Skip to main content

Last night, Bush told us the economy has created 4.5 million jobs in the last 2.5 years.  (Notice how he used a figure from May 2003 instead of the beginning of his term in the White House?).  But, Bush didn't mention a very important fact about these new jobs: and the jobs created pay on average $9,000 less than the jobs lost.

First of all, compared to other economic expansions, Bush's job growth is dead last in total number of jobs created (add three zero's (000) to each number):

The expansion of 2/61 - 12/69 created 17,684 total jobs and 6,244 at 49 months.


The expansion of 3/75 - 7/80 created 13,183 total jobs and 12,831 at 49 months.


The expansion of 11/82 - 7/90 created 21,003 total jobs and 11,510 at 49 months.


The expansion of 3/91 - 3/01 created 23,969 total jobs and 8,266 at 49 months.


The current expansion which started in November 2001 has created a total of 3,410 jobs.


Bush' economy would have to triple the total number of jobs created in order to get to 4th place on this list.

In case you are wondering how the unemployment rate is low, people have left the labor force as explained in this report from the Boston Federal Reserve.

This history of weak job growth would explain the 4-year stagnation in median national income or the 4 year increase in the poverty rate.  It would also explain why inflation adjusted non-supervisory wages have increased a total of 2.62% over 5 years.

But there is another disturbing trend at work: the quality of job creation as measured by annual earnings has dropped during this expansion.

The United States Conference of Mayors commissioned Global Insight to study this expansion's job creation record.  The study is titled "The Role of Metro Areas in the U.S. Economy."

In 2003, Global Insight and the U.S. Conference of Mayors examined the quality of jobs lost from the beginning of the recession through the end of 2003, and those that were projected to be added back to the economy during 2004 and 2005.  We projected that the average annual wage of $43,629 in the top ten sectors that lost jobs during the 2001-02 period would not be marched by the average wage of $35,855 in those sectors adding jobs through 2005.  Job gains would come in sectors where wages average only 18% of those in the sectors hit hardest by the recession.  This projected 18% gap reflected, in part, the higher-than-average wages paid in the declining manufacturing sectors.  Many of those manufacturing jobs and others lost in the information sector had been send overseas due to outsourcing, or were lost due to firm and plant closings because of over-supply as demand waned.  We now, with data through 2005, can assess those projections.  Indeed, the measured wage gap given the composition of the actual jobs gains in 2004 and 2005 is substantially higher than our earlier projection.  The average wage, measured in 2003, of those added jobs in the leading expanding sectors has been just $34,378, 4.1% lower than anticipated in the recovery.  The wage gap created between jobs lost and jobs gained is 21%.

Over 2001-2003, the US lost 2 million durable goods manufacturing jobs that paid an average annual salary of $46,800.  Over the same period, the US lost 800,000 non-durables manufacturing jobs with and annual salary of $40,700 and 500,000 information service jobs with an average annual salary of $57,300.  These are the top three areas of job loss over the 2001-2003 period.

From 2003-2005, the top three areas of job growth occurred in administrative and support services (+680,000 jobs created), health care and social assistance (+620,000 jobs created) and leisure and entertainment (+546,000 jobs created).  Respectively, each of these pays an average annual salary of $26,178, $37,410 and $14,750. Notice how the top three areas of job creating have noticably lower annual incomes.

In other words, the US economy is creating lower-quality jobs that pay less than the jobs lost.  Color me impressed, Mr. President.  Maybe next he can invent re-invent indentured servitude.  Oh wait, there was that bankruptcy bill......  

Originally posted to bonddad on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 05:27 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Not only that, (4.00)
    but the jobs created do not include benefits such as health insurance.  Great analysis.

    "If you get an outfit, you can be a cowboy, too..." : The Smothers Brothers.

    by wozzle on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 05:40:58 AM PST

    •  Sudden increases in cost of living cuts even more (4.00)
      In the past year, we've been hit hard by sudden price jumps: $30-50 more a month for gasoline for our cars, 40-70% increase per month in heating oil and gas costs ...

      That may not seem like an onerous burden for most people, but for those who are on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, it means having to cut vital needs from the budget.

    •  It's the norm (none)
      Back in '04, I lost a job I'd held for 9 years, the last three of which were under a new owner who was proud to support Bush.  I was out of work for 3 months and had to accept a new position at EXACTLY $9000/year less.  

      Fortunately, since it was a bigger company with more employees, insurance was cheaper, but not cheap enough to offset a 3-fold increase in property taxes and skyrocketing fuel costs.  Not enough money to save for retirement or the kids' college funds.

      I'm back in job search mode again, having been downsized after the new company shelled out $140 million to acquire contracts and assets of 2 other companies.  (This after failing to buy Duke Cunningham's bribery buddies, MZM.)

      I hope I don't have to accept something $9000 less again (making the total loss $18000), but it doesn't look good.

  •  good post (4.00)
    Great post. These are the sort of talking points Tim Kaine needed last night. When he mentioned Medicaid, he should have mentioned the post-Midnight, backroom, GOP-only cut of $22 BILLION. When they mentioned jobs and wages, they should have cited some of these statistics here. Everybody can understand $9k less and $22 billion cut from Medicaid. That's easy to understand.
  •  fries? with that (4.00)

    "welcome to the monkey house" vonnegut

    by realheathen on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 05:50:19 AM PST

  •  I had to take $5000 less (4.00)
    for my new job.

    If I count shift differential and benefits then $9000 is right on.

    Recommended.

  •  Bush wouldn't know what a real job was (4.00)
    if it came up and bit him in the ass.

    This is a man that thinks taking month long vacations is hard work.  A President who thinks a guy who obsesses over what to wear and where to eat during the largest hurricane disaster in modern times is doing a heckuva job.

    "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

    by Steven D on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 05:57:54 AM PST

    •  exactly (4.00)
      i mean, his idea of "making it on his own" was pandering for clients in the oil industry with the last name bush.

      it's such a tough life.

    •  Also has no experience with taking responsibility (none)
      or accepting consequences.  He acts like a bantam rooster with his tough guy swagger but probably has never been in jeopardy of having his nose flattened.  

      I just got one of those new economy 'ownership society' jobs, sans health insurance, so there's my $9,000/year cut.  

      Thanks a lot asshole preznit!

      Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else. --Will Rogers

      by groggy on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 10:02:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm confused... (none)
    ...by the number of jobs created on the list of recoveries.  How does a 5-year recovery only create a few thousand jobs?  Are those numbers in thousands, so "20,000" means 20 million?
    •  Bush actually LOST net jobs (none)
      until October of last year I think.  That's right, a net loss of jobs in the economy, before even calculating the effect of keeping up with population growth.

      I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man - find out who said it!

      by TheGryphon on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:15:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And don't forget... (none)
        ...that the population has been growing rapidly since Dumbya took office. In 2000, there were about 280 million people living in the US. Today, it's closer to 300 million according to the Census Bureau. I don't know how many of the 20 million additions are of age to be members of the labor market, but I'd bet it's more than the number of jobs BushCo "created" in the past five years.

        So to sum up, there aren't many more jobs available now than there were when Dumbya took office, the jobs that are available tend to pay far less than the jobs that were available five years ago, there are more people looking for work than there were five years ago, and there are more people our economy has to support than there were five years ago. And if you factor in inflation, the runaway costs of health care, gasoline, and home heating fuels, and increasingly unaffordable costs of education, the state of our economic union is far worse than it was under President Clinton.

        Thwarting the forces of conservatism since 1978. -7.63, -5.64

        by wiscmass on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 09:30:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks (4.00)
      for pointing that out.  Add three zeros (,000) to each number.  

      "You think you can intimidate me? Screw you. Choose your Weapon." Eliot Spitzer

      by bonddad on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:17:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Maybe I'm confused... (none)
    but are these job numbers adjusted for mid career vs starting salaries?  I mean, it seems obvious to me that a starting wage in any sector will be less than the average wage in that sector.  Would factoring in that fact make these "new" jobs even worse paying, or is this already calculated in?

    I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man - find out who said it!

    by TheGryphon on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:14:03 AM PST

    •  asdf (4.00)
      I don't know because the study doesn't address that.

      They looked at the jobs created and the annual salary of each job.  

      "You think you can intimidate me? Screw you. Choose your Weapon." Eliot Spitzer

      by bonddad on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:18:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  hmmmm (none)
        seems like a fundamental flaw in the study.  After all, I just red your digest of it, not the whole thing, and I'm not a statistician or an economist, so why didn't that occur to them?

        I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man - find out who said it!

        by TheGryphon on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:23:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not Really (none)
          The numbers they use for the salaries are national averages derived from the Bureau of Labor Services.    They are used by many economists as raw data for a variety of studies.  

          The BLS conducts national surveys that are very broad in order to get information on salaries.  Therefore, the BLS numbers are about as complete as possible considering the size of the economy.  In addition, the salary numbers they use are current numbers based on all most employment factors -- new and old jobs, degree of experience etc....

          "You think you can intimidate me? Screw you. Choose your Weapon." Eliot Spitzer

          by bonddad on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:29:48 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What's The Difference Between Bush's Stupidity (none)
            and Clinton's brilliance. In bonddad terms, of course.

            All you have to do to find out is check the BLS table on hourly wages in 1982 dollars. In Clinton's first five years, hourly wages in 1982 dollars increased from $7.52 to $7.83, up $0.31 or 4.1%. But in Bush's first five years those wages only grew from $8.06 to $8.19, only $0.13 or 1.6%.

            Now if Bush, during the first five years of his administration, had been able to duplicate Clinton's performance in his first five years in terms of the growth of hourly wages in 1982 dollars, then hourly wages would now be a robust $8.39 rather than a paltry $8.19.

            Now, based on a 40 hour week that extra $0.20 per hour pencils out to an extra $8.00 a week. Now that's enough to spring for an extra cup a day at the Starbucks near 86th and Amsterdam.

            So what's the difference between the economic brilliance of the 90s and the economic disaster of today?

            Why it's that extra cup of Joe every day.

            •  asdf (4.00)
              First, you offer no facts to counter anything asserted in the essay.  In other words, the facts about annual salary for the top areas of job growth under Bush clearly paint a negative picture of Bush's achievement.

              Clinton's brilliance.

              1.) He created twice as many jobs as Bush at this point in their comparative recoveries.

              2.) He was well on his way to balancing his last three federal budgets.

              3.) Federal debt outstanding increased from 4 trillion to 5.6 trillion under Clinton's leadership an -- increase of 40%.

              4.) He eventually created 23 million new jobs.

              5.) Household net worth (your favorite metric for measuring economic achievement) increased nearly 100%, from 21 trillion to 41 trillion.

              Bush's stupidity.

              1.) His job growth is the weakest of any expansion in the last 50 years.

              2.) National Median Income has stagnated

              3.) The poverty rate increased.

              4.) 5 years into his presidency, total federal debt outstanding has increased 46% from 5.6 trillion to 8.2 trillion.  

              5.) He has not balanced a budget, and will probably never balance a budget, despite his claim of fiscal conservatism.

              6.) Household net worth (your favorite metric for measuring economic achievement) increased from 41 trillion to 52 trillion -- a 24% increase.  

              "You think you can intimidate me? Screw you. Choose your Weapon." Eliot Spitzer

              by bonddad on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:50:01 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Stupidity is the wrong word (none)
              This is a conspiracy to loot the Treasury and dismantle the middleclass to benefit the super Rich. Bush is not stupid. He has done a brilliant job of executing his strategy. Sad to say.

              The war that matters to me, is Bush's war against the middleclass.

              by CitizenOfEarth on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 10:58:45 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  The huge difference ... (none)
              isn't the increase in wages but the nearly five million more jobs created by this point in the Clinton expansion. You can bet that those people could afford more than an extra cup of joe.

              But it's also a mistake to sneer at that $8 per week. I've been poor, and when you're poor, the less money it takes to make a big difference. That $8 a week might pay for 20 percent of your groceries.

    •  i would have to guess (none)
      (not being an economist or a statitician mind you) that it is all factored in.  i am what should be my mid-career but i am making $15k less than i was 5 years ago.  there are a few factors

      1.  my industry (telecom) tanked
      2.  when i was laid off i moved home (to an area that doesn't have a lot of industry) and during that period of time when relocations dried up, my son started school and now i'm not willing to relocate and i am pretty much stuck with the opportunities that are in this area
      3.  i quit one of the few project management jobs i found in the area b/c i was unhappy and had surgery on my ankle and was out of work for about a year

      so yeah.  i'm making $15k less than i did at age 25 (granted i was doing better than most 25 year olds)

      so i'd say, it's factored in.

    •  it's (none)
      it's average annual salary vs annual average salary.  

      So in truth, if you were a 20 year veteran in one field and had to go to one of these new fields, the hit will actually be much worse than the 9000 average.

  •  When Bush (4.00)
    crows about creating jobs, he's talking about China, India, and Mexico, right?

    Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

    by drewfromct on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:20:37 AM PST

  •  Well, I am not surprised (4.00)
    because we outsource the tech/customer service/office jobs, move US factories to other countries eliminating union jobs, we lay-off (to increase production) jobs so nobody works...

    What do we have left in our future? The rich in oil/gas, outsourcing experts, athletes/movie stars, Trumps, corporation CEOs, insurance execs...

    The rich need services so they hire:
    Waitresses, cashiers (soon to be eliminated with auto-checkout), auto detailers,  short order cooks, landscapers, shoe shiners..  

     The middle in America is quietly being exterminated.   Either you have $$ or you struggle paycheck to paycheck worrying, "Am I the next to go?"

  •  Bush = Genius (4.00)
    His plan is to make it cheaper for his Rich B@astard buddies to hire workers. He has exceeded all expectations. And he has 1000 days left -- Plenty of time to complete the dismantling of the Middle class.

    The other half of this story is that as wages are falling, costs are exploding. There have been drastic increases in the cost of health insurance, gas (energy) and home prices. So real buying power is a worse story than falling wages alone.

    The war that matters to me, is Bush's war against the middleclass.

    by CitizenOfEarth on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:31:52 AM PST

  •  Living proof (4.00)
    My husband lost his job in 2003, found another in 2004 for $10,000 less. I have gone back to work part-time to help pay the bills. We are still in the hole when you factor in gas, heat & healthcare increases.....
  •  Martin Wolf in the Financial Times (none)
    had a post-Davos take on the declining fortunes of the middle classes this morning:Confronting seismic economic shifts.  

    Basically, it boils down to viewing the past 200 years of human history and US/European dominance as an anomaly that is now being corrected.  Asia is where most of the world's population, education and competitive drive is concentrated.  They are going to kick our ass competing for resources, jobs, investment and education.  

    We American and European adults were privileged to be born into a dominant society.  The children being born in India and China and Southeast Asia are the lucky ones of the future.

    Could the USA be managing its decline better?  Sure.  But it's still going to be a harsh decline, and I'm not sure there is any way to sugar that pill for a country so stuck on being Number One.

    "Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing - after they have exhausted all other possibilities." Winston Churchill

    by LondonYank on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 06:47:39 AM PST

    •  Not just how it's managing it. (none)
      It's actually escorting the middle and lower class into the new era, by making it more and more economically feasable to push those jobs overseas -- to make it cheaper for the rich to get richer.

      One of these days people over here will realize that their only good market, due to widespread unemployment and underemployment, is also overseas, and either go under or move abroad.

      Then we'll be left with...what?  Peasant farming?

      "There's no question that the minute I got elected, the storm clouds on the horizon were getting nearly directly overhead." - GWB, 5/11/01

      by Stymnus on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 07:21:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The worst part of it (4.00)
    to me is that the middle class Republicans don't care.  I once asked one of them, semi-sarcastically, if he would rather his tax money (in the form of hand-outs to giant companies) go to people in India than people here at home.  He said yes, he'd rather his money didn't go to lazy people in his own country!  

    No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. -Eleanor Roosevelt

    by tryptamine on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 07:02:07 AM PST

    •  He might find those "lazy people" (none)
      a bit more motivated when they are cmaping out on his front stoop some sunny day, not too far into the future...

      People in Eurasia on the brink of oppression: I hope it's gonna be alright... Pet Shop Boys: Introspective

      by rgilly on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:00:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Fewer jobs at lower wages (none)
    A perfect formula for defaulting on social security obligations.

    It's a compounding factor as well. 12.4% of wages of a lower rate creates a quickening of the 2017 break even point.

    I think we need to define the word dead. Over the past few months there have been many comments as to social security reform as being dead.

    Sorry to burst the bubble but in the past couple of weeks Bush has issued comment concerning social security reform as being alive and attainable.

    Once again he has spoken a truth.

    If a commission is appointed in Congress to develop a method to reform social security, it will happen. Both political partys want it in order to hide the theft of funds over the years.

    After the SOTU last night Ken Mehlman was excited about the prospect of reform and once again mentioned the word bankrupt in conjunction with the entitlements. No one objected and no one will.

    Think about this, make a list of all the scandals, all the lies, all the criminal activity, etc. under this President and then ask yourself if you really, really think social security reform won't be forthcoming.

    There is absolutely nothing we can do to prevent it. Nothing. With the Joe Liebermans, the Joe Bidens, etc. it's history, it's fact.

    •  Bush would much rather... (none)
      have people begging at the church door's of his ideological allies, the Rushdoonyist Christian Triumphalist, like some 21st Century version of -Angela's Ashes, subjecting the downtrodden to the scrutiny and moral handwringing of the religious mandarins that get a bounty of taxpayer funds for their "faith-based initiatives".

      People in Eurasia on the brink of oppression: I hope it's gonna be alright... Pet Shop Boys: Introspective

      by rgilly on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:07:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  4.5 million new jobs (none)
    When he stated that last night, he followed it up with "more than Japan and the EU combined".  Now, I'll be the first one to acknowledge that I have no idea what the population comparison is between the US and Japan/EU, but I hazard a guess that we have the larger number. I'm also a bit curious as to what the Japan/EU number of new jobs is in that same 2.5 year timeframe so that a "fair ratio-type" comparison could be made (since W brought it up and made it a part of his speech).  

    "You can have your own opinion, but you can't have your own set of facts." - Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) 1/25/06

    by Ellicatt on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 07:10:37 AM PST

  •  the single biggest achievement of the Republicans (4.00)
    is getting people to vote against their economic self-interest. And they have done a brilliant job of it, as much as it disgusts me.

    After all, don't Republicans have families to feed? Don't they need health care? Do they need to buy gas to get to work? How is it they consistently support someone who puts them one step closer to bankruptcy?

    I can understand the millionaires supporting Bush, but why would anyone else?

    •  Morality. (4.00)
      Remember those Godless Democrats.  The ones that want to kill unborn children and take away our guns.  The ones that want to close churches and teach everyone socialism.

      And besides, if Kerry had taken over, there would be mushroom clouds, MUSHROOM CLOUDS!

      So, in a nutshell, fear and disinformation.  And attraction to self-proclaimed (but lacking) morality in the conservtive/Republican party.

      "There's no question that the minute I got elected, the storm clouds on the horizon were getting nearly directly overhead." - GWB, 5/11/01

      by Stymnus on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 07:29:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  they (none)
        they have been brainwashed into thinking living in a double wide and working at Walmart is living the good life.
        •  As long as the double wide... (4.00)
          is set on a 6+ acre rural lot, about an hour's drive from an outlet mall/fry pit complex, and 10 minutes drive from a "Wally World" most mouthbreather Americans are happier than pigs in shit, as long as they have the fiscal wherewithal to buy cheap Chinese electronics and able to fuel their 12 MPG SUV...to get to their corrections officers jobs in the hinterlands.

          And come home at night to watch American Idol and Skating With the Stars...

          People in Eurasia on the brink of oppression: I hope it's gonna be alright... Pet Shop Boys: Introspective

          by rgilly on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:20:57 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Keep in mind (none)
    Keep in mind..bush lies..and cooks the books..
  •  very (4.00)
    very nice dairy Bondad, Keep up the good work.

    Nice catch on this
    It would also explain why inflation adjusted non-supervisory wages have increased a total of 2.62% over 5 years. these type numbers illustrate clearly that the unemployment figures ( as most index) are bullshit. If we were anywhere near full employment, salaries and competition for workers would be fierce.  Remember the Clinton years, when we were near full employment, my god, companies were paying 10k bonus to people to just take the job.

    To be honest, the american economy is dying, and all bushco does is spray "air freshener" to cover the stench.

    •  Oddly enough (none)
      Overall inflation adjusted wages (and weekly earnings) actually rose during the worst (to date) parts of Bush's reign.

      As you can see, inflation adjusted earnings actually rose a bit during the periods of the least employment.

      However, if we take a look at the same period figuring in the employment picture (the pink line showing aggregate payrolls) the picture is much different.

  •  What about the SAVINGS rate going NEGATIVE!!!??? (none)
    Bondad, you should roll this into your story somewhere:

    Savings rate at lowest level since 1933  

    The Commerce Department reported Monday that the savings rate fell into negative territory at minus 0.5 percent, meaning that Americans not only spent all of their after-tax income last year but had to dip into previous savings or increase borrowing.

    The savings rate has been negative for an entire year only twice before -- in 1932 and 1933 -- two years when the country was struggling to cope with the Great Depression, a time of massive business failures and job layoffs...


  •  Population and Inflation Adjusted Job Indexes (4.00)
    Fun with Charts

    I created this index by combining two others.

    One the Employment level Index - or the % of the non institutional civillian population aged 16-65 that is actually employed (removes the effect of workers "leaving the workforce") and the other is the average weekly earnings (1982$).  Jan 2001 is set as the base  (index = 1)

    And then overall job creation.  The chart below compares Bush's record of employment to the level of employment in Jan 2001 (% of pop aged 16-65 employed).

    He is short 4.1 Million Jobs.

  •  Good jobs come from fast expansion (4.00)

    When you have rapid economic expansion, the economy produces good jobs. (Fewer people have to take shit jobs, after all.)

    The economic expansion during Bush's first term was about 10.4%. This was second from last in presidential terms since 1960 (and also, though I'm remembering RGNP instead of reading RGDP, since 1948). This isn't enough to keep the unemployment rate from rising, and it isn't enough to generate good jobs.

  •  Exxon Profits (4.00)
    Bush spoke of tax cuts creating jobs, and innovation, and technology saving us from oil dependence, and science and math being the way of the future for kids.  What is the test for whether this will work?

    Well, everyone knows about Exxon's profits last year ($36.5bn).  Did they create jobs over the same period?  No.  In fact, they lost about 2k.  $36.5bn could fund about 200,000 new jobs, each paying $100k + health & taxes.  This would triple the size of Exxon and establish their engineering and innovation leadership in developing alternative fuels.

    But $36.5bn is sitting there doing nothing instead.  And the kids with the science degree and the big loan to pay off?  Wal-Mart greeters.

    The corporate world is in breach of contract.

  •  Friggin' ridiculous (none)
    Outrageous.  Insane.  Your diaries just kill me.  It's not your fault though is it?  It's the crazy half of the populations fault for this mess.  Bush has to be the greatest campaigner/misleader of all time.  Outrageous.  

     

    What would Jesus Do? He would impeach Bush.

    (-6.75, -3.85)

    by mapKY on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:33:12 AM PST

    •  Give me Rubin, Panetta and Clinton (4.00)
      and I will shill like a madman.

      Give Snow and Bush, and I will make you cry.

      "You think you can intimidate me? Screw you. Choose your Weapon." Eliot Spitzer

      by bonddad on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:34:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is it really shilling though (none)
        when it becomes clear that their policies make us stronger rather than weaker?

        What would Jesus Do? He would impeach Bush.

        (-6.75, -3.85)

        by mapKY on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:36:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  nope... (none)
        Clinton, Rubin, and Panetta just screw us in a slightly different way.  

        There are of course important differences between the ways the elites of the different parties promote the Davos agenda. The preferred instruments of Rubin Democrats are the economic levers of the US Treasury, the IMF, the World Bank and other international financial institutions. Rumsfeld/Cheney Republicans prefer the Defense and Energy departments. The Rubin mode is certainly less lethal and probably more effective. Still, Davos relies on the Pentagon to protect its class privileges with a worldwide web of military bases, training schools and the always-present threat to send in the Marines. It's worth remembering that virtually the only section of Saddam Hussein's law still untouched by the US occupation is its oppressive labor code.

        absolute freedom for one individual undoubtedly limit's the freedom of another.

        by jbou on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:49:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Kaiser Steel (none)
    is where I practiced my trade until they shut down in 1983.  Now, 23 years later, I make the same money applying my trade at a state mental health institution.  The erosion of buying power of that same money is significant enough that I must work 2 jobs.  

    Now we have the vigorous "drowning in a bathtub" of public spending on social services.  My job security is threatened again.  And my Social Security, medical benefits, and retirement benefits are also questionable.

    I've spent the past 30 years running at that carrot on the end of the stick in front of me. The carrot was an illusion.  The American Dream has transformed into just a fantasy.  I will now file this with other unfulfilled fantasies such as McGovern landslides Nixon, Sharipova has the hots for me, and AnnArborBlue is a woman.

  •  Thank You (4.00)
    Thanks for mentioning this. I get so sick and tired of hearing about all of these jobs that Bush is "creating". If we lose one high-wage, high-tech manufacturing job with benefits and create two minimum-wage burger-flipping jobs. . . well, I don't think that's a very good tradeoff, even though we have "doubled" the number of jobs.

    I still remember the town-hall meeting a year or two ago when a woman went off script and told Bush and the audience that she was working three jobs to make ends meet for her family. Bush replied about that being "terrific" and asked, jokingly, if she got much sleep.

    It's been posted here before by others, but I'll repeat it. To the Bush family, there are three types of people:

    1. Themselves
    2. Other rich people
    3. The help

    We, my friends, are "the help". Get used to it.

    This man was born into political and financial royalty. He's never had an economic concern in his life. He's never really had to work. He's never had to worry about putting food on the table or putting his children through college. He's never had a sleepless night worrying about what would happen if he lost his job the next day. He's never had to go on a budget, or cancel his cable TV, or tell his family that there will be no vacation this year because there simply isn't enough money for everything.

    He doesn't give a shit. He's never had to. And he never, ever will.

    And despite it all, he can find millions of votes among poor people in rural Kansas and rural Indiana and rural Everywhere Else by appealing to hate, fear and ignorance.

    Hate. Fear. Ignorance. These three elements are the oxygen of the Republican Party, and they've served him quite well.

    I'm a man who discovered the wheel and built the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn -- Ron Burgundy

    by IndyScott on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 09:01:45 AM PST

  •  terrific diary (none)
    Important issue, and explained very clearly.
  •  technical question (none)
    Bonddad, thanks once again for keeping me informed and enlightened about stuff that, quite frankly, bores the piss out of me when it comes from almost anyone else.  A quick question for you or anyone else who knows:

    What does it mean exactly to "leave the labor force?"  To my decidedly non-economics-oriented brain, if you live in the US there are only a few options for tracking your employment status:

    1. you are employed (self- or otherwise)
    2. you are unemployed
    3. you leave the country and should no longer be counted anyway
    4. you retire officially and live off of earnings

    Is there something I'm missing about unemployment rate figures that keeps them artificially low, or is everyone just retiring early?  Who else is leaving the work force?  Because I have this argument about jobs and wages on other boards including fiscal conservatives, and I can't explain away the low numbers because I don't understand where they come from.  
    •  Being "Retired" (none)
      Think of the meaning of the word "retirement" in the movie "Blade Runner" when you look at that subject line.

      My husband is 53 years old. He has been unemployed since 1999. He's looked. Nobody's hiring a guy that old, not even Wal*Mart. They want to wait until you are 65 and getting Medicare, then they will be happy to take your employment application again. Basically, my husband has been "retired" by the Bush economy.

      I'm 42 and back at school. I'm in my Junior year at a university. However, in order to get any sort of job with the BA degree I will receive, I have two more years of Post-Grad. At least. I just got approved for $500 in work-study from Financial Aid. W00h00. That sure saves our bacon. Not.

      I'm sure we are far from being alone.

      GOP = Spies, lies, borrowing & binging.
      Enough Is Enough 2006!
      Econ: -4.63 Soc: -6.92

      by MamasGun on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 10:15:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  According to the US Department of Labor (none)
      Unemployment figures come from a monthly sample survey, conducted through personal interview by Census Bureau employees, called the Current Population Survey (CPS). This survey covers about 60,000 households, selected so as to (in theory) be representative of the entire population of the United States.

      They get information on all household members 16 or older. Each person is classified according to the job-related activities engaged in during the reference week. Respondents are never asked specifically if they are unemployed, nor are they given an opportunity to decide their own labor force status. That status is:

      People with jobs are employed.

      People who are jobless, looking for jobs, and available for work are unemployed.

      Everyone else is defined as "not in the labor force."

      That would include, for example, somebody who had looked for work in the past 12 months, but not in the survey week. It might include people working under the table who don't report that work to the surveyor. It wouldn't count people on disability or retired people or fortunate dot-commers who cashed out their stock at a the right time and live off investment income.

      The explanation of the methodology doesn't make it clear whether self-employed freelancers are "employed" or not, or whether people who run their own businesses, but are losing money, are "employed" or not. When I'm looking for a new client, am I "looking for a job" and therefore unemployed? Or am I "employed" even if no money is coming in?

      The thing that this survey absolutely does not measure (for benefit of your fiscal conservatives) is underemployment. For example, ex dot-commers who cashed out at the wrong time and now live with their parents and work part time at McDonald's.

      Also, I've never, personally, been surveyed. So (just like with the Nielson ratings) I can't shake the suspicion that the numbers are rigged.

      Hope that helps.

      •  It helps immensely (none)
        thanks, but it is, oddly, not very comforting.  
      •  I had always heard (none)
        that they determined the unemployment number based on how many people were receiving unemployment benefits.  That would mean that when people's benefit period ended and they were no longer receiving unemployment benefits, they were no longer counted as unemployed even if they had still not found a job.

        Just because you're self-righteous doesn't mean you're not a hypocrite.

        by AMcG826 on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 12:40:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Lou Dobbs, 6pm Wed (none)
    Lou Dobbs is going to be giving his take on the State of the Union tonight, and I suspect he'll be talking about the jobs situation.

    I beg to dream and differ from the hollow lies..

    by lesliet on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 10:47:02 AM PST

    •  Yes and I'm sure (none)
      Lou Dobbs will point out the fact that the statistics on low-wage jobs are directly connected to illegal immigration driving down the wage market (especially in construction - an area that Americans used to excel, and service jobs).

      But Dems don't want to go there - reality-based economics. Also the fact that outsourcing is killing the American IT and manufacturing worker.

      Our party no longer cares about the average American nor unions that made this country great. Take the fact that the victims of New Orleans were barely mentioned in the SOTU and the media and Dems just let it go. Nearly 2,000 people killed and many more displaced.

      "conservatives are the worshipers of dead radicals".

      by gandalf on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 12:28:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Beat Ya! Mine Dropped $30,000 (none)
    Since I set up a home craft business. I expect that to improve dramatically, though, to a $20,000 cut long term. But that's what I deserve for making such a stupid choice of talents.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy....--ML King, "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 11:25:29 AM PST

  •  O/T (none)
    I couldn't seeem to find an open thread so, my apologies but I'm looking for some information on transferring funds from a storage company from one country into this country. I'm trying to help someone out but I first want to know more about the actual process.

    Worst. President. Ever.

    by R Dub on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 11:33:04 AM PST

  •  "Discouraged Workers" (none)
    Paul Craig Roberts has a piece related to this thread over at Counterpunch.  I love to read his stuff lately.  He talks about eating seed corn, and the millions of discouraged workers who aren't even counted among the official unemployed.
  •  we need more science jobs (none)
    Bush talked in the SOTU about training more science teachers, but what we really need is more science jobs. Why get a science Ph.D. to earn $40K a year in your field if you can get a BS and make that or more?

    If you want more scientists, more mathematicians, more engineers, the way to get them is to find a way to get them jobs that pay well. During the dot-com boom, people pushed into computer jobs like crazy, responding to the increased demand.

    There are plenty of physics Ph.Ds out there who are not working in physics, who transition out to computer programming or to other fields (marketing, law) where they are better able to find work. Physics is a great education that makes you qualified to do a lot of things -  but I think our economy would be best off if we could employ them in science fields and pay them appropriately for their training and skill.

  •  Wal Mart (none)
    Over 24,000 people applied for 325 jobs at the new Wal-Mart to open in Evergreen Park, IL.  Those are real numbers that just don't lie about Bush's job creation.    

    Just because you're self-righteous doesn't mean you're not a hypocrite.

    by AMcG826 on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 12:38:21 PM PST

  •  Bonddad, link to your website (none)
    Your usual excellent job. As a 1-yr. retiree from the banking business and newly liberated from a W-2, I live on the scary global economy. Americans need to understand what Reagan, MBA school, and the movie "Network" (Digby's Howard Beale)  taught us--markets are bigger than nations. Destroy the consumer here, and capital just goes to other markets. It's doesn't go to church or worry about who's lazy and thus not deserving. GM too risky for your retirement funds? Toyota is a good bet now. Soon it will be Kia. Then that $10,000 car from China. Your message is that W-2 Republicans who are not part of the ruling class fuel their destruction by destroying the middle class in this country. Bush's base is blinded by religion, patriotism and a hatred for the liberals that has been cultivated by the genius of Karl Rove and decades of southern politicians. I'm not sure even Bush understands this. He's just an immature, spoiled rich kid they prop up in front of the public because he can take a punch. He'll take what we give him because that's his only virtue. The last man standing after the brawl. Other than wingnuts and fundies, other loyal Republicans like Bush because he's "a standup guy." They see Democrats as getting a case of the vapors when things get tough. Again, please provide the link to your website.  
jbou, Bob Johnson, Kimberley, Florida Politics, wozzle, The Cunctator, Alumbrados, hoipolloi, JWC, Right Thinking American, MattK D1, Stirling Newberry, tmo, SteveLCo, pb, SarahLee, teacherken, ks, Joan McCarter, ubikkibu, Gooserock, philgoblue, Danno11, KLM, B Rubble, Shockwave, Sherri in TX, SanJoseLady, genethefiend, greatbasin2, Mnemosyne, tryptamine, polecat, Raven Brooks, elfling, red moon dog, Molly Pitcher, Jerome a Paris, HariSeldon, RubDMC, km4, mlafleur, bronte17, northcountry, groggy, nyceve, Ti Jean, liberaldregs, KS McCann, Transmission, roses, threecents, LondonYank, MyName, mapKY, Southern Bell, Cedwyn, Alna Dem, pf498467, Georgia Logothetis, wader, nio, MamasGun, Moody Loner, danthrax, missreporter, AskQuestions, bogdanmi, Republic Not Empire, mad ramblings of a sane woman, kdrivel, TXsharon, besieged by bush, duncanidaho, baxxor, NYFM, dwahzon, btyarbro, horsewithnoname, lcrp, Democratic Hawk, eleanora, WV Democrat, DrReason, Steven D, DrewDown, kd texan, thereisnospoon, sxwarren, cafepants, Fabian, farleftcoast, pattyp, Chris Kulczycki, Alexander G Rubio, el dorado gal, auditor, ignorant bystander, aerojad, irate, ejmw, offred, BTower, station wagon, KiaRioGrl79, buckeyedem08, Frank Palmer, concerned, chicagovigilante, EdlinUser, vassmer, jcitybone, Gegner, skralyx, Skid, spunhard, bayside, Land of Enchantment, skywriter, SSMir, occams hatchet, zot23, MissInformation, PoppyRocks, kraant, BlueInARedState, cazimi, Ellicatt, Leeserannie, NBBooks, vome minnesota, Chingon, Wage Warrior II

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site