Skip to main content

Back when Mitt Romney was telling the truth about what he would do to create jobs, it was noted that his plans were like the Bush years except on steroids.  Once he and Ryan are forced to own those previous plans, and they will be, these five points will kill them.

1. Improvement in unemployment  numbers

When talking about the economy, the trendline is what is most important.  There are different ways to judge the trendlines during a president's time in office.  One of the fairest ways is to start one year after the president's term begins and end one year after his term is over.  This allows time for one's policies to show an impact, and also shows how the president's policies affect his successor before the successor's policies have had a chance to make an impact.  From the BLS we get this chart of unemployment numbers starting with January 2002, one year after President Bush took office:

Photobucket

As you can see, between January 2002 and January 2010, President Bush gained 4 whole percentage points, while President Obama has lowered unemployment by 1.9 percentage points thus far.

It is no accident that President Obama has such a positive trend. The almost immediate effect of the ARRA on the number of initial unemployment claims is very striking.  Steve Benen at the Maddowblog has this graph showing the effect of the stimulus on initial unemployment claims:

unempclaims

2. Private Sector jobs growth:

Private sector jobs growth is usually what Republicans want to focus on most since they believe there should be fewer government jobs.  But when compared with the jobs creation numbers of previous presidents, the private sector grew faster in the first three years of the Obama administration than it did in three of the previous five administrations — the exception being Bill Clinton’s administrations, when private sector growth was more rapid. In both of George W. Bush’s terms as well as in the first three years of the George H. W. Bush administration, though, the private sector grew more slowly. (link)

3. That private sector job growth is even more impressive when you see the public sector's drag on the economy.

As Think Progress has noted, poor performance in public sector jobs growth has likely cost 750,000 private sector jobs.  The main drag on the economy has been the public jobs sector.  Public sector employment has made modest gains of 73,000 jobs over the last 3 months, with 10,000 of that coming in September.  But since June 2009, there has been a net loss of 569,000 jobs. (pdf link) This is mostly due to cuts at the state and local levels, mainly in red states which Tea Party Republicans seized control of in 2010.

In May, Justin Lahart of the Wall Street Journal (and seconded by Barry Ritholtz) suggested that without government (ie public sector) job cuts, the unemployment number would have been 7.1%:

Photobucket

This huge drag on the economy stands in direct contrast to the Bush years, where public sector jobs were the one bright spot in the Bush economy.  Without all his public sector jobs, Bush's record would have been even more awful.  And the fact that President Obama has improved the economy with negative growth in public sector jobs is nothing short of astounding.  Here is a comparison of the two records on public and private sector jobs:

Photobucket

4. Manufacturing jobs growth

Alternet's response to President Clinton's convention speech included a systematic comparison between Democratic presidents and Republicans and found that President Obama's manufacturing growth is better than all but one of the last nine Republican Presidential terms.  Of all nine Republican terms going back to Eisenhower, only Reagan's second term was better:

Based on all three of our measures, Obama’s manufacturing jobs record is currently better than eight of the nine Republican presidential terms. President Ronald Reagan’s second term does slightly better than Obama’s incomplete first term, but the numbers are close enough that this may change once we have all the numbers.
Here is their graph showing from first quarter of term to first quarter of next term(see all three graphs here):

manfgains

Here is the most recent BLS (pdf) graph of President Obama's manufacturing jobs numbers:

blsmanf

5. Republicans, nationally and at the state level, have tried their best to deny President Obama any success on the economy.

elephant

Starting with what Republicans are doing at the national government level, Paul Ryan and others met on the night of President Obama's inauguration and vowed to block him at every turn, be completely uncooperative and deny him any successes. (link)  

The main point here is that the President's American Jobs Act has been blocked by Republicans in congress.  Recently we had the first anniversary of the original obstruction of this specific bill and Think Progress shared three estimates of the jobs AJA would create:

–Moody’s Analytics estimated the American Jobs Act would create 1.9 million jobs and add two percent to gross domestic product.

–The Economic Policy Institute estimated it would create 2.6 million jobs and protect an addition 1.6 million existing jobs.

–Macroeconomic Advisers predicted it would create 2.1 million jobs and boost GDP by 1.5 percent.

–Goldman Sachs estimated it would add 1.5 percent to GDP.

Of course that isn't all the national Republicans in congress are blocking.  More on that here.

Back to the state level, as noted above, much of the negative growth in public sector jobs comes from Republican-controlled state legislatures and/or governors.  Here is a graph showing some of those details:

Photobucket

One of the governors with a big deficit in public sector jobs is New Jersey's Chris Christie.  Recently, New Jersey Policy Perspective released a report (pdf) on how much public sector job loss was affecting the state's economy.  Here is some of what the report said (link):

[I]f not for the loss of public-sector jobs, New Jersey’s 2011 unemployment rate would be more than a full percentage point lower: 8 percent instead of 9.3 percent. That rate would be even lower when accounting for the effect of public-sector job loss on private-sector employment.

......

Unlike the previous two recessions, public-sector jobs continued to be lost after the latest recession began. This is a marked change in strategy from earlier recessions, when public-sector jobs were maintained or added during and after the downturn to help the state to recover more quickly.

Among other things, the report calls for the federal government to "provide targeted financial assistance to state and local governments that meet specific criteria promoting efficiency in public services."  President Obama has proposed the American Jobs Act that would include money to do that very thing.  Unfortunately, the legislation has been blocked by the Obstructionist GOP congress.  

New Jersey's problems are unfortunately all too common.  Because of this pervasive issue,The Economic Policy Institute has recently suggested that aid to state and local governments should be the top priority for job creation.  

Without all this Republican obstruction, unemployment might easily have been below 6%.(link)  But when one considers the lengths to which Republicans have gone to sabotage the economy, an overall lowering of the unemployment number by 1.9% is downright awe-inspiring.

9:36 PM PT: Thanks for the rescue!


Originally posted to mikepridmore on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 11:23 AM PDT.

Also republished by Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (31+ / 0-)

    The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

    by mikepridmore on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 11:23:50 AM PDT

  •  Jobless Claims at 4.5 Year Low (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    congenitalefty, mikepridmore

    AND, unemployment claims dropped by 30,000 last week to 339,000 (seasonally adjusted)! This is the lowest level since February 2008. So in spite of all the Republican attempts to keep the economy from recovery, we're seeing very strong progress in the right direction.

    Reuters News Story Link

    •  Yes even though (3+ / 0-)

      that number was often lower during Bush's term, the right track/wrong track direction is much better now than under Bush.

      The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

      by mikepridmore on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 12:51:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  right track wrong track is where its at (0+ / 0-)

        I am not impressed by the numbers. U6 is at 14.7%, about 22 million people would take a full time yr rnd job if offered.

        Many countries are facing near double dip conditions, US, Mexico, Canada, in the EU, some of those have GDP growth in the negative and are solidly in double dip conditions.

        We need some major ass kicking by the House and Senate Dems, and Mitts rear end needs to be put in its right place.

        Then those Dems need to pass actually solutions on the scale of the problems we have, lets start with 20 million jobs, 5% of GDP spent on infrastructure, creating 12 to 16 million jobs right there.

        FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 01:46:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What universe are (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          congenitalefty, Shockwave

          you living in?  Yes you could have more jobs as you mention but not if GOP controls congress.  And not quite the magnitude you seem to think.

          The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

          by mikepridmore on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 02:33:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  the universe one is living in is a good question (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MGross

            As is one's perception of the glass being half empty or half full.

            If the glass is a champagne flute, I'm guessing it's half full.  If it's a water glass, and you are dry as a bone, it is half empty.

            There are many, many metrics that one can use to guage the health of this economy, and this recovery.  The unemployment rate is just one of them.

            How about new claims for SNAP assistance?  They are at a record high.  Poverty rate?  it's been at a level for the past two years that America hasn't seen since 1965, when LBJ launched his "War on Poverty."

            Food insecurity?  Food bank dependance?  LIHEAP applications?  SSDI claims?  (SSDI has become a shadow "long term unemployment" program)  

            The way to accurately measure the health of the economy is a good debate to have, and one that should be engaged without anyone calling another person a "Truther."

            The unemployment rate paints a 2 dimensional picture of a 3 dimensional reality.

            Wage declines?  If wages are declining, and they are, then it doesn't matter that there is tepid job growth...EPI estimate that 6 of 10 jobs created since 2009 have been "low wage jobs."  A nominal growth in jobs, but at lower wages in the face of inflation, is not a "rising tide."  It is a waning tide.  

            And a waning tide lowers all boats.

            I say this not in defense of Jack Welch, or to detract from our president has managed to accomplish in the face of GOP obstructionism...It's simply fact.

            If you made it through this recession relatively unscathed, or if you got nicked by it early in life and have time to recover, it affects how you view these stats.

            I wonder what the wage deflation for older workers, those over 50, who have gone through two recessions in just 12 years, looks like...separated from the aggregate?

            Oregon: Sure...it's cold. But it's a damp cold.

            by Keith930 on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 03:56:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thanks for the (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              factbased, biscobosco

              Republican talking points.  Now go read to find out that the problem is that Republicans are killing the American Dream.

              The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

              by mikepridmore on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 09:12:41 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  talking points (0+ / 0-)

                It is no talking point that clients are coming into my office with their families and  literally begging for help after being evicted.  One even told me "All the good spots (under a bridge) have already been taken".  The misery from this neverending recession is palpable.

                •  Unnecessary misery (3+ / 0-)

                  I don't object to acknowledging the misery of the economy, but if you don't also explain why we're in this situation (GOP policies) and that much of the misery could be alleviated (absent GOP obstructionism), you sound like a Republican.

                  How about an Office of Fact Based Initiatives?

                  by factbased on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 12:22:21 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  yeah, The misery of outsourced jobs (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mikepridmore

                    Romney's  a real jobcreator   For China!   Bain Capital right now continues to be such an awesome example of the kind of success we will acheive if we follow those successful Republican policies.

                     Have we ever heard Romney address how we stop moving jobs to China??

                    Wonder why not?

                     

                    "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics" - F.D.R.

                    by biscobosco on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:31:25 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Sounds like hyperbole. (0+ / 0-)

                  Not that there isn't any suffering.  But you seem to only want to blame President Obama and not give him credit for anything.  Smells like a troll to me.

                  The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

                  by mikepridmore on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 02:10:34 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  response (0+ / 0-)

                    No, I am not a republican nor did I vote for McCain or intend to vote for Romney.  My point is simple, recovery may be swell in New York, but it stinks in Michigan.  Further, there is no denying that the GDP is headed in the wrong direction (along with a lot of the world).  I do not blame this on the Bamster rather his advisors failed to understand the depth of this recession.  Hence, QE3.  Y'all throwing out some statistics without understanding the human misery now occurring in parts of this country.  

                    •  hyperbole (0+ / 0-)

                      No, it was not hyperbole-go to your local soup kitchen-my office is across the street from the largest here.

                      •  Yes hyperbole. (0+ / 0-)

                        Michigan's unemployment number was very high in 2009 but has since come down to close to the national level.  At the end of last year, Michigan's recovery was the second fastest in the nation. Only North Dakota was recovering faster. In September a report came out showing that the Michigan recovery is spreading beyond the manufacturing base.  

                        Yes, the President's advisers underestimated the size of the economic downturn back in early 2009. I recently discussed that here.  But, in spite of that mistake, the stimulus package they put together has been effective even though it was smaller than what we really needed.  But that does not give you the right to mislead about the Michigan recovery.

                        The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

                        by mikepridmore on Sat Oct 13, 2012 at 11:14:38 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  BTW (0+ / 0-)

                      GDP is going up.  Since when is that the wrong direction?

                      Maybe you should stop listening to Rush Limbaugh or watching Fox News or whatever it is you are doing that has you so misinformed.

                      The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

                      by mikepridmore on Sat Oct 13, 2012 at 11:28:28 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  Irresponsible (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Roger Fox, biscobosco

              It's irresponsible to go on about how bad things are without being very clear that the Republicans are causing the unnecessary pain and Democrats are at least trying to improve the situation.

              It's a Republican talking point to bring up SNAP usage as if it's Obama's fault. Republican austerity has put many out of work and slowed the economy as a whole. Changing the rules so that SNAP is tougher to qualify for would have been like closing a long operating soup kitchen during the Great Depression or closing a homeless shelter every winter. That's when they're needed most.

              How about an Office of Fact Based Initiatives?

              by factbased on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 12:11:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Exactly. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                biscobosco

                If Republicans got their way, there would be none of these safety net options.  Republican safety net is YOYO: You're on your own.

                The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

                by mikepridmore on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 02:26:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Its a given the GOP is blocking progress (0+ / 0-)

                at least in our world. I have a feeling that on election day many will vote with that on their mind.

                FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                by Roger Fox on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:11:26 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Right over 50, thats me (0+ / 0-)

              My wage deflation went from 48k to zero.

              Appreciate the nuance, well said.

              FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 05:22:24 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Green Jobs Growth in the USA: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shockwave, mikepridmore, Roger Otip


    Despite the obstruction in Congress and many State Legislatures the Green economy is growing, shoulda started some forty years back but that's another story with the same obstructor's, slowly as they hold it back but it's taking hold!

    Manufacturing Leads the Way, 3.1 Million Green jobs in November
    October 10, 2012 - There were 3.1 million “green jobs” in the US as of November 2011. Green jobs are growing faster than overall job growth in the US. They pay well, and there’s an increasingly wide range of them accessible to Americans of every level of education and experience, according to the Economic Policy Institute’s “Counting up to green” analysis of the Labor Dept. Bureau of Labor Statistic’s (BLS) groundbreaking Green Jobs report, which was released Sept. 28.

    BLS’ data and report follow on similar studies of green jobs — notably by the Brookings Institution and Pew Research Center – that indicate making the transition to a cleaner, greener, low-carbon US economy and society doesn’t necessarily entail a net loss in jobs — far from it. If the transition gathers enough momentum, it appears that more green jobs will be created faster than jobs in other sectors and activites are lost.  read more>>>

    Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

    by jimstaro on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 04:20:06 PM PDT

  •  with a little help (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shockwave, mikepridmore

    we would be down at 6% unemployment.  But no, the GOP opposed every effort to help aided by GOP governors.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

    by noofsh on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 04:36:17 PM PDT

    •  but this still doesn't address the fact that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      happymisanthropy

      a substantial majority of the new job growth in the private sector has been in low wage jobs.

      How do you factor in wages in the metrics of the job picture?

      There seems to be a new "equilibrium" in the labor market, and the tide is much lower than it once was.

      Oregon: Sure...it's cold. But it's a damp cold.

      by Keith930 on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 04:47:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  American Jobs Act (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        biscobosco

        I don't hear anything meaningful from Romney about how he will create good jobs.  Yes I hear him say that he will, but not how.  

        If we get the American Jobs Act passed (which should help the construction industry as we repair infrastructure) and get some of those government jobs back, much of this problem with low jobs will disappear.  Government jobs and the construction industry seem to be the two biggest hits that are causing this (link), both of which are addressed in the American Jobs Act.

        The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

        by mikepridmore on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 09:26:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  This is the meat of the AJA (0+ / 0-)

          !) Immediate investments in infrastructure and a bipartisan National Infrastructure Bank, modernizing our roads, rail, airports and waterways while putting hundreds of thousands of workers back on the job.

          2) A New “Project Rebuild”, which will put people to work rehabilitating homes, businesses and communities, leveraging private capital and scaling land banks and other public-private collaborations.

          3)Expanding access to high-speed wireless as part of a plan for freeing up the nation’s spectrum.

          This sort of work, if expanded, could create between 10 and 13 million jobs in infrastructure alone. Last year we spent about 1.3% of GDP, 195 billion, we should be spending about 5% of GDP.

          Internet projects can easily add between 1 and 2 million jobs.

          Remove tax breaks for outsourcing, turn them into tax breaks for domestic investment, in emerging tech and markets like solar wind HVDC grid work can add between 2-2.7 million jobs.

          On paper about 18 million jobs.

          FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:02:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The Economic Policy Institute (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Roger Fox

            article (link) on the necessity of helping state and local governments might mean we need to add more of that if we can get a receptive congress.

            The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

            by mikepridmore on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:24:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Stagnant wages and job creation (0+ / 0-)

        Are almost 2 different issues.

        FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 05:51:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The GOP looked for word jobs (0+ / 0-)

      and voted against the bill what ever it was.

      I'm hoping they pay for that on election day... big time.

      FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:04:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'll only add this...anyone who thinks the current (0+ / 0-)

    jobs situation is "awe inspiring" is not currently looking for work.

    Oregon: Sure...it's cold. But it's a damp cold.

    by Keith930 on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 05:04:51 PM PDT

    •  And anyone who thinks (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      factbased, biscobosco

      Mitt Romney will do better simply isn't paying attention:
      Exposing Mitt Romney's Job Creation Lies.

      The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

      by mikepridmore on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 09:46:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Perspective (0+ / 0-)

      Ok FDR had a huge majority, Obama doesnt even have both Houses, but...

      In 1934 GNP grew at 11%, 1935 9%, 1936 13.9%.

      Keynesian economic stimulus at work. Realistically we wont see those sorts of numbers, no matter how much we spend. Most agree that with the workforce growing at just under 1%, Energy harder to drill for.... that the days of 4% growth and higher are not possible. But 3 to 3.5% seems to be agreed on.

      FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 05:48:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  low wages (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happymisanthropy, Roger Fox

    That sensible - its hard to bring up wages until you start to get fuller employment. If you are an employer with 100 applicants at your door, you probably can play less than if you have 20 people at your door and get the same quality of employee.

    The opposite of course occurs when UE is low. I remember reading article after article in the late Clinton era about how it was a workers market - benefits were up, wages were up, bargaining power was up (at least among white collar workers).

    Certainly the general tide of American labor is towards lower paying jobs - robots and foreigners are going to make that a trend for a while, regardless of party, maybe forever - which is why we need to invest heavily in education and go for more progressive taxes.

    But aside from that, wages arent going to go up until UE goes down further.

    •  As mentioned above, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      biscobosco

      two of the biggest hits to quality jobs seem to be the construction industry and government jobs. (link)  I think the American Jobs Act would help both.

      The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

      by mikepridmore on Thu Oct 11, 2012 at 09:29:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd love to see 5% of GDP spent on infrastructure (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        biscobosco

        Last year we spent 1.3%.

        Anything thats got the word jobs on it is an anathema to the GOP House.

        Offshore wind turbine and the HVDC marine cable means hi paying jobs, like oil rig jobs, 85k to 120 k. And manufacturing all that stuff can mean more good jobs in the US......

        FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 05:33:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  absolutely (0+ / 0-)

      Real wage growth either cyclical or non cyclical....Wont happen without prolonged U3 at 5.5% or lower.

      I dont have the citations handy, but I've looked at the U3/wage growth over inflation since 1980, and we saw real wage growth twice, both when U3 was 4-5% for prolonged periods.

      When employers compete for skilled employees, we generally see upward wage pressure.

      Unfortunately since 1973 wages have not kept up with inflation. Erosion of labor rights, outsourcing etc.... Thanks Reagan....

      FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 05:40:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Romney Pays his Maid $20,000 (3+ / 0-)

    His old company is now outsourcing a profitable company in Illinois to China. He likes to have the right to fire people. He's done everything he can to help the race to the bottom in his race to the top.

  •  Obama took office in Jan 2010? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happymisanthropy
    As you can see, between January 2002 and January 2010, President Bush gained 4 whole percentage points, while President Obama has lowered unemployment by 1.9 percentage points thus far.
    Obama has no net loss or gain in unemployment since he took office (at the beginning of 2009.)  The Obama Stimulus passed in February 2009.

    You don't do anyone any favors by moving the goalposts.  

    •  When Obama took office the trend was up (0+ / 0-)

      Now the trend is down.

    •  The idea of a one year lag (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      biscobosco

      is not mine.  It has been a standard starting place for discussion.  If you read this recent paper (pdf), for instance, starting at the bottom of page 7, you will see that both of the most-talked-about studies of Presidential effectiveness assumed a 1 year lag in responsibility.  This is a very legitimate way of looking at presidential effectiveness.  And it shows just how much better President Obama has been.  There is no moving of the goalposts, just putting them in the same place that others, others with academic respectability on this topic, put them.

      The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

      by mikepridmore on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 01:58:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Even more so (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mikepridmore

        Because he has been opposed every step of the way by a congress (and don't forget the fillibustering senate) which has dragged its feet and "Just said NO" to bills which would have improved the jobs picture  so much that they remind me more of teenagers being asked to clean up their rooms than they do of adults.

        "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics" - F.D.R.

        by biscobosco on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 05:33:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  And Bush just couldn't wait (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mikepridmore

      to hand the stinking mess over to him, if I recall.

      Do you remember Fall 2008? I do; Bush said

      Major financial institutions have teetered on the edge of collapse, and some have failed. As uncertainty has grown, many banks have restricted lending, credit markets have frozen, and families and businesses have found it harder to borrow money.

      We're in the midst of a serious financial crisis The government's top economic experts warn that, without immediate action by Congress, America could slip into a financial panic and a distressing scenario would unfold.

      More banks could fail, including some in your community. The stock market would drop even more, which would reduce the value of your retirement account. The value of your home could plummet. Foreclosures would rise dramatically,

      Oh yeah, take the country from the brink of simultaneous collapse of the financial markets, and the housing market, as well as handle the costs of two wars, which Bush had estimated at 50- 60 billion dollars hahahahahah!

      At the same time while sustaining tax cuts which Republicans refused to forgo, so the wars which are now costing us well over a trillion dollars http://www.usnews.com/...

      So that debt rises...

      No problem, It seems like Republicans think  Obama  is God. Cause he should have been able to fix all that in 7 days.

      "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics" - F.D.R.

      by biscobosco on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 05:54:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Private sector jobs vs public sector (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mikepridmore

      Bush's good jobs numbers were inflated by massive growth in public sector jobs.

      Under Obama we have seen reduction in the Public sector jobs.

      Did you read the diary?

      "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics" - F.D.R.

      by biscobosco on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:01:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Public sector job growth (0+ / 0-)

        It'd been on pretty much the same trend since Reagan

        (Just use the graph, the first article I could find with it was a Reason article)

        •  No it isn't. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          biscobosco

          Public sector jobs went up before now, not down.  That isn't "the same trend since Reagan."  

          The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

          by mikepridmore on Sun Oct 14, 2012 at 02:38:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  For Bush's term (0+ / 0-)

            There wasn't any more of a "massive growth in public sector jobs" under Bush than there was under Clinton, Reagan, or his father.

            •  compared to the negative Public sector job growth (0+ / 0-)

              During the Obama administration, growth under Bush was indeed massive.

              "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics" - F.D.R.

              by biscobosco on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 09:20:57 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  You said trend was same. (0+ / 0-)

              The trend is different under President Obama, especially when compared to President George W. Bush.  And one of the main reasons for the trend to have changed under President Obama is that state and local government jobs have been cut, mostly in states that Tea Party Republicans gained control of in 2010.  

              You seem to be intentionally ignoring what was said in the diary and subsequent comments and/or you are intentionally misleading on the topic of government jobs.  Just because Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan seem to think we are in a post-factual world, and act accordingly, does not mean you get to follow suit.

              And I also notice you have still not admitted that the one year lag is the way professional economic analysts judge presidents on the economy and related topics.

              The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

              by mikepridmore on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 09:24:06 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  But the Goalposts Should be Fiscal Years (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mikepridmore

      "You don't do anyone any favors by moving the goalposts.  "

      No, but the far fairer and more revealing metric is Fiscal Years. This lets the outgoing president get credit for the results of his last budget, and it lets the incoming president assume responsibility once he's had time to start getting his appointments approved and to craft his first budget.

      Ironically, both Bush, Jr., and Obama are helped by this protocol. Bush Junior avoids having to be responsible for the Clinton dot com bust and, of course, Obama has far less of Bush's concluding jobs disaster on his record.

  •  if I could rec this diary 1000 times I would (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mikepridmore

    if only for the single chart which shows public sector vs private sector job growth under Obama and bush first terms.

    I knew Bush's job creation record was bad, but did not realize his first term was so much worse than obamas.

    He had negative private sector job growth -- EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS MASSIVE PUBLIC SECTOR JOB GROWTH!

    "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics" - F.D.R.

    by biscobosco on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:05:52 PM PDT

    •  One estimate (0+ / 0-)

      says that Bush had a net loss of 653,000 private sector jobs.  One mention on The Economist blog:

      But Mr Obama can always draw a favourable comparison with his predecessor. At the time of the election, the president may be able to say (more or less accurately) that where the last Republican president oversaw the loss of 653,000 private-sector jobs while creating 1.7m government jobs, he presided over a gain of nearly 800,000 jobs in the private sector while trimming back nearly half of the public-sector fat added by Mr Bush. All that despite the socialism.

      The ...Bushies... don't make policies to deal with problems. ...It's all about how can we spin what's happening out there to do what we want to do. Krugman

      by mikepridmore on Fri Oct 12, 2012 at 06:32:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site