Obama: Leaving his mark on the U.S. Economy

By Joel Murray

Even though Obama has been replaced, its often great to reflect the mark such a president left on the economy. Whilst Obama himself said “In the United States, our economy is growing again,” it most definitely didn’t seem so for the U.S. economy. Lets have a look.

Looking from a single employment report from May 2016, the unemployment rate had moved from 7.8 percent at Obama’s inauguration to 5.0 percent in April 2016, as more and more Americans stop looking for work, the Labor Force Participation Rate whilst he’s been in office has decreased from 65% to 62%. Since Obama took office, this metric has slid 3%. Not really relating to his growing economy he so says there was.

Obamacare seemed like a good idea, right? Tens of millions of uninsured people would now have access to affordable, high-quality health insurance through Medicaid expansion, their employers, and the Health Insurance Marketplace. But, they had to get the money to help insure all these people, so what did they do? New taxes were introduced. Which were mostly on high-earners and the healthcare industry. What this also meant was the people who paid for private health insurance (around 30 million of the U.S.)  had their insurance cancelled, as it didn’t comply with the affordable care acts benefits policy. Replacing insurance after is cancelled is not cheap, and ate into the the pockets of private health insurers. And for those who didn’t reapply for insurance of another kind, the ACA taxed the hell out of them. So essentially, what Obamacare told America was “get health insurance the falls under the ACA’s policies, even though some of them don’t apply to all Americans, or we will tax you!”. This all inevitably ate into the disposable income of those who had private health insurance, which were mostly the upper class in the working economy. Why would everyone need insurance that falls under the ACA’s act? A single, high income male doesn’t need insurance that covers him for maternity care, which is one of the 10 essential benefits that fall under the ACA. We have to question ourselves, how was Obama seeing a growing U.S. economy when his new plan put unnecessary taxes upon those who didn’t want health insurance, or didn’t want national health insurance?

President Barack Obama was notorious for wasting America’s. One such case, according to new documents obtained by government watchdog group, confirms he has spent a large amount of money on travel as president, wasting military resources and putting an copious amount of stress on the secret service. It was estimated that a near $100 was wasted on travel privileges he has. Current president, Donald Trump has said as a part of helping to save the tax payer, by reforming presidential travels.

Obama really took a crack into America and has gone now across several websites and newspapers as one of the worst presidents for the U.S. economy. Such debate is still at hand about this. Could Obama really see a growing economy as he mentioned? Such a cut in rates of parts of employment, unneeded taxing for an unreliable plan that helped one side of the working class but slashed disposable income for the other, and a waste of money and resources really is still to question.



  1. This is an interesting case of government intervention and the vast gap sometimes between what is intended and what actually happens. One of my friends in the US voted for Trump SOLEY to get ObamaCare repealed as it was costing his business so much in employee insurance. Yet Australia and many other countries have tax-payer funded health systems. Why should it work elsewhere but not in the USA?


    1. I think it’s because Obama tried to put in place in such a short time? Places such as Australia has had tax payer funded health systems for a longer time and so we don’t really know how much we could save if we didn’t have it. Because America is changing their system, they feel the effects, but since we already have it we don’t really notice.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. One of the main reasons that led to the Affordable Care Act not being as successful as it could have been was the fact that it was a universal plan for Americans. It lacked flexibility, so people were not able to decide what was best for themselves, and were stuck with plans that covered all 10 of the ACAs essential benefits, even though not all of them were applicable to them. Another issue was that people gradually had no incentive to take out insurance, because it was possible to do it after people became sick and needed help with bills. This defeated the purpose of insurance, because people were only taking it up when they needed it.
    The Affordable Care Act could have been much more successful and beneficial to all Americans had it had more flexibility, as people would only pay for what they felt necessary.


    Liked by 2 people

    1. An excellent observation Anusha. Here we see how government intervention in market failure (healthcare as a public good) does not always lead to an efficient allocation of resources. A one-size-fits-all solution rarely works, especially in the context of USA which has such a diverse range of peoples.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s