Is it possible that the Cons are correct about President Obama's economic policies? Have they really failed to increase jobs? Wouldn't Mitt's business experience as a "jobs-creator" be better for our economy?
Well let's look at the latest data from the Labor Department:
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Job openings at U.S. workplaces increased to 3.64 million in May from 3.45 million in April, the U.S. Labor Department reported Tuesday. Compared with the prior year, job openings rose 18% -- private openings increased 17% to 3.25 million, and government openings rose to 395,000 from 303,000. There were about 4.3 million jobs open when the recession began in December 2007. With about 12.72 million unemployed people in May, there were about 3.5 potential job seekers for each opening, down from 3.6 in April. In May of 2011, there were about 13.89 million unemployed people - about 4.5 potential seekers per opening. The number of separations, such as quits and layoffs, rose to 4.35 million in May from 4.14 million in April. Meanwhile, the total number of hires increased to 4.36 million from 4.21 million. The level of hires was about 5 million when the recession began.Now the economy has definitely slowed down in the second quarter of 2012, but why? Dean Baker has the answer:
And why did GDP growth slow? Try the end of the stimulus. Government spending shrank at an annual rate of 2.8 in the fourth quarter of 2010, followed by drops of 5.9 percent in the first quarter and 0.9 percent in the second quarter. After being a boost to growth in the second half of 2009 and the first half of 2010, the government sector became a major drag on growth in the first half of 2011.And why has there been no more federal stimulus spending? I think even the dumbest Tea Party dolt - think Sarah Palin - could figure that one out.