The Failed Policy of Promoting Job Growth through Tax Cuts to the Rich and Big Business



Posted: Saturday, January 12, 2008

by
Articles and Answers.com

Each month the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) prepares the Employment Situation Report for the prior month.  This particular report is a big deal because it's a "market mover" meaning the results of this report have the ability to push the Dow Jones Industrial Average, DJIA, higher if the results are good, or send the stock market spiraling if the numbers are poor.

The employment report consists of a combination of data from two separate sources

  • Household Survey is a sampling of approximately 60,000 households and only covers a small percentage of employed persons.
  • Establishment Survey is a survey conducted on approximately 400,000 businesses of all sizes and represents about 33% of total nonfarm employment.
Between the two data sources the BLS is able to provide us with various information in their report, including the following figures for December 2007, as released on January 4, 2008. 

    • Unemployment Rate - 5% - Household Survey
    • Nonfarm payroll employment - +18,000 - Establishment Survey [138,495]
    • Number of unemployed persons  - 7.7 - Household Survey
    • Total employment - 146.2 million - Household Survey
The figures released each month are the seasonally adjusted totals and the key number is the increase/decrease in nonfarm payroll employment.  In the month of December 2007 the increase in nonfarm payroll employment is +18,000, meaning 18,000 jobs were added to payrolls during the month of December 2007.

During a President's term of office, the number of jobs produced during his/her administration becomes a very important issue because job creation is based on economic policies put in force by the administration.

Upon release of the January 4, 2008 Employment Situation Report, the White House placed a Fact Sheet on their website claiming "Since August 2003, more than 8.3 million jobs have been created". 

Knowing the Bush administration didn't start in August 2003 and knowing 8.3 million jobs since August 2003 averaged out to little more than 160,000 jobs a month I decided to research the subject further.

During the eight years, Bill Clinton was in office, his economic policies produced 23.1 million jobs [average 240,000 per month] as follows:

Data extracted on: January 12, 2008 (11:19:19 AM) Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National) 
Series Id:     CES0000000001
Seasonally Adjusted
Super Sector:  Total nonfarm
Industry:      Total nonfarm
NAICS Code:    N/A
Data Type:     ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS
Year
Dec 1992
109418 2000
132484

At the end December 1992 the Bureau of Labor Statistics, BLS is indicating total, seasonally adjusted nonfarm employment, of 109,418,000.  At the end of December 2000, the total has increased to 132,484,000.  The difference is 23,066,000 or 23.1 million new jobs were produced during the Clinton presidency.  In contrast, George Bush has been in office seven years and his economic policies have produced a total of 6.0 million jobs as follows: Data extracted on: January 12, 2008 (11:31:47 AM)
Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National) 
Series Id:     CES0000000001
Seasonally Adjusted
Super Sector:  Total nonfarm
Industry:      Total nonfarm
NAICS Code:    N/A
Data Type:     ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS
Year
Dec 2000
132484 2007
138495(p) p : preliminary

At the end December 2000 the Bureau of Labor Statistics, BLS is indicating total, seasonally adjusted nonfarm employment, of 132,484,000.  At the end of December 2007, the total has increased to a preliminary figure of 138,495,000.  The difference is 6,011,000 or 6.0 million new jobs have been produced during the seven year period from January 2001 through December 2007, the length of time President Bush has been in office.   If the White House is stating 8.3 million jobs were created and I'm saying 6.0 million jobs have been created, who is correct? Both figures are correct - they just represent different periods of time.  The White House is simply ignoring the job losses incurred during the first 32 months of the Bush presidency. There have been 8.3 million jobs created since August 2003, but there were 2.3 million jobs lost during the period from January 2001 through July 2003, bringing the job creation total down to 6.0 million from January 2001 through December 2007. This is a very important subject and you really shouldn't believe either what the White House is stating, or what I'm indicating regarding these numbers.  To confirm the validity of the numbers, you should extract the data yourself from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. What these numbers prove is the economic policies put forth by the Bush administration, mainly The Jobs & Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 have backfired.  The tax cuts in this plan were intended to "encourage consumer spending that will continue to boost the economic recovery and create jobs" and "promote investment by individuals and businesses that will lead to economic growth and job creation." Our country cannot move forward with policies that create little more than 71,000 jobs per month. Most Americans are worried about the economy and think this country needs change.  The major change needed is to go back to the policies that were in effect under the Clinton administration, where all of us prospered, not just the rich and big business. Patricia L Johnson is a former special assignment writer/photographer and co-owner of the Articles and Answers News and Information sites. You may read more by this author at http://www.articlesandanswers.com or http://articles2007.spaces.live.com



By Patricia L Johnson

Patricia Johnson
SearchWarp.com
Author!
Patricia Johnson Author on SearchWarp!

Patricia L Johnson is a former special assignment writer/photographer and co-owner of the Articles and Answers site. You may read more by this author at our new blog http://articlesandanswers2011.wordpress.com/

This Article has been viewed 102 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (2 total)
» left by James P Krehbiel
 4 years 20 days ago.
125 fans.
Patricia, Well done and true. Unfortunately you won't get alot of takers on this website. Beliefs seem to be more important than evidence. Be well.
» left by Patricia Johnson from USA 4 years 20 days ago.
Thank you for your comment James. It's very difficult to get a point across when statistics are involved as most people shy away from numbers. In addition, our reporting system is very complex and it's difficult for most to understand. Then there's the real killer - we all WANT to believe what our government is telling us - most of us were raised to respect the President and the office he holds, and it goes against the grain to criticize the highest office in the land. Unfortunately, the criticizing of this administration should have started January 22, 2001, the day after he began his term in office, and maybe the country wouldn’t be in the shape it’s in now. Have a good one. P.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.