Your editorial ("Doing better than 'fine,'" June 12) was correct in mildly chastising President Barack Obama for not being upbeat enough about the record of the private sector during his administration.
You correctly cited the mess he inherited form the Republicans. You also pointed out Ronald Reagan as an example. The Republicans, including Mitt Romney, always say this president is doing a terrible job on the economy and long for the days of Ronald Reagan's performance in this area.
To paraphrase the Gipper, "Well, there they go again." Let's look at some measurements comparing the economy's performance during President Reagan's first term to now. Let's use unemployment and the stock market as measuring sticks. When Mr. Obama came into office, the unemployment rate was 7.8 percent. It is now 8.2 percent. When Mr. Reagan came into office, the rate was 7.5 percent. At this same time in his first term it was 7.4 percent. Wow, what an improvement. When you look a little deeper on the unemployment front, one notices that the rate under Mr. Reagan shot up to 10.8 percent during the first two years of his term. Over that same time under Mr. Obama, the rate went up to 8.5 percent.
Then there is another measure — the stock market. You know that bastion of socialism. When Mr. Obama came into office, the Dow stood at 8,100. It is now 12,400, an increase of over 50 percent. When Mr. Reagan came into office, the Dow stood at 965. At this time in his first term, the Dow stood at 1,104, an increase of 14 percent. By any measure, the private sector is doing better compared to the great Mr. Reagan's performance.
So if Republicans chose to vote for President Reagan's reelection using the economy as criteria, then I guess they are giving serious consideration to voting for President Obama's reelection, too. What makes me think that isn't going to happen?
Mel Mintz, PikesvilleCopyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun