366,000 new jobs have been added since August?

[Brian Sweat]

In the article I have linked below, Shrub claims that 366,000 new jobs have been created since August. Now I know that that is only about 70,000 a month, but my knee jerk reaction is to assume that any economic numbers presented by Shrub are skewed to paint the rosiest picture possible. Does anyone have an cold hard facts on this?


White House Backs Off Job-Growth Forecast

Oh, and Shrub is not a statistician. Once a again, the buck zooms by here.

[lovedems]

1. Ha! He isn't a pResident either, but that doesn't seem to stop him!

from playing one! He can't paint it however he wants, 70,000 jobs a month sucks when you compare that to the number of layoffs! George, you better familiarize yourself with the term "Net job loss"!

He is such a bumbling idiot!

Edit: Sorry, I don't have the answer to your question but yes, every number is suspect when it comes from this administration or any think tank associated with it.

[JanMichael]

2. I think we need around 150,000/month average just to keep pace...

...with population growth.

What a stellar performance!

[Virginian]

3. I think he meant in India. - Sorry, can't help with stats. n/t

[NewJeffCT]

4. liberal bias, liberal bias

366,000 divided by 5 months is 73,200 jobs a month, not a mere about 70,000. All you libruls just twist the facts.

But, in all seriousness, the economy needs to add, at a minimum, 150,000 jobs a month to keep up with the growing population. (I have heard some economists say we need to create 175,000 a month, but I'll be conservative so I can't be accused of lefy bias!) So, we should have created at least 750,000 jobs just to stay even. At 73,200 a month, that is pathetically less than half we need to stay even with a growing population.

[Zynx]

5. That may technically be correct. However, the math is iffy.

[Warren Stuart]

6. I can't help with stats, but can't help observing

Sure you can add 366,000 jobs but what about the hundreds of thousands that have been lost.

[Mr. McD]

7. Bush is creating jobs

but they are mostly in Iraq.

[stewert]

8. Jobs Created is a Misleading Stat !

I heard the economy had a net loss of 55,000 jobs in 2003, so unless
the economy has created 336,000 jobs in the last 6 weeks that number
is bullshit. The Bush economic council predicted the economy would create
1.7 million jobs from July of 2003 to the end of 2003. July is when his tax cuts
kicked in.

BTW, the economy created 112,000 jobs in January 2004. After the seasonal
adjustment it comes out to 33,000 jobs. Not to mention employers also cut
117,000 jobs in January.

So Basically, Bush is talking out his ass. Those 336,000 jobs are a fantasy.

Then you must consider the quality of the jobs created, 80% of these new jobs
are service sector jobs that pay an average of 40% less than the job they had
before. And most of them do nat have health care, when most of the jobs they
had before did have health care.

The average yearly pay for the American worker has gone down 21% in just 3
years. In 2000 the average yearly pay was $44,000 a year, in 2003 the average
yearly pay was $38,000 a year.

All the good jobs are leaving the country, and the low paying no health care jobs
are being created here.

Bush only talks about jobs created, but he never gets into the facts of those jobs.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

9. How many of those jobs were created overseas?...

On top of that, 70,000 jobs per month will only generate 840,000 jobs in a year's time. That's pretty far short of the 2-3 million jobs that the NeoCons have been promising.

[HootieMcBoob]

10. You misunderestimated what he said

what he really said was 336,000 job related program activities have been created since August.
:toast:

[DaBigJagov]

11. Please explain to me...................

.........how the government 'creates' jobs???
First of all ... I'm going to repeat this simply because it makes the whiners so unbelievably angry. Listen up. They're not your jobs! The jobs belong to the employers .. not to you! You have job skills and, presumably, a willingness to work. Your task in a free economy is to get out there and find some employer with a job who needs your skills ... and strike a deal.

If you do not have the particular set of job skills that an employer needs, or if you have priced your labor out of the marketplace, guess what? It's not the employer's fault. The fault lies with you. Either develop a new set of job skills that are actually in demand, or adjust your pricing. The employer knows what he's looking for. If you're not it .. it's your problem, isn't it??

Tell me. Just what will you expect President Kerry to do? You information technology people out there .. just what are you demanding? Do you want companies to stop outsourcing IT jobs to India? OK ... tell me how to do that. These companies aren't shipping parts overseas and completed products back. All they do is ship information overseas by phone lines or the Internet. Then that information is modified and shipped back the same way. What do you want the government .. the president to do? Do you want some federal law that prohibits companies from transmitting information overseas by the Internet, having that information transformed or modified, and then shipped back? And tell me just how do you enforce that law? Does that law then apply to you also if you seek information from a company that is located overseas, thus depriving a domestic company of your business?

[Virginian]

13. Thanks for the perspective.

But it would be nice if they wouldn't keep raising the H-1b quotas.

[Zero Gravitas]

12. Hint: Bush is a LIAR

If Bush says it I automatically assume its a lie until demonstrated otherwise.