PDA

View Full Version : Millions Fewer Jobs Created Under Bush



LoungeMachine
01-09-2007, 06:42 PM
Fewer jobs created under President Bush

January 9, 2007
By Jeannine Aversa the associated press
WASHINGTON -- The economy has cranked out fewer jobs under President George W. Bush -- by millions -- than it had by the same point in the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton.

Democrats say it's evidence that Bush's economic policies aren't working.

Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez counters, in an interview, "It's just a matter of timing and when we started getting out of the recession that the president inherited."

Economists suggest something fundamentally different also may be going on in the economy: The labor force of available workers is growing more slowly as the baby boom generation ages.

Under Bush, the economy produced 3.7 million new jobs from January 2001 through December of last year based on nonfarm payroll figures collected by the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That figure is likely to be higher -- perhaps by an additional 810,000-- when the government releases annual revisions based on more complete information next month. However, that doesn't change the basic historical picture.

When Clinton was in the White House, the economy generated 17.6 million jobs during the corresponding period -- from January 1993 to December 1998. Under Reagan, 9.5 million jobs were created from January 1981 to December 1986.

Those are the two most-recent two-term presidents before Bush. Some 2.6 million jobs were created during the four-year term of Bush's father, who took office in January 1989.

Reagan had two recessions -- one of which began in July 1981 and ended in November 1982. It was the most severe recession since the Great Depression, pushing the monthly unemployment rate as high as 10.8 percent.

Bush, too, has had his economic challenges. He had the 2001 recession and that year's terror attack. And, Gutierrez noted, Bush faced lingering fallout from the bursting of the stock market bubble in 2000. He also was confronted with a wave of corporate accounting scandals that rocked Wall Street -- and with Iraq war beginning in 2003.

The economy lost jobs in 2001 and 2002. Since then jobs have been growing each year -- including 2006, when the economy was hit by the real-estate bust.

Those jolts did affect jobs on Bush's watch, economists say. Yet they see deeper reasons for slower job growth, too.

"The principal reason is that the labor force has grown much more slowly during the president's term than under the presidencies of Clinton and Reagan and that has nothing to do with anything but demographics," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com.

Baby boomers -- a huge block of workers -- poured into the work force in the 1980s and were rising through the ranks in the 1990s. That's not the case now as boomers face retirement, and there are fewer young people to take their places.

Women, meanwhile, who helped to bulk up the labor force over the past few decades, aren't streaming into jobs as they once did.

EAT MY ASSHOLE
01-09-2007, 06:42 PM
I just realized the solution to this problem. Somebody call Steve Jobs and tell him to get busy with his wife.

LoungeMachine
01-09-2007, 06:43 PM
ba-dum-dum

EAT MY ASSHOLE
01-09-2007, 06:44 PM
Also, I feel I should mention that there is no better job than a job under bush.

EAT MY ASSHOLE
01-09-2007, 06:46 PM
You know, I wouldn't mind who ever is stealing my passwrod and posting with my name so much so long as the comments were FUNNY...

Nitro Express
01-09-2007, 11:07 PM
Oh he's created jobs but everyone has to work three or four of them to compensate for the job with bennefits they lost to Bush's globalistic policies. Oh hell, you can drive a truck in Iraq for Halliburton and still make decent pay but of course many didn't get to enjoy it because the died driving that fucking truck.

ppg960
01-09-2007, 11:17 PM
I think Clinton did a great job for the country. He would have gone down as one of the better Presidents if he wasn't Impeached??
I thought he did well.
At least he didn't go to War with everyone.

4moreyears
01-10-2007, 09:25 PM
No matter who the president is or what party they belong to there will most likely be less jobs under the next administration. The reason is technology. I know there are global outsourcing initivites going on but I feel technology is displacing white coller workers as sophisticated manufacturing plants did to union workers in the 70's and 80's.

Let me give you an example. A friend of mine was a stock broker for 30 years. He would take an order over the phone and was able to mark out the stock and charge 100.00 ticket charge on top of it. If a stock traded for 22.00 and the bid (what someone is willing to pay) was 21.00 and the ask (what someone was looking to sell it for) was 23.00 he would get the client in @ 23.00 and buy at 21.00. A thousand shares makes him 2000.00 plus 100.00 for the privdlidge. Then discount brokers like Schwab opened up to start lowering costs. Lower costs displaced brokers. Now with the Internet and all the data out there who needs a broker. The same can be said of hundreds of thousands of travel agents who have been displaced by Travelocity and Expedia. Or iTunes taking over for all the record stores.

Bottom line is competition is forcing Corp America to impliment technology improvements that reduces payroll and increases productivity for remaining employees.

Hardrock69
01-10-2007, 09:42 PM
And it is the same technology that is causing people to lose their jobs.

I jumped ship in the late 90s...realized I was not getting any younger and needed a career change.

I work with computers, and make a good living doing what I do.

Those not nimble enough to learn about new technology will get left behind.

Survival of the fittest.

The Weak must perish so the Strong may live.

Or something like that.

It's a jungle out there....

Lqskdiver
01-10-2007, 10:30 PM
The technology sector and the big dotcom boom helped fuel this surge in jobs in the 90's. After it went bust, things slowed down.

Technology did bring in a new sector into the market...and it replaced an old one.

Also, with the introduction of cheaper wage labor in the overseas market, that did not help the figures as well.

You can't deny that we've had record numbers in trading in the recent months. That goes with all the current trends as well.