rate is more than three points lower than when Obama took office and more than five points below its October 2009 peak of 10 percent. (Sources: 1, 2) | 7.8% (Jan. 2009) | 4.7% (Dec. 2016) |
| GDP | When Obama took office, the U.S. was deep in a recession, and GDP had fallen by 3.5 percent over the prior year. After plummeting to -4.1 percent, the GDP growth rate righted itself, and as of the third quarter of 2016 was 1.7 percent — modest, but steady. (The value shown is the percent change in GDP from the same period one year ago. | Sources: 1, 2) | -3.5% (Q1 2009) | +1.7% (Q3 2016) |
| Household income | Household income was declining as of 2008; it would go on to dip below 53,000 in 2011 and 2012. The rise since then has been encouraging, particularly the 5.2 percent jump between 2014 and 2015, one of the biggest increases in 50 years. (Values shown are in 2015 dollars | Sources: 1, 2) | $55,376 (2008) | $56,516 (2015) |
| Average income in the top 5% | While the middle class is faring better now than in 2008, the richest Americans have also done well for themselves. The average income for people in the top 5 percent of incomes has grown by 8.1 percent since 2008. (Values shown are in 2015 dollars | Sources: 1, 2) | $324,431 (2008) | $350,870 (2015) |
| Wage growth | Wage growth was higher in January 2009, but that was just before the recession sent it plummeting to below 2 percent for much of 2010. So while hourly wage growth is not as high as it was right when Obama took office, the trajectory today is much, much better, as it is generally moving upward right now. (The values shown are the percent change in average hourly earnings from the same period one year ago. | Sources: 1, 2) | +3.6% (Jan. 2009) | +2.9% (Dec. 2016) |
| Inflation (CPI) | No one likes higher prices, but inflation can be a positive sign. The recession sent inflation plummeting below zero, but it recovered to being right around 2 percent today. Two percent marks the region that the Federal Reserve is currently targeting with its monetary policy. (The value shown is the percent change from the same period one year ago. | Sources: 1, 2) | -0.1% (Jan. 2009) | +2.1% (Dec. 2016) |
| Poverty | As with so many economic statistics, the poverty rate under Obama got worse before it got better. In 2008, it was at 13.2 percent but on an upswing. It peaked at 15.1 percent in 2010 but then fell off after that. (Sources: 1, 2) | 13.2% (2008) | 13.5% (2015) |
| Women’s earnings as share of men’s earnings | The gap between full-time, year-round working women’s and men’s earnings has slowly crept upward over the past few decades. It rose by around 2 percentage points between 2008 and 2015 after a flat stretch in the late 2000s. (The value shown is women’s year-round full-time earnings as a share of men’s. | Sources: 1, 2) | 77.1% (2008) | 79.9% (2015) |
| Black workers’ earnings as a share of whites’ | African-Americans’ median earnings (for full-time workers) as a share of whites’ have barely inched upward, from just below to just above 76 percent in 2015, the latest year for which data are available. (The value shown is black workers’ year-round full-time earnings as a share of white workers’. | Sources: 1, 2) | 75.8% (2008) | 76.4% (2015) |
| Hispanic workers’ earnings as a share of whites’ | As with the figure for black Americans, Hispanics’ earnings as a share of whites’ ticked upward only slightly, from 65 percent in 2008 to almost 66 percent as of 2015. (The value shown is Hispanic workers’ year-round full-time earnings as a share of white workers’. | Sources: 1, 2) | 65% (2008) | 65.7% (2015) |
| Asian workers’ earnings as share of whites’ | Asians routinely make more money and have lower unemployment rates than other major racial groups. They make more than whites do, and between 2008 and 2015, that gap widened slightly. (The value shown is Asian workers’ year-round full-time earnings as a share of white workers’. | Sources: 1, 2) | 105.3% (2008) | 109.1% (2015) |
| Inequality | The Gini index measures inequality on a scale of 0 to 1, with 0 representing total equality (that is, equal income for everyone) and 1 represents total inequality (one person with all the income). This measure inched upward between 2008 and 2015, from 0.466 to 0.479. (Sources: 1, 2) | 0.466 (2009) | 0.479 (2015) |
| 90th/10th income percentile | One measure of inequality is how much more the richest earn than the poorest. That gap grew over Obama’s presidency; in 2008, an earner at the 90th percentile earned 11.37 times someone at the 10th percentile. In 2015, it was 12.23 times as much. (Sources: 1, 2) | 11.37 (2008) | 12.23 (2015) |
| S&P 500 | Even adjusting for inflation, the S&P 500 has fared well over the last eight years, more than doubling from around 930 points to more than 2,200. (The 2009 value shown is in 2016 dollars. | Sources: 1, 2) | 930.72 (Jan. 23, 2009) | 2,266.72 (Jan. 11, 2017) |
| Federal deficit | Under Obama, the federal deficit grew much bigger before it got smaller. It ballooned from 3.1 percent of GDP in 2008 to 9.8 percent in 2009, due to programs implemented to stabilize the economy during the recession. The stimulus greatly increased the deficit, but it also helped pull the economy out of a deep recession. (Sources: 1, 2) | 3.1% of GDP (2008) | 2.4% of GDP (2015) |
| Federal debt | The federal debt grew sharply during the early years of the Obama presidency, then continued to climb at a slower rate after that. Some of that was his fault, and some of that wasn’t; he did sign expensive measures, like the stimulus and later tax cut extensions, but the debt had also already been projected to grow in a big way even before he took office, as the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget notes. (Sources: 1, 2) | 77.4% of GDP (Q1 2009) | 104.8% of GDP (Q3 2016) |
| Labor force participation rate | The labor force participation rate has declined since Obama took office. Part of that is due to demographic shifts; as baby boomers retire, that will drag the rate downward, as those people will no longer be working or looking for jobs. The same goes for many adults who are in school. However, some of this downward movement is because of a bad economy; as of 2014, the CBO attributed half the decline at that time to demographics and half to economic problems. (The labor force participation rate measures the share of the population 16 and over that is working or looking for a job. | Sources: 1, 2) | 65.7% (Jan. 2009) | 62.7% (Dec. 2016) |