The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

NewsMax ^ | Feb. 25, 2004 | Paige McKenzie

[visualops]

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Paige McKenzie, NewsMax.com
Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million jobs lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job record since before World War II, they claim.

One little problem: It's not true.

Not only has there been no net loss of jobs during the Bush administration, there has been a net gain, even with the devastation of 9/11. At least 2.4 million jobs have been created since the president took office, 2 million of those in 2003. The gains more than offset the losses.

While Democrats continue to beat their election-year drums about outsourcing, manufacturing losses, unemployment and slow growth in employment, America’s economy has been steadily creating jobs.

At least 366,000 jobs have been created in the last five months, over 100,000 of those in January, White House press secretary Scott McClellan has noted. And though the eight-month recession “officially” ended in November, economic indicators are surprising economists and pointing toward a take-off in the recovery.

The signs:

 

• The 5.6 percent unemployment rate is the lowest in two years and below the average of the 1980s (7.3 percent) and '90s (5.8 percent), and still continues to drop.

   

• The nation's economic output revealed the strongest quarterly growth in 20 years. The data for the fourth quarter of 2003 show that the civilian labor force rose by 333,000, while the number of unemployed in the labor force dropped by 575,000. Even better, the number of so-called discouraged workers declined in December.

   

• Consumer spending grew between 4 percent and 5 percent last year, and real hourly earnings rose 1.5 percent. Real earnings have risen over the last three years.

   

• Exports doubled to 19 percent in the fourth quarter, compared to less than 9 percent in the third.

   

• The number of American workers is at an all-time high of 138.5 million, a level never before attained in U.S. history.

   

• Jobless claims are 10 percent below the average of the last 25 years and still falling.

   

• Hiring indices are up, even in manufacturing.

   

• Productivity growth is extremely high.

   

  Now the doomsayers are criticizing the validity of the unemployment rate, which at 5.6 percent does not fit their gloomy story.

   

  Faulty Counting

   

  The problem is the areas of biggest job growth are usually not even being counted at all.

   

  Though 75 percent of jobs are created by small companies, according to the Small Business Administration, this sector’s entrepreneurial activity and the jobs it creates are left out by Washington bean counters when calculating official new job numbers.

   

  The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does its Payroll Survey by phoning businesses to crunch the number of jobs that have been gained or lost. This is where Democrats grabbed onto their lifeline, the 2.3 million figure. Look only at the Payroll Survey, and there has been a gain of only 522,000 jobs since Bush took office.

  But here’s the rub. The Household Survey is used to determine the unemployment rate and accounts for those who are self-employed, and small emerging businesses that might be overlooked by the Payroll Survey. But the number of U.S. firms isn’t static, and the "fixed list" used by the BLS for phoning established businesses does not reflect new entrepreneurial activity.

  People are called at home and asked if they have jobs, or if they are in the market for a job. In contrast to the Payroll Survey, the Household Survey shows that 2.4 million jobs have been created so far during Bush's time in office.

  As Economy.com writer Haseeb Ahmed recently wrote, "something is amiss in the [Payroll] survey."

  Credit Where Credit Is Due

  That’s not all. When doomsayers, and media spoiling for a fight in an election year, laughed at Bush’s prediction of 2.6 million new jobs this year, not everyone was scoffing.

  Ahmed, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and others hardly batted an eye. Greenspan said it was "probably feasible" the economy would reach the Bush administration's forecast of adding 2.6 million jobs this year, provided growth continues and the productivity rate slows to more typically levels.

  "I don't think it's 'Fantasyland,'" Greenspan said.

  "I agree with him," said John Ryding, chief market economist at Bear Stearns. "I think that we will create 2.5 million, possibly more, jobs over the balance of the year."

  Ahmed is convinced that "the revision patterns of the early-1990s recovery cycle" will be repeated. A total of 1.4 million job gains were revised upward to 2.9 million in the first 21 months after the end of the last recession, just after Bush Sr. was voted out of office.

  Next: If elected, will John Kerry get credit for the jobs created under the Bush administration? And find out why so many workers are not being counted.

[nopardons]

BTT

[KSCITYBOY]

bump

[Eala]

Even here in Washington State, where they say we're having the slowest recovery, I'm starting to see want ads for my specialty.

[Eala]

Even here in Washington State, where they say we're having the slowest recovery, I'm starting to see want ads for my specialty. (I am currently employed, just thinking about a change.)

[J. L. Chamberlain]

(people on unemployment aren't motivated to look for work and are thus not counted as unemployed).

You're kidding, right? Those are the only folks who ARE counted! Not those whose benefits have run out, not those who've given up on looking, not those who've taken a gig at 1/4 their former wages. But then, you really did know that already, right?

J

[Future Useless Eater]

The MOST dishonest dem talking heads STILL keep repeating their tired old mantra...

"3 million jobs lost" on President Bush's watch.

For a while I thought these jerks were just mis-informed and repeating old data. But then I figured out they knew EXACTLY what they were doing, and have NO INTENTION of ever correcting those figures.

They take what they believe is the highest recent employment figure (pre-Bush), and they subtract the numbers from THEIR WORST POINT.

Never mind using CURRENT data. They still go ahead and slam GW with whatever their worst-case analysis shows. They just conveniently 'leave off' whatever qualifiers that would show their data is flawed.

---

I've wondered another thing about employment figures... NO ONE ever points out the number of upper-end baby boomers who have RETIRED during GW's presidency, nor the number of young Americans graduating from H.S. or college and ENTERING the job market.

Surely, with Roe.v.Wade, the latter number is much much smaller than the earlier figure. That difference might explain away a Million or two of those employment-drop statistics!

Where can I go to look these things up?

[revtown]

I posted this comment in a similar article before.

Its surprising how the Dem's complain about evil corporations and job statistics.

It seems like the percent of people working for evil corporations is going down from the discrepancy between the 2 methods of figuring unemployment.

The corporate report shows bad employment. The household report shows new jobs.

And according to the Dems this is a very bad thing. So either the DEMs like evil corporations or hate small businesses and self-employed.

[Schattie]

Well in the survey they ask if you've looked for work in past 4 weeks and if you're receiving an extended weekly unemployment stipend you aren't as likely to have looked for work.

[J. L. Chamberlain]

I don't mean to be insulting, I really don't. But do you live in the real world? You can't collect unemployment if you're NOT looking for work. Sheesh!

J

[Future Useless Eater]

>>"WHY WHY WHY isn't the administration doing ANYTHING to counter the negative press? "

maybe there's a reason for waiting if we can hang on a bit longer... Remember how Dean dropped off the face of the earth due to a little criticism? We don't want a repeat of that.

Let Kerry get locked in by his delegate count. He should have 1300 delegates after March 2nd. Then its almost impossible for him to not coast and still get the remaining 700 needed for the Dem nod.

Remember when it was announced GW's advertising blitz starts March 4th? That is 1.5 days after Kerry gets 'blessed' by Super Tuesday. And 1.5 days is just long enough for the Super Tuesday news coverage to die down.

[sixmil]

The problem is that Bush is importing workers, illegally and legally, faster than jobs are being created. This is why you still have bad employment numbers. Also, there have been reports that new jobs are going to new immigrants. Free traitors should be proud of themselves for this one.

[visualops]

"Bush is importing workers"
How differently are illegals dealt with in this administration than any other?
"illegally and legally"
So a legal immigrant shouldn't get a job exactly why?
"reports that new jobs are going to new immigrants"
So a new legal immigrant shouldn't get a job exactly why?

And, from what I've read, unemployment is going down.

The big wall you seem to want to build around this country will keep jobs out, not in.

[sixmil]

Bush is importing workers" How differently are illegals dealt with in this administration than any other? "illegally and legally" So a legal immigrant shouldn't get a job exactly why? "reports that new jobs are going to new immigrants" So a new legal immigrant shouldn't get a job exactly why?

And, from what I've read, unemployment is going down.

The big wall you seem to want to build around this country will keep jobs out, not in.

It's ok because the dems turn their backs on illegal immigration? Is that your argument?

A legal immigrant (H-1B, L-1) should not get a job because Americans come first.

I've read unemployment is going down too, but I've read lots of other things as well.

I'm not trying to build a wall, you on the other hand are pretending that there are no borders.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

If Bush wants to REALLY up his numbers, he should take credit for the millions of jobs he's created overseas.

[CyberAnt]

I hope it's another rope-a-dope

[CyberAnt]

Me! I want a job. I've been on so many interviews and sent out so many resumes .. nothing. I'd even settle for part-time. I lost my job in January of 03. But .. I take care of my 91 yr old mom and I would like to be able to work at home.

I've applied for an extension of Unemployment for one reason .. I want to enter into a federal training program to start my own business doing web design. The training is minimal in time and expense, and my son (who has his own computer business) says there's a real need out there for web designers who don't charge an arm and a leg - especially for companies who are just starting out in business. In 13 weeks, I could be well on my way to being my own boss. Sounds great to me.

[CyberAnt]

Maybe we all need to start sending the WH a note and asking when they intend to counter the erroneous 2.5 mil jobs lost info.

[dalebert]

Sounds like you are doing great and being self empoyed will make it easier for you to care for your mother. Your son gives good advice. Best of Luck.

[reformedliberal]

They hate small business and the self-employed.

In the 1970's, when I worked as an organizer of food co-ops, I was shocked to be told that "Not everyone can be self-employed" and "The government is who you need to thank for your having your own home."

I hung on a bit longer, but the entire idea of individuality and boot-strap capitalism that did not depend on a government grant was anathema to the Left. And I have specifically heard leftist organizers tell young people to get every grant they can, so as to take as much as possible from the government while not giving anything back, ever. This is their idea of a revolutionary act.

Any response or critique of their beliefs is automatically labeled as *conservative rhetoric*. Young people who question the left are inundated w/leftist textbooks to dispute the conservative ideas.

I think their attitude towards corporations depends on whether said corporations are at the mercy of unions or not.