The article "Why the 'Obama Recovery' Took so Long"
The article “Why the ‘Obama Recovery’ Took so Long” by Peter Ferrara evaluates President Obama’s claim that he played a pivotal role in helping the economy of the United States recover from the 2008 – 2009 recession period. The author analyzes the former head of states’ contribution using historical evidence and theoretical economic concepts. Peter Ferrara uses Milton Friedman’s ideology to illustrate that any economy that suffers recession is naturally bound to boom irrespective of the strategies implemented. The author also believes that President’s Obama’s recovery efforts were inferior to the policies adopted by his predecessors based on the length of time it took the country to stabilize from the 2008-2009 financial depression.
The relevance of the editorial
The editorial is relevant as it provides the foundations upon which the contributions of the current and the previous U.S. governments should be rated with regards to financial performance. The author gives an outline that incorporates both economic and historical perspectives to the debate concerning President Obama’s self-proclaimed success in stimulating the recovery process. Further, the statistical evidence provided in the editorial gives valuable insights into the success of strategies implemented by President Obama’s administration. Therefore, the author offers useful analysis to the issue raised.
Agreement with Peter Ferrara’s position
I agree with Peter Ferrara’s position on why President Obama should not receive much praise for his recovery policies. While it is true that he began the economic reforms, it took the country comparatively more time to regain the lost jobs. Therefore, it seems that the policies implemented by the former regime were not appropriate. As such, the economy may have recovered only due to the natural boom-recession pattern explained by Friedman or efforts of the current administration.
