Skip to main content

Reply to "It Doesn't Look Like We've Lost Jobs, in fact a gain of 2.6 million MORE jobs under Bush!"

"The employed civilian labor force had 135,999,000 workers during the early days of the recession in January 2001 when Bill Clinton left office. The employed civilian labor force at the end of last month, with the recession long over, was 138,603,000. Those raw numbers show 2.6 million MORE jobs now. "

That's a bit misleading, sarge. For starters, there's quite a difference between job growth and job demand. The job market aspect of a recession does not require that the number of jobs available drop, but that the number of available jobs grow more slowly that the number of people looking for work. So to say that there's no problem in the job market if there were 2.6 million more jobs created belies the fact that to maintain our employment rate of the Clinton years, we would have needed upwards of 4 million new jobs just to keep up.

Besides which, under Clinton (and I'm not saying democrats can take all the credit for this) the unemployment rate peaked at only 4.2% and up to 6 million people were out of work (from your bls sources). Now we are at 5.9% unemployment and 8.7 million are out of work, and that's after the 2.6 million extra jobs. That's a net loss of 2.7 million, because that's how many more people are out of work now due to lackluster job growth. Basically, what increases we have seen were not high enough to maintain our previous levels of growth, and that's one of the hallmarks of a recession. You won't find too many economists who would dispute that it was a recession at this late date.
×
×
×
×