Reagan's 2nd year at the top, Obama's through November (they don't go past that) at the bottom. I shaded above zero green to show the part where year over year job change goes positive. There ain't no green in Reagan's chart: (click to go to source)
Tinfoil, You gigantic loser. Just admit you went online and did a search for "denner" and found one of MANY denner's posting about Koch Industries. Who was your mentor, Inspector Clouseau?
Huh??? You're actually serious??? You do know there's a search function on this board??? It's very fast, doesn't take much to learn, works very well. Do it yourself (if you can find it; I'm beginning to have my doubts), you'll find the two posts I'm talking about, and the fact you say exactly nothing about the influence of Koch. Which is as you would expect from a far-right tool.
Again, more leftist propaganda that doesn't show the real picture. Below is the big uncensored picture:
It's amazing how Presidents get credit and blame for things that they had nothing to do with. Obama happened to get inaugurated when the stock market was at an extreme bottom. It was bound to bounce up. Obama could have been replaced by Elmer Fudd, Hugo Chavez, Mussolini, or Bozo the Clown and the same thing would have happened.
Thanks for making my point. You're the one who said Obama has yet to create a job. Neither had Reagan at this point in his Presidency. Your chart proves that factoid is irrelevant to either the question of whether Reagan did any good for the economy or whether Obama is or isn't now. I used to regularly make the point that no one today remembers much about Reagan's first two years, because things got way better once he got past that. I had thought people would give Obama those first two years to straighten out the far larger mess he inherited. Instead, we get stupid posts like yours, which is, to borrow a phrase, nothing but right-wing propaganda.