"Job Growth Soars". But again, compared to WHAT?!

So 308,000 jobs in March is "the fastest pace in nearly four years".
http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/02/news/economy/jobs/index.htm?cnn=yes

That's not saying much, considering Bush's miserable failure of a record on jobs, and the fact that half that is needed just to keep up with population growth. I'd venture a guess that most months during Bush's term have seen job losses, so it's not hard to beat that. Clinton's AVERAGE job growth was nearly this much: 248,000 jobs per month, the highest of any President on record. (http://clinton4.nara.gov/textonly/WH/New/html/20000204_13.html).

What the press should be saying is "These job growth numbers are the highest since early in Bush's term, which admittedly has yielded pretty dismal job numbers."

What is Bush's average monthly job growth number now? Anyone have that?

How many net jobs has the Bush presidency produced? I know that one. A big fat ZERO!

Once again, the press is using short term numbers to try to paint Bush's job record as anything other than what it is:
The worst since Herbert Hoover.
The worst since the Great Depression.
The first president to oversee a net loss in jobs in three quarters of a century.

That's right. I forgot about all those manufacturing jobs at Burger King and Subway.

Wonder about the 308,000 jobs... how many are government jobs? How soon will this number be "corrected" down to 190,000 or so.

I'd they're also considering counting people sent to prison as "new hires" since they'll be working in the laundry or call center.

... you have to look at the bigger picture.

If there were net jobs lost in every month of the Bush presidency, then a monthly job growth number of ONE JOB would be "the fastest pace in nearly four years". They consistently look only at monthly numbers and not the big picture.

I'm reminded of a rabid freeper who called into a local radio show the other day. He said something like (in "countering" Bush critics):
"They say we've lost jobs. 70,000 jobs doesn't sound like lost jobs to me! But liberals don't wanna hear facts!"

He was likely citing some recent monthly growth number, simply oblivious to the fact that we've lost some 2-3,000,000 jobs in Bush's term. Yeah, I'm sure those few thousand who have jobs are happy, but what about the other few MILLION?!

Stalin is raising a glass of vodka in salute to Goebbels for his masterful tuteledge of Karl Rove.

Read the story on msnbc http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4652107 with an eye for Orwellian doublespeak.

"In March, there were 8.35 million people unemployed, compared with 8.17 million the previous month. The average duration of unemployment has been more than 20 weeks, a 20-year high."

"The March rise in payrolls reflected the resolution of a labor dispute at grocery stores in southern California that had idled 72,000 workers. The department said the return of those workers helped fuel a 47,000 increase in retail employment last month, but it did not quantify the impact."

"Jobless workers are increasingly accepting part-time work. The number of people who worked part time for economic reasons rose to 4.7 million in March, up from 4.4 million the previous month."

Hmmm, 4.7 minus 4.4 million, is 300,000.
Coincidence?

How can any of this be spun as "positive" news?

Which will be released in a few weeks. Ever notice, all the revisions are DOWN? Are these people optimistic or what?

what types of jobs those were? That would give a fuller picture.

'nuff said.

108,000 were McJobs in the service sector.

... over jump that will not appear on next month's report May 7th.

That's how many grocery workers returned to the employed column after their job action in California.Let the WH party and flog this flawed report all they want. The party will be over on May 7th. Of course, THEN is when the strike explanation for NEXT month's decline will be trotted out. For the next 35 days, the effect of the grocery strike on unemployment reports will remain an open secret.

From http://www.forbes.com/reuters/newswire/2004/02/27/rtr1278463.html

"Mediator says deal reached in Calif. grocery strike Reuters, 02.27.04, 1:24 AM ET

NEW YORK, Feb 27 (Reuters) -Three major supermarket chains and the union representing some 60,000 striking workers have reached a tentative settlement, the mediator in the 5-month-old California grocery strike confirmed on Friday.

The deal ... affects 10,000 supermarket employees in addition to the 60,000 striking workers...."