President Obama will create more jobs in 2010 than George W. Bush did in his ENTIRE PRESIDENCY.

[stevenleser]

Put that in your pipe and smoke it Republicans/Conservatives/TeaBaggers!

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/nj_20100515_5237.php?mrefid=site_search


If the economy produces jobs over the next eight months at the same pace as it did over the past four months, the nation will have created more jobs in 2010 alone than it did over the entire eight years of George W. Bush's presidency.

That comparison comes with many footnotes and asterisks. But it shows how the economic debate between the parties could look very different over time -- perhaps by November, more likely by 2012. More important, the comparison underscores the urgency of repairing an American job-creation machine that was sputtering long before the 2008 financial meltdown.

First, the numbers: From February 2001, Bush's first full month in office, through January 2009, his last, total U.S. nonfarm employment grew from 132.5 million to 133.5 million, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That's an increase, obviously, of just 1 million. From January through April of this year, the economy created 573,000 jobs. Over a full year, that projects to 1.72 million jobs. Job-creation numbers are notoriously volatile, so the actual result could run above or below that estimate. But Obama administration economists are increasingly optimistic that job growth this year will exceed expectations. Few of them will be surprised if more jobs are created in 2010 than over Bush's two terms.

[onehandle]

1. Yeah, but George W. Bush did more damage to the United States than President Obama ever could.

So there.

[Cha]

2. bushcheney's pillaging and plundering

demonstrated how they wanted to destoy government and they couldn't care less if there were jobs created as long as their donors had Tax Cuts and War was permanent.

[jwirr]

3. Unfortunately many of those jobs will be cleaning up the oil spill. One

thing I learned from 9/11 and Naomi Klein is that disaster capital clean up jobs, etc., are counted when looking at the state of the economy.

[HughMoran]

4. This was true before the oil spill

so much for that silly meme

[RC]

5. "LivingWageJobs" needs to be made one (1) word.

Everyone is talking jobs, but no one is talking jobs that can support families.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. Apples and Oranges

Not to defend Bush, but even if it turns out that way, you're picking one year of Obama's presidency (which should be the best for job growth since it will be the first full year after the "end of the recession") to Bush's entire tenure.

Job growth over the past few months, when looked at closely, is actually not so good:

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

For example, as of May, there were almost 600,000 temporary Census workers on the payrolls:

http://2010.census.gov/news/releases/jobs/temp-workers.html

These jobs will go away very soon.

I hope things improve next year.

[Jack Rabbit]

7. A least they won't say x number of times more jobs

Since a hundred times zero is still zero.

[DrToast]

8. I hate Bush as much as the next guy (hmm...that didn't come out right)

But this is a worthless comparison.

Let's not forget that 4 million jobs were lost in Obama's first year.

Now, one could argue that those aren't his fault since the recession isn't his fault. And I would agree with that, but it's also hard to pin the 2001 recession on George Bush since it started in March of 2001. So let's be consistent.

[stevenleser]

9. They talk about all of that in the article

I would say it is a fair comparison. Bush had the same opportunity coming out of a recession to create a lot of jobs. He failed.

[tabasco]

10. Noooooooo!!!!

MORE GOOD NEWS!!!!!!