Posted on 10/04/2011 9:12:14 AM PDT by Nachum
In the midst of the current economic downturn, there is one group that seems to be prospering: public employees. While the private sector is struggling to grow and create new jobs, federal government jobs are doing quite well.
This week’s chart by Mercatus Center Scholar Veronique de Rugy shows the growing number of federal government employees. Using the latest data for annual government employment from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the chart shows that relentless growth in public sector employment largely overshadows private sector employment.
In 2010, there were 22,482,000 government employees. That’s an increase of 1,692,000 employees since 2000. During the examined time period, public employment has grown at an average rate of 0.8% each year—in contrast to the -0.3% average annual rate of private employment decline. From 2000 to 2010, the plummeting employment has been concentrated in the private sector. A total of 3,658,000 private sector jobs have been lost. All the while, public employment continues to increase.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercatus.org ...
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
the always-growing government parasite.
Downturn because government continues to grow.
Exactly
One day enough people will get it.
How many of those that lost their jobs in the private sector took jobs in the government?
A few years ago, there were FR discussions about how the fed govt was going to have to start hiring people because so many were reaching retirement age. I believe that is a big part of this growth.
This headline is totally false. There has been no increase in federal employment. The article also has a false graph. Federal employment is NOT 23 million. I guess people will believe anything that verifies their beliefs and care nothing for the truth.
Got some hard proof of your assessments?
Federal employment has been around 3 million for a LONG time.
The figures listed are for ALL government employment not just federal.
If it were replacing the aging workforce, then the number of employees should remain un-changed.
The FACT is that the Unions have infiltrated the public employee arena, and hiring more friends and laundering MORE Dues to the Progressive Cause is why the government employment is rising. The government produces nothing, spends money of people who haven't even been born yet, and pays themselves exhorbitant wages and benefits.
A 50% across-the-board reduction in government would not affect the Constitutional duties that are required to be performed, at all. The un-Constitutional duties, regulations, oversight, and handouts are the reason we are in the toilet with the Economy.
I think it’s more a matter of hiring new, younger personnel and grooming them, while the ones they are going to replace are still there.
*The article lists the source as the Bureau of Labor Statistics but according to that website, federal figures for 2010 aren't available there.
I did track down some figures on another government site though. According to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the federal government added a total of 313,000 jobs** from 2000 to 2010. (237,000 of those just since Obama took office.) Of that 313,000, 176,000 are "uniformed military" and 137,000 are "executive branch civilians". (Of the 237,000, over a third were ebc positions - 84,000 - and 152,000 were uniformed military.)
**According to the site, figures do include "full-time permanent, temporary, part-time, and intermittent employees", "Postal Service","various disadvantaged youth and worker-trainee programs" and do not include census workers.
Actual figures are hard to find on employment data. I do follow the Mercatus Center and so this was an interesting piece of writing, I thought.
No, the figures in the article do not seem to account for a great deal of those employed by federal agencies, but just the idea that this chart still shows massive employment in the face of what is a modern depression is mind boggling. The Federal government needs to take a hair cut. Now.
That would be true in a business that actually produces something, but when jobs consist of producing nothing, it doesn't take a lot of training.
OTH, if that were the case, over time, government would NOT have grown to the extent it has, since the "retiring" workers (over time) would net out against the TOTAL number of employed there. For the past 20 years, government has grown and grown, and no workforce attrition is apparent at all.
I’ll ask again, got some hard proof of your assessments?
Links, graphs, cave paintings?
We’re so screwed.
When will this House of Cards finally fall? As a past ‘taxpayer-supported government worker’ (Military) I’m sort of looking forward to the bloodbath...but I fear it won’t come for many, many, many more years.
What happens when the very last private sector job is GONE...aside from that person turning out the lights and locking the door?
I've been saying that a lot lately :(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.