![]() | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« What We Need is An Association of Niche Organizations | Main | "Have we become children ... afraid to face the cruel truth around us? » August 6, 2004Bush Economy: Highest Total Employment in American HistoryThe July jobs report is out and it's being spun as bad news for the President by people who don't understand how the data is collected and calculated. The media is reporting that only 32,000 jobs were created in July. But that's not true, for a number of reasons. First, the 32,000 figure has a statistical quirk in it: July is one of two months, the other being January, that the government statisticians simply assume that a certain percentages of businesses fail, and they reduce the jobs-growth estimate by tens of thousands of jobs to account for it. According to the New York Post's John Crudele, a year ago that lead to the job-growth number being slashed by 83,000 jobs in July. Second, the 32,000 figure reflects only "nonfarm payroll jobs," which means, roughly, jobs created by employers. This data come from the government's monthly "Payroll Survey," which generally misses small businesses, especially newer small businesses, and always misses self-employed people. The real number you should focus on is this one: Total employment in America rose by 629,000 to 139.66 million people in July, based on the government's Household Survey, which is also the data on which the official unemployment rate is based. Unemployment dropped a tenth of a percent in July. A few months ago on this blog I published numerous posts documenting the surge nationwide in the growth of the number of limited-liability corporations, one of the most popular forms of incorporation for the self-employed and for new entrepreneurs just launching their ventures. (My most recent post on the LLC surge is here.) And more recently I linked you to Jeff Cornwall's commentary on a Kauffman Foundation report that shows a resurgence of entrepreneurship among Americans, especially minorities but also among whites. As Cornwall noted, the Kauffman report showed that most entrepreneurs are starting businesses because they see an unfilled need in the marketplace, not because they are discouraged job-seekers. The American economy is, more than ever, being driven by entrepreneurs, not by big corporations. That's why, more then ever, the jobs number that matters is the total employment number, not just the number of "nonfarm payroll jobs." Here are some basic facts you need to know about the American economy under President George W. Bush: I blame the Bush tax cuts. Posted in Economy & Business
| Linked By |
Please support HobbsOnline by doing your online shopping at Amazon.com Comments
I appreciate your zeal, Bill, but must I point out that our raw population is also at its highest point in history? The important number is "62.5%." What's the history on that? I am happy about the fact that more people are choosing not to work for "the man,"and instead working for their selves. The bottom line is that oil prices are stifling hiring right now...and (of course!) that's all Mr. Bush's fault. (And before anybody jumps on me for that, please turn on your sarcasm-o-meters!) Posted by: EGC at August 6, 2004 06:50 PMI thank you for that explanation. This stuff can get so fuzzy, it is wonderful to have someone honest telling the story. Posted by: Richard at August 6, 2004 06:54 PM"But the White House was quite happy when these assumptions reversed in the spring and hundreds of thousands of guesstimated jobs were added to the monthly count." I suspect it's safe to assume that you were warning your readers not to get too excited about previous reports as well -- per Richard who vouches for your honesty which I take as a credible reflection of your fairness and balance. BTW, the previous two reports were revised down. The ISM employment component fell from 57 to 50. And the Monster.com online Employment Index shows July as first decline since December though overall demand for workers was still high. My own guess: people know if they are employed or not. Posted by: Crud at August 7, 2004 01:10 AMThe unemployment rate is currently 5.5 percent... what was the unemployment rate in Jaunary 2001, the month that George W. Bush took office? Posted by: Lynn at August 10, 2004 01:19 PMI've posted many similar stories at my Reality Hammer blog. My main criticism of the payroll survey is that it asks employers who is working for them on their payroll. It does not seek to determine the total number of people working for/at that company. Take this scenario: a large company "fires" 10,000 people and re-hires them as 1099 contractors. *cough*Microsoft*cough* According to liberals and the payroll survey, 10,000 jobs were "lost" and none regained, 10,000 more people are "without jobs". The real story, as you would get from the population survey, is that there was no net change in employment. That's the truth, and that's what we should be focusing on. Posted by: Brett Kottmann at August 23, 2004 04:40 PMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||