Reply With QuoteNuff said...........
Facts show Democrats are job creators
I delivered the faculty graduation address last weekend at the University of California, Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy. It’s one of the nation’s best and the reason is its emphasis on rigorous data analysis. Any public policy wonk worth her salt must be focused on data in order to replicate policy successes.
So if we all agree that the nation’s biggest problem is a lack of jobs, we should entrust a respected nonpartisan policy source to examine the economic data, right? The policy analysis should review which laboratory was most successful in creating jobs over a sustained period.
And then we should emulate those policies, right?
If Republican tax cuts create more jobs than Democratic investment, by all means let’s cut taxes! If Republican financial deregulation creates more jobs than Democratic consumer protection, then go ahead, deregulate away!
Which is exactly why the data from Bloomberg’s BGOV Barometer last week will shock many people. Bloomberg studied the past 50 years of U.S. job creation, under Democratic and Republican presidents. The facts: For the near half-century following the Kennedy administration, Democrats created nearly twice as many private-sector jobs as Republicans. Even though Democrats held the presidency for only 23 years compared with 28 years of Republican rule.
Private-sector payrolls increased by 42 million jobs under Democratic administrations, and 24 million under Republican ones. That’s an average of 150,000 new paychecks a month under Democrats and 71,000 per month under Republicans.
Let’s look at some other indicators. How about investing in the stock market? Again, Bloomberg analyzed the data. Investing $1,000 in a hypothetical fund that tracks the Standard & Poor’s 500 index over the past 50 years would have returned $10,920 when Democrats held the White House. The return when Republicans were in power? $2,087.
Annualized returns were 11 percent for the Democrats, 2.7 percent for the Republicans.
What about gross domestic product growth? Through 2008, real GDP grew faster under Democratic administrations — 4.1 percent to 2.7 percent for the GOP.
Income growth? Under Democrats, the real median income over the past 50 years grew at 2.2 percent. Republicans? 0.6 percent.
Number of Americans in poverty? By now you see the pattern. The poverty rate declined under President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society programs from 22.2 percent to 12.6 percent by 1970.
Nuff said...........
Originally Posted by shermbodius
Nuff said...........
Good job reading the article.
Didn't need too, the last 3.5 years are good enough evidence for me.
Exactly...
LOL, Democratic Politician writes Opinion piece as facts
Heres a fact
12.5 Million Americans Unemployed as of April 2012
Hey if Dems want to crow about that go right ahead
SOURCE:
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Wow, look at all those jobs Barry created.Nuff said...........
Thanks LD, my county is at 12.5
Wow, same idiot crew that never reads an article, without fail. Have fun.
There's plenty of "facts" to suggest that the Democrats killed a lot of jobs, too.
In the end, however, we'll never know for certain - for one simple reason: The crisis has developed an inherent momentum that is beyond the grasp of the White House.
So why the high unemployment rate? Largely because of public-sector job cuts — most in states that saw new GOP governors and legislatures elected in 2010 slash budgets for teachers, public safety and other service functions. Without these cuts, the Labor Department estimates our unemployment rate would be at 7.1 percent. Not the 8.1 percent it’s at now.
I found this interesting
btw - you do know this is an opinion piece...
Same Monkey throwing Poo
Spending money we don't have to pay for jobs we don't need doesn't seem to be a wise way to keep people employed.
![[WDW]Megaraptor's Avatar](image.php?s=2402a8112e8ac563c76bcfd95abebd4b&u=30547&dateline=1171465900 "[WDW]Megaraptor's Avatar")
I didn't read it because job creation under the Kennedy and Johnson administrations has precious little relevance to modern economic policy.
The relevant issue isn't whether "democrats" have created jobs, it's whether "Obama" has created jobs.
What Kennedy or LBJ did is pretty much irrelevant unless it has lessons directly applicapble to now.
The fact that they were democrats and jobs were created on their watch is of interest only to historians.
hehe, people tend to confuse correlation with causation all the time.
Here is right comment on this fallacy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...fNVR_blog.html
"...Is some of this due to policy decisions? Perhaps. But note that “every Republican president since at least the end of World War II has faced a recession during his first term in office.” That accounts for much of the difference.
Perhaps those recessions are due to poor economic policy making. But I doubt it. Or perhaps policies their Democratic predecessors are making is leading to recessions shortly after they leave office. That seems dubious, too.
More likely, this is just a small sample size, and the president’s influence on the economy is far more limited than we tend to admit.
..."
emphasize is mine.
Posting Permissions
