American Jobs Bikini Graph

Red is Bush, Blue is Obama

Good news from the US Labor Department.


~ by B.T. Murtagh on May 7, 2010.

10 Responses to “American Jobs Bikini Graph”

  1. government growth…big whoop

  2. The job growth under dingle Barry has been all *GOVERNMENT* jobs, NOT productive private sector jobs! Who pays the salaries of federal employees?

  3. Nice try, fellows, but the numbers don’t back you up; there have not been a million new government jobs created since Obama took office. If it’s any consolation 66,000 temporary workers were hired for the Constitutionally mandated census.

    I know it pains you to see even modestly good news, but just in April employment rose 14,000 in construction, 44,000 in manufacturing, 20,000 in health care, 26,000 in temporary services, 7,000 in mining. It held steady in the retail and wholesale trades. There were 20,000 jobs lost in transportation and warehousing. The net nonfarm payroll employment rose by 290,000 for the month.

    That’s who is paying the salaries of federal employees, since you ask; I’d add that “federal employee” does not equate to “worthless drone” as you seem to imply.

  4. I understand that we added jobs, and that is great news. But why then did the UR go UP from 9.8 to 9.9 ? Just wondering.

    • That’s a good question, and one I don’t have the data to answer definitively, but bear in mind that the U3 is a statistical measure which excludes ‘discouraged workers’ – people who aren’t actively looking for work any more. When things start looking up some formerly discouraged people begin looking for work again and are once again counted as unemployed.

      • I did see a talking head on TV mention that same thing after I posted the question. As job outlook becomes better, more people that had stopped looking for work return, as well as those who are under-employed. So the number is still somewhat skewered, but at least looking better. The other aspect is the percentage of Government Jobs in the early stages of recovery. My daughter and her husband are both Federal parks employees. For years they were part time and all of the sudden they are full time. Go figure. But they had to accept full time or nothing. That was the kicker.

  5. The Dems controlled the Congress from 2006, so part of the blame lies with them. We must look at what caused the problem that created the job loss. I would say it was the bursting of the housing bubble which lies at the feet of the Dems. They were the ones who wanted Banks to lend to the poor. Remember the ACORN protesters in the Banks demanding loans. Bush tried to reform Freddie/Fannie while Dodd/Franks blocked it. People try to blame Wall Street, who were nothing more than the middle man in these loans. The policy which caused it was the Dems-making home affordable

    • The Democrats certainly do deserve a share of blame for the recession, but not because of the CRA. The CRA applied only to conventional mortgages in specific ‘redlined’ zip codes and to the large commercial banks, whereas the majority of the bubble was down to small mortgage brokers and adjustable-rate mortgages. The high volume and rapid turnover was for the most part done by fairly well off people using the unregulated market to speculate in real estate, not by low income folks buying a primary home.

      The knock-on effect that caused most of the job losses was indeed due to Wall Street Masters of the Universe playing fast and loose with bundled debt packages like the notorious Credit Default Swaps which they knew full well were overvalued. Again, a dearth of regulation was the problem, not interference by the government but precisely the lack of it.

      In that deregulation of key markets there were many-a-many Democratic politicians involved as well as Republican, though I do think it would be fair to say the charge was led by the R’s – they having the double whammy of both being corrupt bastards (as many D’s were and are also) dependent upon bankers’ PAC money, and also an ideological commitment to unregulated markets that persists even today, in spite of repeated manifest failures of that ideology to work well in the real world.

  6. I would like to see the chart from 2001 to 2007. Obama ia a liar and his inexperience is catching up with him. You can only lie for that long. 4 years a long time to continue to lie. It is a lot to carry on your shoulder. So go ahead and continue to lie. You can fool the people sometimes not all the time. Even with a skewed chart like this one.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: