Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNew Data Show Obama Net Positive For Job Creation Since He Took Office
New Data Show Obama Net Positive For Job Creation Since He Took Office
By Pat Garofalo
According to new revisions released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the economy created 386,000 more jobs between March 2011 and March 2012 than shown by previous estimates. As economist Justin Wolfers noted, this means that President Obama is now net positive for job creation over his term in office, even taking into account the massive losses in January 2009:
The Economists Greg Ip noted that the revisions mean that Obamas net job creation number is now 125,000:
- more -
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/27/920781/new-data-obama-net-positive/
By Pat Garofalo
According to new revisions released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the economy created 386,000 more jobs between March 2011 and March 2012 than shown by previous estimates. As economist Justin Wolfers noted, this means that President Obama is now net positive for job creation over his term in office, even taking into account the massive losses in January 2009:
Justin Wolfers @justinwolfers The BLS benchmark revisions means that there has been a net jobs gain since Jan '09. Romney can no longer talk about job losses under Obama.
27 Sep 12 ReplyRetweetFavorite
Justin Wolfers @justinwolfers BLS Benchmark revisions mean that over the year to March 2012, the economy was adding 194k jobs per month, not 162k as previously thought.
27 Sep 12 ReplyRetweetFavorite
The Economists Greg Ip noted that the revisions mean that Obamas net job creation number is now 125,000:
Greg Ip @greg_ip Incorporating today's BLS revision, net payroll growth over Obama's term would move from -261K to +125K.
27 Sep 12 ReplyRetweetFavorite
- more -
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/27/920781/new-data-obama-net-positive/
Employment: Preliminary annual benchmark revision shows 386,000 additional jobs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021425106
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 954 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (10)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
New Data Show Obama Net Positive For Job Creation Since He Took Office (Original Post)
ProSense
Sep 2012
OP
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)1. Thanks.
K & R
ProSense
(116,464 posts)2. You're welcome.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)3. New jobs numbers under cut major Romney talking point
New jobs numbers under cut major Romney talking point
By Greg Sargent
So the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced this morning that it is revising its jobs count, to include an additional 386,000 nonfarm jobs that were created from March of 2011 to March of 2012.
Jobs numbers are only one metric for measuring economic improvement, so we shouldnt overstate their significance. This new finding, however, does matter politically in a few key ways. First, as Justin Wolfers points out, the added jobs means that there has no longer been a net loss of jobs on Obamas watch. As you know, Romney has been saying for a very long time now that the net jobs lost on Obamas watch proves his policies failed. Thats a bogus metric, because it factors in the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs lost in each of the first few months of Obamas term, before those policies went into effect.
But putting that aside, net jobs were now actually gained on Obamas watch. So, in theory at least, Romney has been deprived of one of the talking points that has been central to his candidacy for a year now. That talking point was crucial for Romney, because it enabled him to make the (nonsensical) case that Obama destroyed jobs overall.
By the way: If Romney objects to incorporating BLSs new revisions into his jobs count, he should know that in 2004, the George W. Bush White House relied on BLS revisions to improve its own jobs count.
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/new-jobs-numbers-under-cut-major-romney-talking-point/2012/09/27/afc38a64-08c0-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_blog.html
By Greg Sargent
So the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced this morning that it is revising its jobs count, to include an additional 386,000 nonfarm jobs that were created from March of 2011 to March of 2012.
Jobs numbers are only one metric for measuring economic improvement, so we shouldnt overstate their significance. This new finding, however, does matter politically in a few key ways. First, as Justin Wolfers points out, the added jobs means that there has no longer been a net loss of jobs on Obamas watch. As you know, Romney has been saying for a very long time now that the net jobs lost on Obamas watch proves his policies failed. Thats a bogus metric, because it factors in the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs lost in each of the first few months of Obamas term, before those policies went into effect.
But putting that aside, net jobs were now actually gained on Obamas watch. So, in theory at least, Romney has been deprived of one of the talking points that has been central to his candidacy for a year now. That talking point was crucial for Romney, because it enabled him to make the (nonsensical) case that Obama destroyed jobs overall.
By the way: If Romney objects to incorporating BLSs new revisions into his jobs count, he should know that in 2004, the George W. Bush White House relied on BLS revisions to improve its own jobs count.
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/new-jobs-numbers-under-cut-major-romney-talking-point/2012/09/27/afc38a64-08c0-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_blog.html
What are the chances Romney will whine about this?