Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What now libs? Less than 18,000 jobs
It’s idiotic to blame lack of job growth on 'libs' or Obama, in office only two and a half years.
Indeed, for the last 11 years, job growth has been poor:
Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record
By WSJ Staff
President George W. Bush entered office in 2001 just as a recession was starting, and is preparing to leave in the middle of a long one. That’s almost 22 months of recession during his 96 months in office.
His job-creation record won’t look much better. The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton‘s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.
Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record - Real Time Economics - WSJ
Poor job growth can be attributed to the Bush tax cuts, among other factors:
So what we’re seeing is the aftermath of Bush and GOP fiscal policy. I understand this is frustrating for republicans, conservatives, and others on the right, champing at the bit in anticipation of ‘blaming Obama.’ But he simply hasn’t been in office long enough to have any effect – good or bad – on the economy. Consequently, it will be the administration after Obama that will feel the effects – again, good or bad – from Obama fiscal policy.
Sluggish private job growth indicates failure of tax cuts
Changes in tax law since 2001 reduced federal government revenue by $870 billion through September 2005. Supporters of these tax cuts have touted them as great contributors to growth in jobs and pay. But, in reality, private-sector job growth since 2001 has been disappointing, and a closer look at the new jobs created shows that federal spending—not tax cuts—are responsible for the jobs created in the past five years.
JobWatch
Needless to say these facts have nothing to do with partisan politics.
What now libs? Less than 18,000 jobs
It’s idiotic to blame lack of job growth on 'libs' or Obama, in office only two and a half years.
Indeed, for the last 11 years, job growth has been poor:
Poor job growth can be attributed to the Bush tax cuts, among other factors:
So what we’re seeing is the aftermath of Bush and GOP fiscal policy. I understand this is frustrating for republicans, conservatives, and others on the right, champing at the bit in anticipation of ‘blaming Obama.’ But he simply hasn’t been in office long enough to have any effect – good or bad – on the economy. Consequently, it will be the administration after Obama that will feel the effects – again, good or bad – from Obama fiscal policy.
Sluggish private job growth indicates failure of tax cuts
Changes in tax law since 2001 reduced federal government revenue by $870 billion through September 2005. Supporters of these tax cuts have touted them as great contributors to growth in jobs and pay. But, in reality, private-sector job growth since 2001 has been disappointing, and a closer look at the new jobs created shows that federal spending—not tax cuts—are responsible for the jobs created in the past five years.
JobWatch
Needless to say these facts have nothing to do with partisan politics.
It is beyond ridiculous that you would say this and reference a source that was last updated in January 2006.
Its idiotic to blame lack of job growth on 'libs' or Obama, in office only two and a half years.
Indeed, for the last 11 years, job growth has been poor:
Poor job growth can be attributed to the Bush tax cuts, among other factors:
So what were seeing is the aftermath of Bush and GOP fiscal policy. I understand this is frustrating for republicans, conservatives, and others on the right, champing at the bit in anticipation of blaming Obama. But he simply hasnt been in office long enough to have any effect good or bad on the economy. Consequently, it will be the administration after Obama that will feel the effects again, good or bad from Obama fiscal policy.
Needless to say these facts have nothing to do with partisan politics.
It is beyond ridiculous that you would say this and reference a source that was last updated in January 2006.
It's true, though. Job creation was the weakest coming out of the last recession than it had been since the Great Depression. And by some estimates, up to 40% of the jobs that were created were due to the housing and mortgage finance bubble. I don't blame Bush much since he was responding to the collapse of the Tech Bubble that was not of his doing, but the economic legacy of the 00s is dominated by one of the biggest asset bubbles ever. It's hardly something to crow about.
This is not about partisan politics. We have created serial bubbles over the past 10-15 years. We have gone from an economy that was managed to the inventory cycle to one where authorities rely upon and target asset prices. The aftermath of an asset bubble collapse is very different than the aftermath of a credit tightening which cools demand due to an inventory build-up. We are now dealing with that aftermath. It wouldn't matter if you had the most pro-growth administration ever in Washington. We would still be struggling mightily because that is the nature of economies after asset bubbles collapse.
It is beyond ridiculous that you would say this and reference a source that was last updated in January 2006.
It's true, though. Job creation was the weakest coming out of the last recession than it had been since the Great Depression. And by some estimates, up to 40% of the jobs that were created were due to the housing and mortgage finance bubble. I don't blame Bush much since he was responding to the collapse of the Tech Bubble that was not of his doing, but the economic legacy of the 00s is dominated by one of the biggest asset bubbles ever. It's hardly something to crow about.
This is not about partisan politics. We have created serial bubbles over the past 10-15 years. We have gone from an economy that was managed to the inventory cycle to one where authorities rely upon and target asset prices. The aftermath of an asset bubble collapse is very different than the aftermath of a credit tightening which cools demand due to an inventory build-up. We are now dealing with that aftermath. It wouldn't matter if you had the most pro-growth administration ever in Washington. We would still be struggling mightily because that is the nature of economies after asset bubbles collapse.
To suggest that the Bush Tax Cuts are in any way responsible for poor job growth over the past decade, up to and including now, is preposterous. There was a very nice run up in employment between 2003 and 2008 before the recession hit. I would not claim that those tax cuts were soley responsible, but it could have had a significant impact.
It is my opinion that a pro growth administration would have made a big difference coming out of the recession, with policies almost the exact opposite of what Obama did. Maybe not back to what life was like back in the roaring 90s, but better than what we've got now. One wonders however what the political environment would have been, maybe there would have been no Tea Party.
Its idiotic to blame lack of job growth on 'libs' or Obama, in office only two and a half years.
Indeed, for the last 11 years, job growth has been poor:
Poor job growth can be attributed to the Bush tax cuts, among other factors:
So what were seeing is the aftermath of Bush and GOP fiscal policy. I understand this is frustrating for republicans, conservatives, and others on the right, champing at the bit in anticipation of blaming Obama. But he simply hasnt been in office long enough to have any effect good or bad on the economy. Consequently, it will be the administration after Obama that will feel the effects again, good or bad from Obama fiscal policy.
Needless to say these facts have nothing to do with partisan politics.
It is beyond ridiculous that you would say this and reference a source that was last updated in January 2006.
It's true, though. Job creation was the weakest coming out of the last recession than it had been since the Great Depression. And by some estimates, up to 40% of the jobs that were created were due to the housing and mortgage finance bubble. I don't blame Bush much since he was responding to the collapse of the Tech Bubble that was not of his doing, but the economic legacy of the 00s is dominated by one of the biggest asset bubbles ever. It's hardly something to crow about.
This is not about partisan politics. We have created serial bubbles over the past 10-15 years. We have gone from an economy that was managed to the inventory cycle to one where authorities rely upon and target asset prices. The aftermath of an asset bubble collapse is very different than the aftermath of a credit tightening which cools demand due to an inventory build-up. We are now dealing with that aftermath. It wouldn't matter if you had the most pro-growth administration ever in Washington. We would still be struggling mightily because that is the nature of economies after asset bubbles collapse.
And the bubbles of the 00s were enabled by misguided government policy.
It is beyond ridiculous that you would say this and reference a source that was last updated in January 2006.
It's true, though. Job creation was the weakest coming out of the last recession than it had been since the Great Depression. And by some estimates, up to 40% of the jobs that were created were due to the housing and mortgage finance bubble. I don't blame Bush much since he was responding to the collapse of the Tech Bubble that was not of his doing, but the economic legacy of the 00s is dominated by one of the biggest asset bubbles ever. It's hardly something to crow about.
This is not about partisan politics. We have created serial bubbles over the past 10-15 years. We have gone from an economy that was managed to the inventory cycle to one where authorities rely upon and target asset prices. The aftermath of an asset bubble collapse is very different than the aftermath of a credit tightening which cools demand due to an inventory build-up. We are now dealing with that aftermath. It wouldn't matter if you had the most pro-growth administration ever in Washington. We would still be struggling mightily because that is the nature of economies after asset bubbles collapse.
And the bubbles of the 00s were enabled by misguided government policy.
It's true, though. Job creation was the weakest coming out of the last recession than it had been since the Great Depression. And by some estimates, up to 40% of the jobs that were created were due to the housing and mortgage finance bubble. I don't blame Bush much since he was responding to the collapse of the Tech Bubble that was not of his doing, but the economic legacy of the 00s is dominated by one of the biggest asset bubbles ever. It's hardly something to crow about.
This is not about partisan politics. We have created serial bubbles over the past 10-15 years. We have gone from an economy that was managed to the inventory cycle to one where authorities rely upon and target asset prices. The aftermath of an asset bubble collapse is very different than the aftermath of a credit tightening which cools demand due to an inventory build-up. We are now dealing with that aftermath. It wouldn't matter if you had the most pro-growth administration ever in Washington. We would still be struggling mightily because that is the nature of economies after asset bubbles collapse.
And the bubbles of the 00s were enabled by misguided government policy.
Primarily misguided monetary policy.
Ongoing loss of government jobs is a major factor in the job growth weakness and has been for years.
Why aren't you small government conservatives happy? You should be, your agenda IS advancing,
and this is the result.
I've been trying for months to explain this to you people. Smaller government, whatever else it is, is a job killer, not a job creator.
You're wrong. Obamanomics is a Job Killer, and here's the score:
9.2% unemployment rate for June.
0.1% increase since May.
16.2% underemployment rate for June.
0.4% increase since May.
8% conventional wisdom for the maximum allowable unemployment rate to win reelection.
15 remaining BLS reporting months before Election Day.
255,000 net jobs that must be created each and every month to reach 8%.
18,000 net jobs created last month.
44,000 downward revision to April and May job creation.
3,825,000 total net jobs needed before Election Day.
2,100,000 jobs created in the last fifteen months.
11.2% unemployment rate if the labor participation rate was as high as it was in January, 2009.
290,000 best monthly net jobs gain during Obama administration.
231,000 real best gain, minus temporary Census hiring.
14 months since best monthly gain.
1% decrease in DJIA in the opening minute of trading, day that jobs figures released.
$1,200,000,000,000 cost of ARRA stimulus, with interest.
1,900,000 net jobs lost since ARRA was signed.
2 quantitative easing programs since 2008.
~$2,000,000,000,000 total of first QE program during Great Recession.
$600,000,000,000 total of second QE program, just ended.
40% increase in federal debt since January, 2009.
30% increase in annual federal spending since January, 2009.
20% decrease in federal revenues since January, 2009.
12% decline in value of US dollar since January, 2009.
37% increase in number of Americans on food stamps since January, 2009.
62% increase in Misery index since January, 2009.
800 days since the Senate passed a budget.
1.9% last quarterly GDP increase.
2.5% consensus projection for last quarterly GPD increase.
2.7% official White House projection.
3.0% or better GDP growth needed to dent unemployment.
3.6% official White House GDP growth projection for 2012.
2.7% IMF GDP growth projection for 2012.
30% federal debt held by public as percentage of GDP, 2005.
60% federal debt held by public as percentage of GDP, 2010.
180% federal debt held by public as percentage of GDP, CBO estimate, 2035.
0% odds of current path being sustainable.
Vodkapundit » The Bistromath Economy
44,000 LESS THAN REPORTED IN MAY
Liberals have used every excuse they can find with my other threads to ignore the events and facts of the situations we face today
U.S. Payrolls Rise 18,000; Jobless Rate Hits 9.2% - Bloomberg
Jobs stall, setting back recovery hopes - Yahoo! Finance
US stocks dive after dismal June jobs report - Yahoo! Finance
And the bubbles of the 00s were enabled by misguided government policy.
Primarily misguided monetary policy.
Deficits do not matter when there 2% of GDP and your fighting 2 wars, thats the part you left out about Cheney's comment
policy has nothing to do with a person approving a loan to a person who cannot pay for it
that would be root cause and at some point within that transaction many laws where broke
policy has nothing to do with rolling up that loan that should have never been approved to a person who could never pay it off and calling it a security
Policy has nothing to do with moody's rating those securities AAA, as far as I know not even today that has been addressed
So Toro,
What happened to holding the individual in account
Toro anything else you want to blame on GWB?
I am still waiting for you to explain to me what it is about tax policy I do not understand, the things you thought yesterday that was so funny
I guess you have no worries about employment nor you tax bill at the end of the year, hell just blame it on W
See what happens if you think instead of attacking people you do not agree with?
and 1 more thing
Your blaming GWB on the economy creating 18,000 jobs 30 months and trillions of dollars spent after Obama took office and 54 months after the Left took over the senate?
And you think the way I see tax policy funny?
tax breaks for the wealthy have been going on for over a decade now and the great job stream promised has never materialized.
Cutting the size of government has also been going on and no job stream apparent as claimed.
Why should we keep doing things that have already failed?
We've been cutting the size of the government? Are you smoking crack?
Do you have any links to back that statement up?
Immie
actually every month "gov." has been shedding jobs, 39K last month....now these could be also from attrition etc. but payrolls have been dropping.
Government employment fell by 39,000, the eighth drop in a row, following declines in all levels of government struggling to close budget gaps.
Worries Grow Over U.S. Jobs - WSJ.com
Still waiting for that Republican plan.
Still waiting for that Republican plan.
Well rdean, to put it simply, the opposite of what this administration has done. Since obviously whatever they have done hasn't worked.
We've been cutting the size of the government? Are you smoking crack?
Do you have any links to back that statement up?
Immie
actually every month "gov." has been shedding jobs, 39K last month....now these could be also from attrition etc. but payrolls have been dropping.
Government employment fell by 39,000, the eighth drop in a row, following declines in all levels of government struggling to close budget gaps.
Worries Grow Over U.S. Jobs - WSJ.com
Well, I would have to disagree with your point in this way, number of bureaucrats (most of those who lost there jobs being low paid "clerks" anyway) does not in my book equal smaller government. In my opinion, and I may be wrong here, the government size is based upon budget and control of our lives. The government is getting bigger in my way of thinking not smaller.
Immie