SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Wharf Rat who wrote (26770)9/6/2012 9:15:36 PM
From: gamesmistress2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 85487
 
So is reading. Here's the source of those original numbers you, er, criticized. You'll notice that he doesn't say jobs created under Repubs or Dems, he says jobs created under conservative or liberal economic policies. As I said, subject to interpretation.

IMO, however, few people care much about the number of jobs created under any administration. They care about whether THEY have one, how much it's paying, and if they are in danger of losing it.

The bad arithmetic of Bill Clinton’s Democrat-Republican ‘job score’
James Pethokoukis | September 6, 2012, 8:41 am
Math is hard. Just ask Bill Clinton.

Here’s one of the more memorable lines from his Democratic National Convention address: “What new ideas did we bring to Washington? I always give a one-word answer: Arithmetic.”

But Clinton’s speech last night really didn’t add up. Take this Clinton claim:

Well, since 1961, for 52 years now, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats 24. In those 52 years, our private economy has produced 66 million private- sector jobs. So what’s the job score? Republicans: twenty-four million. Democrats: forty-two.

Why would we analyze the effectiveness of economic approaches by using party labels rather than looking at the actual policies? For instance, about 10 million net new private jobs were created during the Nixon-Ford years vs 21 million under Clinton.

But which administration generally followed conservative policies of shrinking government (spending fell to 18% of GDP under Clinton from 21%), welfare reform, and cutting taxes on capital … and which administration expanded government (spending rose to 21% of GDP under Nixon-Ford from 19%), increased regulation (the pages in the Federal Register by grew by 185% under Nixon and Ford vs. 7% under Clinton) and presided over a confiscatory tax code?

And was JFK or George H. W. Bush the more conservative president? The former cut taxes — even for the richest Americans — while the other raised them.

If you look at job growth under right-of-center economic policies (putting Clinton and JFK in this category) vs. left-of-center economic policies (swapping in Nixon, Ford, and Bush I), the “job score” looks a lot different.

Conservative economic policies win 40 million jobs to 26 million jobs

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/09/the-bad-arithmetic-of-bill-clintons-democratic-republican-job-score/