Aa
CNN Fact Check: About those 4.5 million jobs...
(CNN) -- Anyone watching the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday night heard the number 4.5 million several times.
"Despite incredible odds and united Republican opposition, our president took action, and now we've seen 4.5 million new jobs," San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, the party's keynote speaker, said.
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who served as President Barack Obama's chief of staff, and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, who followed Obama's November rival Mitt Romney as governor of Massachusetts, both cited the same number.
It's a big-sounding number, given the still-sputtering job market. So we're giving it a close eyeballing.
The facts:
The number Castro cites is an accurate description of the growth of private-sector jobs since January 2010, when the long, steep slide in employment finally hit bottom. But while a total of 4.5 million jobs sounds great, it's not the whole picture.
Nonfarm private payrolls hit a post-recession low of 106.8 million that month, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The figure currently stands at 111.3 million as of July.
While that is indeed a gain of 4.5 million, it's only a net gain of 300,000 over the course of the Obama administration to date. The private jobs figure stood at 111 million in January 2009, the month Obama took office.
And total nonfarm payrolls, including government workers, are down from 133.6 million workers at the beginning of 2009 to 133.2 million in July 2012. There's been a net loss of nearly 1 million public-sector jobs since Obama took office, despite a surge in temporary hiring for the 2010 census.
Meanwhile, the jobs that have come back aren't the same ones that were lost.
According to a study released last week by the liberal-leaning National Employment Law Project, low-wage fields such as retail sales and food service are adding jobs nearly three times as fast as higher-paid occupations.
Conclusion:
The figure of 4.5 million jobs is accurate if you look at the most favorable period and category for the administration. But overall, there are still fewer people working now than when Obama took office at the height of the recession.
SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politics/fact-check-obama-jobs/index.html?hpt=po_c2
"Despite incredible odds and united Republican opposition, our president took action, and now we've seen 4.5 million new jobs," San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, the party's keynote speaker, said.
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who served as President Barack Obama's chief of staff, and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, who followed Obama's November rival Mitt Romney as governor of Massachusetts, both cited the same number.
It's a big-sounding number, given the still-sputtering job market. So we're giving it a close eyeballing.
The facts:
The number Castro cites is an accurate description of the growth of private-sector jobs since January 2010, when the long, steep slide in employment finally hit bottom. But while a total of 4.5 million jobs sounds great, it's not the whole picture.
Nonfarm private payrolls hit a post-recession low of 106.8 million that month, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The figure currently stands at 111.3 million as of July.
While that is indeed a gain of 4.5 million, it's only a net gain of 300,000 over the course of the Obama administration to date. The private jobs figure stood at 111 million in January 2009, the month Obama took office.
And total nonfarm payrolls, including government workers, are down from 133.6 million workers at the beginning of 2009 to 133.2 million in July 2012. There's been a net loss of nearly 1 million public-sector jobs since Obama took office, despite a surge in temporary hiring for the 2010 census.
Meanwhile, the jobs that have come back aren't the same ones that were lost.
According to a study released last week by the liberal-leaning National Employment Law Project, low-wage fields such as retail sales and food service are adding jobs nearly three times as fast as higher-paid occupations.
Conclusion:
The figure of 4.5 million jobs is accurate if you look at the most favorable period and category for the administration. But overall, there are still fewer people working now than when Obama took office at the height of the recession.
SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politics/fact-check-obama-jobs/index.html?hpt=po_c2
The cause of this recession was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the balance sheets of many of Wall Street's most revered institutions. Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound business practices had previously guarded against making. It was either that or face stiff government penalties.
The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority homeownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky subprime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but "predatory".
In 1996 Barack Obama formally joined the New Party, which was deeply hostile to the mainstream of the Democratic party and even to American capitalism. Obama said that the “only” involvement he’d had with ACORN was to represent the group in a lawsuit seeking to compel Illinois to implement the National Voter Registration Act, or motor-voter law. The records of Illinois ACORN and its associated union clearly contradict that assertion. The group was notorious in 2008 for thug tactics, fraudulent voter registrations, and its role in popularizing risky subprime lending.
My 3 cents (which is about all I have left after taxes, so that's all I've got to give!!!)
The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority homeownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky subprime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but "predatory".
In 1996 Barack Obama formally joined the New Party, which was deeply hostile to the mainstream of the Democratic party and even to American capitalism. Obama said that the “only” involvement he’d had with ACORN was to represent the group in a lawsuit seeking to compel Illinois to implement the National Voter Registration Act, or motor-voter law. The records of Illinois ACORN and its associated union clearly contradict that assertion. The group was notorious in 2008 for thug tactics, fraudulent voter registrations, and its role in popularizing risky subprime lending.
My 3 cents (which is about all I have left after taxes, so that's all I've got to give!!!)
Dems had conrtol of House, Senate and Oval office for 2 years, what more do you want? They got passed everything they wanted, it didn't work.
The policies were not President Bush policies that got into this problem, it was even before him for some, and yes some were him but some were Congress alone. Stop trying to blame President Bush for everything...move on.
The policies were not President Bush policies that got into this problem, it was even before him for some, and yes some were him but some were Congress alone. Stop trying to blame President Bush for everything...move on.
Time to fire the obstructionists imo and not reward them for being such and for getting us to where we were 4 years ago imo. Returning to the same policies that caused the mess is not the answer.
I'm not angry Teko.
I'm just a little concerned that nothing that's been done has stopped the "bleeding", that's all.
The current administration has tried and failed, on several occasions.
Time to give someone else a chance at bat.
I'm just a little concerned that nothing that's been done has stopped the "bleeding", that's all.
The current administration has tried and failed, on several occasions.
Time to give someone else a chance at bat.
You need to be blaming the side of government that has been hell bent on not working with this president for the good of the people el. I think your anger is totally misdirected. You have to factor in all that was and is still going on, including the fact of exactly how bad things were. I really think the dems need to make that a major point in their campaign. Exactly, how bad it was and how far we have come since. We are not in a depression so that says something.
The rise in unemployment, unfortunately for President Obama, DIRECTLY coincides with his term in office.
Not his fault, but for Republicans, it's an easy target.
One could argue that the the economic downturn was in the works LONG before he took office, and the rise in unemployment was inevitable.
Between you and me, no matter WHO had been in office (Republican or Democrat), the unemployment numbers would be about the same.
That said, it's not the rise in unemployment that's got me ticked off, it's the CONTINUED rise in unemployment, and the fact that we're spending money, and spending and spending and spending, under the guise of a "stimulus", that was meant to drop unemployment, and get the economy back "on track" (which hasn't happened).
You'll never see me blame President Obama for the unemployment rate being what it is. What you WILL see me blame him for, is his administration not doing anything effective to stop the bleeding.
Not his fault, but for Republicans, it's an easy target.
One could argue that the the economic downturn was in the works LONG before he took office, and the rise in unemployment was inevitable.
Between you and me, no matter WHO had been in office (Republican or Democrat), the unemployment numbers would be about the same.
That said, it's not the rise in unemployment that's got me ticked off, it's the CONTINUED rise in unemployment, and the fact that we're spending money, and spending and spending and spending, under the guise of a "stimulus", that was meant to drop unemployment, and get the economy back "on track" (which hasn't happened).
You'll never see me blame President Obama for the unemployment rate being what it is. What you WILL see me blame him for, is his administration not doing anything effective to stop the bleeding.
Actually you canot take those numbers at face value unless you break it down and factor in that the statistics and the deficity also belong to the predecessor for the year of 2009 as well as the first year of the predecessors term would go on the previous administration as well. Funny how that all works isnt it.
Here's the raw unemployment data, by year:
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.7 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.4
2011 9.1 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.0 8.9 8.7 8.5
2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.3
Source: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.7 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.4
2011 9.1 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.0 8.9 8.7 8.5
2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.3
Source: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
We have definately seen that in THIS campaign for sure.
I don't know if I'd go so far as to say "LIARS, LIARS, LIARS", But the article certainly exposes a little bit of the 'twisting of the facts'.
That said, both parties are guilty of it.
Romney & Ryan (et all Repub speakers) did it in their speeches at the Republican National Convention, so I guess it's only fair that the Democrats do it at theirs.
Politicians will say whatever it takes to get elected, of that fact, be aware.
That said, both parties are guilty of it.
Romney & Ryan (et all Repub speakers) did it in their speeches at the Republican National Convention, so I guess it's only fair that the Democrats do it at theirs.
Politicians will say whatever it takes to get elected, of that fact, be aware.
"The figure of 4.5 million jobs is accurate if you look at the most favorable period and category for the administration. But overall, there are still fewer people working now than when Obama took office at the height of the recession."
Please tell me how this is a lie??
Please tell me how this is a lie??
Well the conclusion tells us that that number is accurate. Nuff said. I wonder how many jobs were lost the last 6 months of the Bush administration. Anyone know? I mean we WERE bleeding 750.000 a month right? Thank god the bleeding is stopped.
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
