Jobs

[guido911]

I thought this was going to be another "Biden can't count" thread:

Anyway, I'm blaming Bush for this news, and of course the Republican controlled House.

[guido911]

According to the White House, the jobs problem will not be solved "overnight"

Problems in the job market were long in the making and will not be solved overnight.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/06/01/employment-situation-may

No word yet on that "overnight" actually means, as Allah points out:

Anyone want to try defining "overnight" for me, just so that we have a rule of thumb going forward? On Inauguration Day, I would have accepted "2009″ or even "his first two years in office" as plausible answers. Instead, five months out from election day, somehow dawn still has yet to break. His braintrust is now actually on the cusp of arguing, in all seriousness, that it's unfair to judge him on what's happened in the jobs market over the course of his entire first term.

What do you do when America's just taken an economic gut punch, with a vicious European uppercut soon to follow? You hold six fundraisers, naturally:

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/01/white-house-on-disastrous-jobs-report-problems-in-the-labor-market-wont-be-solved-overnight-you-know/
[Emphasis] The last sentence is the dagger.

[nathanm]

I'm not sure how going from losing 800,000 private sector jobs a month to gaining 100,000-200,000 private sector jobs a month is such a failure in your mind. Weren't you crowing about the Bush recovery at one point?

[Oil Capital]

FRED is your friend.

Does this look significantly different than the last recovery, which came after a much milder recession and without the ridiculousness in the eurozone?



Edited to add: Note the difference between "since the recession began" and "in the last three years". Local governments alone have shed more than a half million jobs since the recession began and are continuing to do so.

That shows monthly changes in private sector employment.   It does not show that the "government shrinkage is offsetting it and then some".   Nor does it show that we have gained private sector jobs since the beginning of the recession (which is the time period you have now specified for the comparison)?  Do you have a source or link showing either of those?

Here is what I can find in FRED.  I don't know how to embed the graphs, but here are links showing that:

-- total private sector employment was approximately 115.5 Million at the beginning of the recession and is now 111 Million.http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?id=USPRIV#  A reduction of 4.5 Million jobs.

-- total state government employment has dropped from approximately 5.14 Million to 5.075 Million, a reduction of 65,000 jobs.  http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?id=CES9092000001

-- total local government employment has dropped from 14.48 Million to about 14.08 Million, a reduction of 400,000 jobs.  http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?id=CES9093000001

-- total federal government employment has dropped from 22.41 Million to 22.025 Million, a reduction of 385,000 jobs.  http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?id=USGOVT

Total government shrinkage since the beginning of the recession:  850,000 jobs.

So... we do not have growth in the private sector (from the beginning of the recession).  We do not have a reduction of more than 500,000 jobs in local governments from the beginning of the recession.   Since there is no private sector growth in jobs, it would be nonsensical to say that the government shrinkage has offset private sector growth.

Let's look at the numbers starting with the end of the recession (which seems like a more logical starting point):

The graphs linked above show:

-- Total private sector employment rising from 108 Million at the end of the recession to 111 Million for a gain of 3 Million jobs.

-- Total state government employment dropped from 5.17 Million to 5.075 Million , for a reduction of 95,000 jobs.

-- Total local government employment dropped from 14.575 Million to 14.08 Million, for a reduction of 495,000 jobs.  (There is the "500,000 jobs lost" you were referring to... it is since the end of the recession, not since the beginning of the recession.  Local government ADDED jobs during the recession, as did both the state and federal government as well.)

-- Total federal government employment dropped from 22.52 Million to 22.025 Million, for a reduction of 495,000 jobs.

Total private sector gain since the end of the recession:  3 Million jobs.
Total government loss since the end of the recession:     1.085 Million jobs. 

So... government shrinkage is NOT offsetting private sector growth "and then some".  Partially offsetting to be sure.  But it does not full offset "and then some" as was earlier reported to us.


BTW, cool site.  Thanks for introducing me to FRED.

[RecycleMichael]

Oil Capitol...you have the correct information on jobs, but you do realize that your research is "from the start of the recession?"

That is what the republican party is trying to do to Obama. They claim it is all his recession, even though it started more than a year before he took office.

[Conan71]

Oil Capitol...you have the correct information on jobs, but you do realize that your research is "from the start of the recession?"

That is what the republican party is trying to do to Obama. They claim it is all his recession, even though it started more than a year before he took office.

But it is all his because it's an election year.

Anyone know if the massive hire and fire from the temporary census jobs is included in the federal employment figures?

[RecycleMichael]

I got crappy Christmas gifts last December. It must be the next President's fault.

[Red Arrow]

I got crappy Christmas gifts last December. It must be the next President's fault.

Nope, it's the last President's fault.   You have to remember, blame Bush.  I'm surprised at you for forgetting it's all Bush's fault.

[RecycleMichael]

No. I am not blaming Bush for 2011. But you republicans are blaming Obama for 2008.

The last year of the Bush presidency was brutal. You don't get to pin it on Obama. 

[Teatownclown]

Tell us about how GW was one of the greatest presidents Conan, that is a funny story!

[Oil Capital]

Oil Capitol...you have the correct information on jobs, but you do realize that your research is "from the start of the recession?"

That is what the republican party is trying to do to Obama. They claim it is all his recession, even though it started more than a year before he took office.

Yeah, I realize it.  I specifically stated as much.  I did that because that is the time period Nathanm referenced, as I also stated.  

And... did you realize there is more to the post?  I also covered "from the end of the recession."  

[Conan71]

No. I am not blaming Bush for 2011. But you republicans are blaming Obama for 2008.

The last year of the Bush presidency was brutal. You don't get to pin it on Obama. 

I'm blaming the Democrat-led House & Senate for '08.  Certainly can't blame any candidate I backed since you guys can't seem to.

[RecycleMichael]

And... did you realize there is more to the post?  I also covered "from the end of the recession."  

Yes. I liked your post. I just wanted to use your words to say it again to the others on the forum.

Thanks.

[guido911]

I'm blaming the Democrat-led House & Senate for '08.  Certainly can't blame any candidate I backed since you guys can't seem to.

Wasn't there a guy in the Senate during that time we all know who I guess is entirely blameless for what is happening today?

[Gaspar]

Wasn't there a guy in the Senate during that time we all know who I guess is entirely blameless for what is happening today?

I believe you are correct.  I believe he was "present" at that time.