The Facts Show 2.4 Million Jobs Created Under Bush

NewsMax ^

[MaineVoter2002]

The Facts Show 2.4 Million Jobs Created Under Bush

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.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/25/171833.shtml

If elected, will John Kerry get credit for the jobs created under the Bush administration?

[GailA]

RATS always make up numbers...like the 100,000 new teachers or cops...multiply it times the number of nationwide schools or police departments and it's a FARCE.

[anniegetyourgun]

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.

And I expect each and every one of these facts to be highlighted in the second or third wave of Bush/Cheney ads.

[expat_panama]

like the 100,000 new teachers or cops...

Right-- or the number of people killed by global warming or the number of women beaten by their husbands. My question has always been, why stop? Why don't they just say: 

Vote for Kerry or else the universe will implode!!!

[anniegetyourgun]

They won't do that because it borders on having a "message" rather than sheer hatred. They are more likely to say: Vote for Kerry because Bush is the anti-Christ.

[GailA]

http://www.cdharris.net/archives/2004_03.html#003414

Beware Democrats Bearing Statistics


Bruce Barlett takes a look at why the two surveys used to measure unemployment - the household survey and the payroll survey - show such a wide disparity:

- The payroll survey double-counts many workers who change jobs and is now artificially deflated because job turnover is down. Decelerating turnover in 2002-2003 explains up to 1 million jobs artificially "lost" in the payroll survey since 2001.

- The BLS household survey indicates record high employment. The disparity of 3 million jobs (in employment growth) between the household and payroll surveys since the recovery began is unprecedented.

- The disparity between the two BLS surveys of total employment is cyclical. The disparity widens during recessions and narrows during periods of rapid growth in gross domestic product (GDP). Such variation strongly suggests a statistical bias in one of the surveys.

- Payroll survey data are always preliminary. Past revisions have regularly shown the initial estimates to be off by millions of jobs. For example, initial estimates of job losses in 1992 were revised in 1993, 1994, and 1995, and now show net job creation.

The payroll survey does not count the surge in self-employment. The household survey has recorded a surge of 650,000 self-employed workers. This number may be even higher if modern workers in limited liability companies and in consulting positions with traditional firms are not identifying themselves as self-employed. [Emphasis added.]
And so, just as was the case in 1992 (when the last "worst economy in 50 years" turned out to have been an exceptionally mild recession that had already turned the corner into recovery), we are going to have a Presidential election debate about the state of the economy based on inaccurate, preliminary, and incomplete data. I will wait with breathless anticipation for the "conservatively biased" media the lefties are always going on about to pull out all the stops to spread the word that the employment situation may not be so dire as the Democrats would have them believe.

[expat_panama]

Vote for Kerry because Bush is the anti-Christ.

ROTFLOL-- I was going to make a mock Kerry poster that showed GW as Satan, and when I went to get a picture of the devil I found that the Democrats were already using it to prove that Rush Limbaugh is Satan.

I swear I'm not making this up.

[expat_panama]

Great link-- but you've just cost me a few days of my time because now I've to have a blog site like that too!

[GailA]

Add this one to you list, he's doing a good job debunking the AWOL and has one on hanoi john's lies. Bill was a leading blogger exposing the 'we need an income tax' scam in Tennessee.Hobbs online

[KevinDavis]

Many.......

[jslade]

The nation seems to be over its quota of economic idiots right now who want to make jobs the issue in the 2004 presidential race. "Outsourcing" is the big buzz-word right now, and both the politicians and the media-types are eager to tell you how many jobs have been lost overseas because of the outsourcing phenomenon.

OK ... here are some statistics. And NO, they don't come from some conservative think tank or some research group under the control of the Republican Party. They come from the Labor Department's. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The peak unemployment rate during the recession that began in Clinton's term was 6.4 percent. The current unemployment rate is 5.6 percent. In the last year more than 2,000,000 new jobs have been added in the United States. Between 1983 and 2003 outsourcing went from 6.5 million jobs to about 10 million jobs. Between 1983 and 2002 jobs in-sourcing -- jobs coming TO the United States -- went from 2.5 million to 6.5 million. If you subtract the jobs coming to the United States every year from the jobs going out every year you come up with a "net" figure. The net outsourced jobs reached its peak in the early 1980's; a peak of about 4 million jobs. In other words, things were worse at the end of the Carter Administration then they are right now. During this same period ... from '83 to '03 a total of 38 million jobs have been created by private businesses in the United States. No other industrialized country in the world has matched this number. S

[Peach]

For those who don't consider NewsMax a reliable source, here are some other VERY reliable sources that confirm what you have said:

http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031774134551&path=!business!columnists&s=1045855934868

http://www.investors.com/register/default.asp?/ibdarchives/artshow.asp?atn=158756559569663&sy=&kw=unemployment&ps=winName=registration

http://www.investors.com/register/default.asp?/ibdarchives/artshow.asp?atn=157881731831636&sy=&kw=unemployment&ps=winName=registration

CNN called 5.6% unemployment rate terrific in 1996 under Clinton. Now it's the same and it's abysmal.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1087145/posts

[#3Fan]

We've been touting the household survey here for a few weeks now, I'm glad the White House is starting to point it out. I think the reason the business survey continues to disappoint is because since 3 million jobs have been created, how much room is there for more?

[Miles Vorkosigan]

Not a farce, an evil, serpentine LIE. We need to make them HURT for this as much as we hurt, knowing that they're getting every last cent we own and laughing at us.

[#3Fan]

OK ... here are some statistics. And NO, they don't come from some conservative think tank or some research group under the control of the Republican Party. They come from the Labor Department's. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The peak unemployment rate during the recession that began in Clinton's term was 6.4 percent. The current unemployment rate is 5.6 percent. In the last year more than 2,000,000 new jobs have been added in the United States. Between 1983 and 2003 outsourcing went from 6.5 million jobs to about 10 million jobs. Between 1983 and 2002 jobs in-sourcing -- jobs coming TO the United States -- went from 2.5 million to 6.5 million. If you subtract the jobs coming to the United States every year from the jobs going out every year you come up with a "net" figure. The net outsourced jobs reached its peak in the early 1980's; a peak of about 4 million jobs.

Good summary and you're exactly right. The government's own numbers show 3 million jobs created! Surprise, surprise the federal unions in the government cite the worst numbers in their arsenal when there are conflicting statistics.

[MissAmericanPie]

ROFLOL, yeah, he grew government to the point that most of that job creation was new government jobs. Fighting ones way through this blizzard of figgures and dazzling numeric footwork, there is no mention of from what sectors these jobs sprang from.

[Alamo-Girl]

Bump!

[greccogirl]

The problem with all the jobs talk on any side is the simple fact that the government doesn't owe you a job, nor is responsible for finding you one. YOU ARE

[Destro]

ride a Harly from the early 70s to see American made crap. Who was responsible for making that crap? The unions or the bosses of HD?

[CyberAnt]

I had difficulty with the link - it just took me to another thread where there was no information I believe was relevant.

However, I have a question - is the figure of 2.4 million jobs created under Bush a reality - and if it is - why on earth aren't the Bush people out there screaming it at the top of their lungs ..?? I just don't understand why they would hide this info.

[TomasUSMC]

In an election year, to argue that the economy is well and improving, sounds like what Daddy Bush did the first time. I would suggest that the White House focus on making the economy better now. Start some legislation to make it harder for companies to move south of the border.

Better yet, start up a 6 week study and review of the effects NAFTA has had on our economy. That will have the added benefit of shutting up Presidente Fox. In other words he keeps pressuring us about rights for Illegals and we cancel NAFTA.