Bush's Job Growth WORST in 50 Years (Roll out the red carpet for this “staunch Bush supporter.”)

Bush’s giant Right Wing Noise Machine (RWNM) loves to preach about the Bush economic miracle. In fact, the RWNM’s current thinking is Bush doesn’t spend enough time talking about his economic triumphs. If only he did, then everyone would fall in line and believe in the great Bush economic miracle. There is one problem with this argument: it’s a lie. Any way you look at the Bush economy, it comes up short. Today, I want to compare Bush’s job creation record with other economic recoveries. As usual, Bush comes up way short.

The national Bureau of Economic Research has identified 8 recessions since May 1954. For comparison purposed, I only used 5 of these periods because they are longer than the current expansion. Next, I used the total nonfarm employment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). I measured the jobs created from the trough (lowest point) to the next identified highest economic point. (The NBER states a “peak marks the end of an expansion and the beginning of a recession.”) I compared the total number jobs created for the entire expansion as well as the total number of jobs created 49 months into the expansion (According to the NBER, the lowest point of the last trough was in November 2001, making December 2005 the 49th month of this expansion). Here’s how the numbers (in millions) compare.

The expansion of 2/61 – 12/69 created 17,684 total jobs and 6,244 at 49 months.

The expansion of 3/75 – 7/80 created 13,183 total jobs and 12,831 at 49 months.

The expansion of 11/82 – 7/90 created 21,003 total jobs and 11,510 at 49 months.

The expansion of 3/91 – 3/01 created 23,969 total jobs and 8,266 at 49 months.

The current expansion which started in November 2001 has created a total of 3,410 jobs.

In other words, at 49 months into an expansion, Bush’s job creation record is last. While we don’t know when this expansion will end, the Bush economy would have to triple the total number of jobs created in order to get to 4th place on this list.

What’s going on here? The basic problem is some areas of the economy are creating jobs. The BLS tracks 13 different job sectors. 7 (a little over half) have created jobs since November 2001 – natural resources/mining (37,000), construction (539,000), financial (550,000), professional services (238,000), education/health (2.1 million), leisure/hospitality (803,000) and governmental employees (1 million). Of all the jobs created three areas – government, education/health account for 57% of job growth. Of the jobs created outside of education, health and governmental employees (2,167,000), construction, professional services and financial services account for about 60% of the jobs created. Real estate is obviously related to all of these areas. Construction is obviously related to real estate, as are financial services (mortgage lending etc…) and professional services (real estate agents, appraisers etc…) So, real estate, governmental employees and health/education jobs are doing just fine.

6 areas – a little under half of the sectors the BLS tracks – have had a net loss in number of jobs: manufacturing (-2,800,000), information (-565,000), trade/transport/utilities (-353), whole sales trade (-107), retail (-157), and transportation/warehousing (67,000). Manufacturing and information are obviously the two biggest areas of job losses. Some of the information service jobs are the result of natural attrition from Y2K. However, I somehow doubt that is the only reason for the losses. While there is no information regarding outsourcing losses (because the government does not keep any statistics on the subject), I fell safe in assuming outsourcing is a big factor involved in the losses.

In summation, sum people are doing well. They can find jobs and are probably financially somewhat secure. However, others have seen their jobs literally disappear overnight and are hurting to find new jobs that pay commensurate levels. These people are hurting from the current “expansion”. Of course, Bush and the RWNM has forgotten about them.

Even worse, in my city, they seem to be DYING IN ALPHEBETICAL ORDER! Seriesly! I didn't believe it either, but I just checked the obits and it's TRUE!!

This is HUGH!

Oh my GOD! It's a plot it is happening here too!!! It's series!

Today, I want to compare Bush’s job creation record with other economic recoveries. As usual, Bush comes up way short.

Each of the periods listed covers parts of two administrations.
1961 - 1969 Presidents Kennedy & Johnson
1975 - 1980 Presidents Ford & Carter
1982 - 1990 Presidents Reagan & Bush
1991 - 2001 Presidents Bush & Clinton

Why aren’t we comparing President Bush, one on one to the other Presidents?

Why aren’t we taking into account the historical problems President Bush has faced?

1. The recession President Bush inherited.

2. The Enron fraud that prospered during the Clinton administration and was uncovered and prosecuted by the Bush administration.

3. The Sept 11th attacks on America’s seats of commerce, military and government (the intended destination of flight 93).

4. The Iraq war, which has been fought and led second to none, still has been very costly.

Each President works in a unique time and set of circumstances which needs to be viewed in a larger national and world picture, it’s not as easy as cherry picking a few statistics and proving a President “comes up way short”.

You do NOT criticize the president here. This is not allowed.

Are you kidding? The president is criticized here all the time....but to criticize him on this issue is just someone looking to criticize for the sake of it. It's ridiculous and typical liberal BS.

You do NOT criticize the president here. This is not allowed.

Oh please, two long time members have gone so far as to make comments worthy of USSC visits because they hate the President so much. Then others refer to him as "BuSHIT" and plan to campaign for Democrats in 2006 in order to "impeach BuSHIT".

Um...am I the only one here who thinks the 'zotted' person in question is actually looking for answers?

It looks that way, and technically speaking we haven't unleashed the zot yet. So, feel free to engage in intelligent discourse with the poster for a little while longer. In the meantime, conditions are ripe for heavy thunderstorm activity.

The nature of the employment sector has changed rapidly ovr the past seven years.

All of the older mainframe technology and software is being replaced by PC based servers and network systems.

Many are being forced to 'reeducate' themselves to try and find work in the same section of the economy.

The MSM is cutting losses and laying off workers.

Hollywood itself is failing, and employs less.

None of these are the fault nor can be fixed by the President.

That's why there is a big, big gap between the "jobs" survey and the employment/unemployment numbers. People are working---it's just that a lot are not working for someone else.

Right-o. There is a "Household Survey" by the gov't that captures the self-employed data, and which shows a historically strong surge in gainful employment. Here is one reference to it:

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_buzzcharts/buzzcharts200408240832.asp

Kery-ites have a blind spot to the self-employed. They confuse an entrepreneur whose business earns more than $200,000 a year with the "idle rich" (which is what HE is). They must think the chap has all his income lying about as cash in the vault and not re-invested in his business.

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.