Did Bush create 7,502,000 jobs as the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows??

G.T.

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
73,926
Reaction score
10,174
Points
2,030
What publius said - plus you forgot to factor in the job losses for 2009 as that economy was under a c.r. approved by Bush before there was even an election, lying liar.
 

Darkwind

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
26,335
Reaction score
6,787
Points
290

NYcarbineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
117,063
Reaction score
13,858
Points
2,210
Location
Finger Lakes, NY
Step one to proving Bush created ANY jobs:

Unequivocally reject as bullshit what conservatives repeatedly claim:

...that the government doesn't create jobs.
 

Unkotare

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
92,612
Reaction score
9,025
Points
2,015
Step one to proving Bush created ANY jobs:

Unequivocally reject as bullshit what conservatives repeatedly claim:

...that the government doesn't create jobs.


Why is that "bullshit"?
 

G.T.

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
73,926
Reaction score
10,174
Points
2,030
Oh forgot :

Healthmyths' obsessive thread on the same exact subject number: 1, 375.

Mods dont curr.
 

Publius1787

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
6,211
Reaction score
668
Points
190
Step one to proving Bush created ANY jobs:

Unequivocally reject as bullshit what conservatives repeatedly claim:

...that the government doesn't create jobs.
Responsible for creating an environment whereas jobs are either created or lost is a much different question than who creates jobs. Presidents don't create jobs. Presidents enforce the law. Congress does not create jobs. They make laws. Individuals create jobs.
 

Avorysuds

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
13,834
Reaction score
1,658
Points
245
Location
Eugene Oregon
Step one to proving Bush created ANY jobs:

Unequivocally reject as bullshit what conservatives repeatedly claim:

...that the government doesn't create jobs.
The Government creates environments for the privet sector to create jobs. All Government policy and even speeches do is either stifle, hurt or create environments for that privet sector to create the jobs.

Bush had the FED-R fueling the housing bubble, meanwhile Bush gave no intention that he would be cutting that bubble building nor raising taxes... Thus the injection of fake money propped up a housing market and spurred mass malinvestment in the privet sector, creating pointless jobs.

Obama talks about cutting taxes for people already paying no taxes and usually on welfare, Obama talks about raising taxes on the rich while utilizing the FED-R to dump money on the rich. Obama also creates new policies and starts new wars and expands old wars despite claiming he would end them all... Obama confuses the markets, thus you get a recession lasting 5 years.

So no a President nor Government truly creates a privet sector job, because Government does not un-create privet sector jobs. It is as simple as creating an environment for privet sector to create or un make jobs... Obama destroys the environment while Bush rode a bubble only to towards the end of his term destroy that environment when his progressive policies did as predicted, they impoverished the middle class through mass inflation.


It's funny how tricky it all seems, mainly because there are people who only want "their guy" to look good at all costs. Bush was a progressive, so is Obama, they are not left and right, they are not in the middle... There are many ways to destroy a strong job environment, Bush and and Obama have proven this recently..... FDR did a great job of keeping people starving and poor.
 

velvtacheeze

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
1,959
Reaction score
299
Points
130
Bush The War Monkey certainly left the country worse off than when he became President, that's an undeniable fact.
 
OP
H

healthmyths

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
21,700
Reaction score
4,132
Points
280
But none of you have disputed the FACT that
Bureau of Labor Statistics state:
End of 2000 135,836,000 people were employed.
End of 2008 143,338,000 people employed.
That mean there were 7,502,000 people MORE working at the end of 2008 then end of 2000!
Why is there any dispute with the Bureau of Labor Statistics???
 

G.T.

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
73,926
Reaction score
10,174
Points
2,030
No, the years chosen have been disputed. Fy 200o= Clinton budget. Fy 2009 = Bush.

Nice try (again) though.
 

Harry Dresden

Adamantium Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
72,539
Reaction score
11,333
Points
2,060
Location
Nv.
Step one to proving Bush created ANY jobs:

Unequivocally reject as bullshit what conservatives repeatedly claim:

...that the government doesn't create jobs.
the trouble with that is,you have to do the same thing with Liberals......when you take what the right and left say out of the Conversation....then reality sets in....
 

G.T.

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
73,926
Reaction score
10,174
Points
2,030
Must spread some rep before giving more to harry bladdidy blahh
 

G.T.

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
73,926
Reaction score
10,174
Points
2,030
One of these days, I will do healthmyths' mental state a solid and I will collect all of the OP's he has ever created and report him to a mod for spamming the boards with the same thread over and over and over instead of being a grown up non attention whore and keeping it in the same thread just the one time. So disturbed.
 

Clementine

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
12,919
Reaction score
4,801
Points
350
They can only count the number of jobs created on someone's watch. Government doesn't create jobs, but it has a strong effect on how the private sector can create jobs or not. Government can certainly pass legislation that is conducive to job creation or it can pass job-killing legislation, like Obamacare. The private sector will react to policies by expanding and hiring or just laying people off.
 
OP
H

healthmyths

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
21,700
Reaction score
4,132
Points
280
One of these days, I will do healthmyths' mental state a solid and I will collect all of the OP's he has ever created and report him to a mod for spamming the boards with the same thread over and over and over instead of being a grown up non attention whore and keeping it in the same thread just the one time. So disturbed.
MY purpose is to get some simple FACTS straight!

Why is it so hard to admit this is REALITY?

At the End of 2008 the last month of Bush Administration there were 143,338,000 employed people! Employment Situation News Release
At the End of 2000 the last month of Clinton's Administration there were 135,836,000 employed people! http://www.bls.gov/news.release/history/empsit_01052001.txt
After 8 years 7,502,000 More working end of 2008 then at end of 2000!
It is just simple math!
It is the reality. There is no contexting.. no twisting, no explanations needed. It is a FACT!
Simple math!

And until you idiots can come to the simple conclusion that the Bureau of Labor Statistics did i.e. there were more people employed at the end of 2008 then end of 2000
I will NOT have to repeat so many times for simpletons to do simple MATH!

FACE REALITY folks!
 

OODA_Loop

Account Terminated
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,494
Reaction score
676
Points
175
Location
Lubyanka
One of these days, I will do healthmyths' mental state a solid and I will collect all of the OP's he has ever created and report him to a mod for spamming the boards with the same thread over and over and over instead of being a grown up non attention whore and keeping it in the same thread just the one time. So disturbed.
Or...not open and participate in his threads.

But there is no attention in that.
 
R

rdean

Guest
Seems to be some question about that so here are the FACTS from the Federal Government's Bureau of Labor Statistics!

Employment Situation News Release

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/history/empsit_01052001.txt

View attachment 28829
I don't know. I couldn't get past this part:

In the goods-producing sector, manufacturing employment fell by 62,000
in December, bringing its loss for the year to 178,000. Employment in
primary metals declined by 9,000 in December, partly reflecting 3,000
workers who were on strike and thus not on payrolls. Motor vehicles lost
8,000 jobs, as did rubber and miscellaneous plastics. Apparel and textiles
continued their long-term declines, losing 9,000 and 5,000 jobs,
respectively. Declines also occurred in several construction-related
industries, including lumber, furniture, and stone, clay, and glass
products.

Construction employment fell by 13,000 in December, affected for the
second month in a row by adverse weather. Employment in mining fell by
3,000.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Or the fact that the government grew enormously and that accounted for a lot if not most of the job growth. At least, that's what your link seemed to say.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top