ONTD Political

Obama made jobs and isn't working towards terroristic economic crashes of America? INCONCEIVABLE

6:36 pm - 11/24/2010

It’s Official: More Private Sector Jobs Created In 2010 Than During Entire Bush Years

By Ole Ole Olson


October 8, 2010

The September jobs report was just released and demonstrates that America is on a far slower path to recovery than anyone originally predicted. Despite this, the shedding of government jobs cloaks a glimmer of hope: more private sector jobs have been created this year than during the entire Bush administration. Read that again: 2010 has had more private job creation than during the entire 8 year tenure of George W. Bush.

This is the 9th straight month of private sector job growth in the midst of a devastating recession that has put a serious strain mostly on the poor and middle class. There has been a total of 863,000 private sector jobs created in 2010, exceeding the total created under the Bush/Cheney regime.

The numbers are not all good however. Companies added 64,000 jobs last month, but after the loss of 159,000 government jobs at all levels, there was a net shedding of ~95,000. The fading influence of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA or the economic stimulus) is causing much of the strain on the job market, as state and local governments still strained by poor revenue are cutting positions, particularly in education.

This is also the central agent that has caused the overall net job loss for the last four months, following a net gain for the first 5 months of the year. The net jobs gained during 2010 stands at 613,000, which is over half of the 1,080,000 jobs were created during the entire time George W. Bush was in office.

2010 Total Jobs Gained or Lost
January 14,000
February 39,000
March 208,000
April 313,000
May 432,000
June -175,000
July -66,000
August -57,000
September -95,000

After modest gains in January and February, March was the month with the greatest job gains in 3 years (since March 2007), and April 2010 was the biggest monthly job gain in 4 years (since March 2006). Beyond this, the increase in jobs from March to April is counter to the jobs trends of the last 10 years, where according to the average, March has gained 61,000 jobs and April only 32,000. The huge gain of 432,000 jobs in May 2010 is the largest net gain of jobs since March 2000 when Bill Clinton was president.

A commonly cited article by conservative pundits to soften the blow on this data is a Wall Street Journal piece titled, Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record, which inaccurately states that Bush created 3 million jobs. The actual figure is 1.08 million (all jobs added minus jobs lost), but the conservative leaning WSJ has yet to issue a retraction, correction, or clarification.

In the chart below found on the Bureau of Labor Statistics, find the monthly statistics of total jobs created or lost since January 2000.

Read the rest (and see many more charts!) at the source

Kind of old, hopefully it hasn't already been posted.

blackjedii 25th-Nov-2010 03:31 pm (UTC)
Because apparently you can buy elections for somewheres around 6 billion dollars.
(no subject) - Anonymous
blackjedii 26th-Nov-2010 12:59 am (UTC)
Well yes and no - in the sense that a great deal of Obama's money (great deal, def not all because he DID receive donations from some big banks, as your link shows) came from individual donations whereas this election cycle (thanks to a genius ruling by our Supreme Court), there's no way we'll ever know where campaign contributions came from, but they were most certainly big businesses and/or organizations. Some which may or may not have even been in the US.

Also I really do think Obama was elected less on his own merits... and more because people did not want Sarah Palin / a Republican thanks to the major economic blowout. It wasn't really until those two factors came into play that I saw John McCain's numbers slide.
(no subject) - Anonymous
blackjedii 26th-Nov-2010 01:18 am (UTC)
Maybe, but I don't think they were thinking that far ahead nor were the Republicans in any kind of order in 08. Palin was picked because McCain was considered "too" moderate and in hopes that she'd pick up Hillary voters, but no one knew she sucked so badly. And McCain had been trying to get Pres. for years, IIRC. So it being a setup is too many things happening at once for too many reasons.

This page was loaded Apr 19th 2018, 5:38 pm GMT.