Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (51336)	9/19/2006 1:14:52 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Enough of what? Your idiocy? No. I am the only sane one here. Here are the average hourly earnings as of last month in the "high paying" manufacturing sector, and the "low paying" service sector and education & health subsector: Manufacturing - $16.82 Services - $16.45 Educ. & Health - $17.42 You're kidding? Averages mean nothing......they don't begin to give a reasonable picture of reality. That's why medians are used. I thought you were an economic whiz. And below is a picture of the number of employed persons in the US - a gain of 6.8 million from January 2001 and a 4.3 million gain in the last 19 months. Not bad considering that Bush inherited a recession that cost us two million jobs in 2001 alone and that his tax cuts didn't even take effect until a couple of years later. Picture? What I see is a blank space. I guess you must need neo-vision to see it. BTW are you getting your numbers from Fox News? They look rather fair but balanced and adjusted as well. In any case, I am glad you brought up job growth under this economic expansion......in a word or rather two, it stinks! Job growth is much slower under this expansion than any in recent history: "Recent job gains lag far behind historical norms President Bush has noted that 2 million jobs were created over the course of 2005 and that we have added 4.6 million jobs since the decline in jobs ended in May 2003. But does that mean the labor market is getting back to normal? Unfortunately, no. Recent job gains lag far behind historical norms. Last year's 2 million new jobs represented a gain of 1.5%, a sluggish growth rate by historical standards (see chart below). In fact, it is less than half of the average growth rate of 3.5% for the same stage of previous business cycles that lasted as long. At that pace, we would have created 4.6 million jobs last year. If jobs had grown last year at the pace of even the slowest of the prior cycles—2.1% in the 1980s—we would have added 2.8 million jobs. Over the last half century, the only 12-month spans with job growth as low as 1.5% were those that actually included recession months, occurred just before a recession, or were during the "jobless recovery" of 1992 and early 1993." But let me show you a chart that also explains the story and that actually is visible to the eyes of non neos as well as neos. You must learn not to discriminate. ;-) jobwatch.org As you can see, job growth sucks. Only under Reagan was it nearly as bad. You Republicans don't have a clue when it comes to keeping a budget and growing the economy. What exactly is your strong suit? You can't fight wars. You are only slightly better with national security. Forget about illegal immigration.......its a bust. You are real good at making pork but that's not a positive. What is it that you do good? Inquiring minds want to know. ;-)