Of course, we have been setting a new record for Americans working nearly every month of every non-recession year. In any case, it's easy to be misled by the large numbers being thrown about. The following table shows the average monthly and annual gain in jobs under every President since Kennedy:
TOTAL NONFARM EMPLOYMENT (thousands) No. of Monthly Annual Term Mo Year Count Change Months Average Average --------------------------------------------------------------- Kennedy Jan 1961 53683 5900 48 122.9 1475 Johnson Jan 1965 59583 9855 48 205.3 2464 Nixon Jan 1969 69438 6182 48 128.8 1546 Nixon/Ford Jan 1973 75620 5072 48 105.7 1268 Carter Jan 1977 80692 10339 48 215.4 2585 Reagan 1 Jan 1981 91031 5322 48 110.9 1331 Reagan 2 Jan 1985 96353 10780 48 224.6 2695 G.H. Bush Jan 1989 107133 2592 48 54.0 648 Clinton 1 Jan 1993 109725 11507 48 239.7 2877 Clinton 2 Jan 1997 121232 11156 48 232.4 2789 G.W. Bush Jan 2001 132388 -821 44 -18.7 -224 Sep 2004 131567 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Total (Kennedy thru Clinton) 78705 480 164.0 1968 Total (Kennedy thru G.W. Bush) 77884 524 148.6 1784 Source: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ce, Series CES0000000001
As the table shows, the average job gain from Kennedy through Clinton was about 164 thousand jobs per month and nearly 2 million jobs per year. Hence, 1.9 million jobs in 13 months is not even quite average. The 96,000 jobs created last month is well below average. Even the 3.4 million jobs that Kudlow says have been created since the end of the recession in 2001 according to the household survey is below average. Hence, it's not surprising that the growth in jobs has fallen behind the forecasts given in the last three Economic Reports of the President. The following graph shows the forecasts and the actual results according to the payroll and household surveys (the numbers can be seen at http://home.att.net/~rdavis2/employed.html):
I would be remiss if I didn't point out that the years ( with the exception of the clinton years ) referenced include the largest demographic this country has ever witnessed, the baby boomers. That was a huge mass of humanity. Also for the first time since WW11, women became an integral part of the work force instead of homemakers. Right now we are at 5.4% unemployment 2/10's of a point below 1996. Before we hit 4.2%, the last time unemplyment was that low was in 1962. So a number this low is an anomaly not the norm. To have economic growth at over 4%, unemployment at 5.4% and inflation hovering around 2% goes against all the conventional thinking of the economic intellectuals. I should know. This was hammered into me ad nauseum for four years in college.