Sigh. Anytime you read about presidents creating jobs, you know you’re in for some malarkey. Clinton, for example, presided over the dot-com bubble which, fortuitously for him, burst just after he left office, wiping out most of those job gains. Biden took credit for jobs that resumed after he declared the pandemic over by fiat. There’s also the fact that these statistics are in straight numbers rather than relative to the population – population growth could explain some some of these statistics.
And these statistics are just “payroll jobs”. That says nothing about what whether those jobs are full or part time, how much they pay or whether they offer benefits. I’m reminded of the famous internet meme that shows a politician talking to a blue-collar looking woman saying, “My administration added millions of new jobs last year.” The woman answers, “Yeah, I know, I have three of them and I still can’t pay my bills.”
You’re right to question statistics, which can be read to fit various agendas. Unfortunately, presidents get too much credit or blame for a variety of factors. It’s just easier to point to one person, rather than factor in the congressional influence on supporting or opposing a president’s policies during his tenure. It’s overly simplistic, but that’s the way our country & media lay things out to the masses. Historians who try to explain complicated & nuanced explanations of past administrations’ successes or failures usually only are heard by intellectuals or nerds who can digest all of that information. That does not happen on a mass basis throughout the electorate. It’s amazing that our country has lasted this long with this lack of awareness, involvement & intelligence on the part of our citizenry. We had a pretty decent run of 250 years, but I believe that is coming to an end, despite what plays out with Trump & his corrupt regime. The Tech & Media Oligarchs have taken over & we’re all just pawns in their global chess games. Other than all that, life is wonderful!l
So FDR was just a phony and didn’t create any jobs?
The GOP over and over again lowers taxes, (mainly benefiting the millionaires, billionaires and now the trillionaires) and creates huge deficits. So when the Democrats come back into office they have to stabilize the economy and raise taxes to deal with the GOP deficits. Remember that it was Bush #2 who lowered taxes during a time of war.
From legalknowledgebasedotcom: Yes, President Bill Clinton balanced the federal budget and achieved budget surpluses during his final four years in office (fiscal years 1998–2001), marking the first time the U.S. government ran a surplus since 1969. end quote
Of course the right wing Cato Institute disagrees.
The machine that creates jobs is different from the machine that creates economic power. Digging deeper requires that we ask what sort of jobs are being created.
Our political system seems to favor surface evaluation of important issues, especially where jobs are concerned. O tempore, O mores.
Sigh. Anytime you read about presidents creating jobs, you know you’re in for some malarkey. Clinton, for example, presided over the dot-com bubble which, fortuitously for him, burst just after he left office, wiping out most of those job gains. Biden took credit for jobs that resumed after he declared the pandemic over by fiat. There’s also the fact that these statistics are in straight numbers rather than relative to the population – population growth could explain some some of these statistics.
And these statistics are just “payroll jobs”. That says nothing about what whether those jobs are full or part time, how much they pay or whether they offer benefits. I’m reminded of the famous internet meme that shows a politician talking to a blue-collar looking woman saying, “My administration added millions of new jobs last year.” The woman answers, “Yeah, I know, I have three of them and I still can’t pay my bills.”
LikeLike
You’re right to question statistics, which can be read to fit various agendas. Unfortunately, presidents get too much credit or blame for a variety of factors. It’s just easier to point to one person, rather than factor in the congressional influence on supporting or opposing a president’s policies during his tenure. It’s overly simplistic, but that’s the way our country & media lay things out to the masses. Historians who try to explain complicated & nuanced explanations of past administrations’ successes or failures usually only are heard by intellectuals or nerds who can digest all of that information. That does not happen on a mass basis throughout the electorate. It’s amazing that our country has lasted this long with this lack of awareness, involvement & intelligence on the part of our citizenry. We had a pretty decent run of 250 years, but I believe that is coming to an end, despite what plays out with Trump & his corrupt regime. The Tech & Media Oligarchs have taken over & we’re all just pawns in their global chess games. Other than all that, life is wonderful!l
LikeLike
As Candide said, it’s time to make your garden grow.
LikeLike
So FDR was just a phony and didn’t create any jobs?
The GOP over and over again lowers taxes, (mainly benefiting the millionaires, billionaires and now the trillionaires) and creates huge deficits. So when the Democrats come back into office they have to stabilize the economy and raise taxes to deal with the GOP deficits. Remember that it was Bush #2 who lowered taxes during a time of war.
From legalknowledgebasedotcom: Yes, President Bill Clinton balanced the federal budget and achieved budget surpluses during his final four years in office (fiscal years 1998–2001), marking the first time the U.S. government ran a surplus since 1969. end quote
Of course the right wing Cato Institute disagrees.
LikeLike
The machine that creates jobs is different from the machine that creates economic power. Digging deeper requires that we ask what sort of jobs are being created.
Our political system seems to favor surface evaluation of important issues, especially where jobs are concerned. O tempore, O mores.
LikeLike