Barack Obama: The jobs president that Republicans were looking for?

Barack Obama: The jobs president that Republicans were looking for?

Republicans regularly argue that the goal of a president should be to reduce the size of government and to oversee growth in the private sector.

The last Republican president, George W. Bush, was not successful in that regard.

Between the January he took office and the January he left it, private sector employment declined by 463,000 and government employment increased by 1.7 million.

President Obama, by contrast, has seen a net change in private sector jobs of 9.3 million, as of the new jobs report out on Friday morning -- and that's even after the dip due to the recession. Government jobs, meanwhile, are down 591,000.

Now...I understand ATS is not exactly a place for the GOP to acknowledge a Democratic Presidents successes, but with 8 years a piece with the last two presidents GOP vs. Dems...It does look like President Obama has managed to perform well by even the GOPs criteria.

Interested in what folks impressions are of the charts...

a reply to: Indigo5

Oh yeah, I am going to have to call bullsh*t on this. Look around your town and tell me if this is true. Federal reserve as the source? Come on now, don't be naive.

President Obama, by contrast, has seen a net change in private sector jobs of 9.3 million, as of the new jobs report out on Friday morning

I hope the public does realize this number includes the amount of jobs that were cut , then reupped as cheaper , lower skilled "new" jobs.Companies have to do this to pay for the new corporate taxes that has came during the Obama administration. Also , some companies that are off-shoring at a feverishly high rate are actually including these numbers in the reports to keep their stock value high. This is happening mainly in the Tech sector. They get a "warm body" to occupy a space for 1/20th the amount the skilled US worker was paid...

The second chart is labeled wrong.....

a reply to: Indigo5

Good luck with the thread

a lot of this BS is Temp work gained and lost quickly!

Unemployment compensation rate changes as well, people eventually lose that too and fall of the charts


Numbers are skewed to make jackass look better
Our country is in a bad place.

Look at the real numbers

originally posted by: HighDesertPatriot
a reply to: Indigo5

Oh yeah, I am going to have to call bullsh*t on this. Look around your town and tell me if this is true. Federal reserve as the source? Come on now, don't be naive.

Let me guess, you look around your town to determine if climate change is a hoax, as well?

You can't just simply ignore all data, facts, and numbers and opt, instead, to look out your window and go with your gut feeling.

a reply to: KonigKaos

This is an excellent point. Scanning through the radio the other day NPR was doing a piece on Temp Agencies/Staffing companies being the fastest growing segment of the economy. Kind of funny really. The most people being put to work are in the business of finding cheap labor for other businesses. What a legacy.

originally posted by: Abysha

Let me guess, you look around your town to determine if climate change is a hoax, as well?

Now let me see, on a bright winter night I look up into the sky and it's freezing my butt off ... but it's all just my imagination, because it's not really colder ... it's warmer! that's what the papers say, so it must be right ... my "real" life experience ... that's just my imagination.

Doh ... dumb and dumber ... I feel so stuuuuuppiiiid.

a reply to: Abysha

Have any information on worker pay stats to go with these new jobs? How many are part time? How many are in the service sector? How many are Government jobs? How much value is added to the economy than was there before 2008 from these jobs? More is not always better.

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Abysha

Have any information on worker pay stats to go with these new jobs? How many are part time? How many are in the service sector? How many are Government jobs? How much value is added to the economy than was there before 2008 from these jobs? More is not always better.

Nope. I don't. You know what I also don't have? A belief that I can back up my argument by looking out my window.

I'm not even defending the accuracy of the graphs in the OP. What I am saying is that you can't just use anecdotal evidence to make a value judgement on the entire nation.

originally posted by: bjarneorn

originally posted by: Abysha

Let me guess, you look around your town to determine if climate change is a hoax, as well?

Now let me see, on a bright winter night I look up into the sky and it's freezing my butt off ... but it's all just my imagination, because it's not really colder ... it's warmer! that's what the papers say, so it must be right ... my "real" life experience ... that's just my imagination.

Doh ... dumb and dumber ... I feel so stuuuuuppiiiid.

Yeah...

Hey, do me a favor and tell me what the weather is like at my house by looking outside where you live.

a reply to: Abysha

That is exactly what the OP is doing.....making a value judgement using anecdotal evidence. If the article wasn't biased it would have included the information I asked for.

a reply to: Indigo5

Well, gosh, you've presented numbers and charts from a reliable (somewhat conservative) source, but some ATS members are "calling BS" and claiming various reasons why the "real numbers" (if we only had real numbers) would tell a very different story... without a single source to back it up...

Which should I believe?

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

BS. The chart merely shows number of jobs not quality. You really think that was informative? Do you understand how propaganda works? This is like a lie by omission.

Whats funny is that if it had been the other way around...they would have been saying told ya so..

If a republican used this same chart to prove they did something good..same thing...lol

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: KonigKaos

This is an excellent point. Scanning through the radio the other day NPR was doing a piece on Temp Agencies/Staffing companies being the fastest growing segment of the economy.

No... it's not a point at all...By every measure Full-time employment has increased.

"Working part-time but wanting full-time employment" dropped 18% from last year.
www.nytimes.com...

Lots of emotion and claims, but very little statistics or math so far.

How you "feel" about numbers is really not relevant.

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Abysha

That is exactly what the OP is doing.....making a value judgement using anecdotal evidence. If the article wasn't biased it would have included the information I asked for.

How is it anecdotal? Those are graphs made with data. That is practically the opposite of anecdotal. Those charts may be wrong but they are not anecdotal.

If you tell me that there is a national increase of red cars on the road according to DMV, that would be a statement based on data. If I were to refute that by saying "No way, I just drove around my street today and saw tons of blue cars", that is refuting data with anecdotal evidence. It doesn't work. Especially when using a localized anecdote to refute something with a much larger scope than your neighborhood.

Remember when a conservative uses a chart..it is golden and no such thing as manipulated, wrong data...

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

The WAPO is "somewhat conservative"? Maybe in your universe and compared to the NYT, but really ... no, not even a bit.