Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.
Do you have one?
Published on September 29, 2004 By COL Gene In Politics
President Bush tells us the economy has created almost 1.5 million jobs since August 2003. That means we are only about 1 million below the number when he took office. What the president does not tell the American people is that over the past 3 3/4 years since he took office, about 5 million new workers have tried to enter the job market. For us to remain just even, the economy must create about 120,000 new jobs each month to keep up with our population growth. The economic policies of George W. have not produced the 6 million jobs we needed to stay even.

Mr. Bush is telling us the unemployemnt rate is down to 5.4% which is about where it was in the 1990's. What President Bush is not telling the American People is that during the economic downturn of the past four years, workers have been unemployed so long, that many are no longer counted as unemployed even though they are not working. When you include the long term unemployed, the REAL unemployemt rate is above 7%.

President Bush also does not address the quality of the 1.5 million jobs he claims were created since August 2003. The truth is many of these jobs do not pay a living wage and have few if any benefits. Thus, the real impact on the jobs picture that is faced by American Workers and the picture painted by George W. are as different as night and day! The impact on workers in America has never been worse since Herbert Hoover at the time of Great Depression. Every day Lou Dobbs provides an update on the lost jobs to other countries. He has a list of over 1,000 companies that are exporting American jobs. President Bush has done nothing to stem this loss and his Secretary of Commerce has said it is " good for America to export American jobs". George Bush can pass tax cuts to the wealthy that is being paid foy by adding to the national debt but he can not work with congress to level the playing field for American workers. Add to all this that about 5 million workers, that still have jobs, have lost their health benefits since George W. became President and the JOBS PICTURE IS COMPLTET. Great work, Mr. President!

Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Sep 29, 2004
I had to be out of work for a year due to major neurological problems and surgery. It was incredibly hard to get back into the job market once I recovered, and I'm making only about half of what I was making before. I'm not complaining too hard about the pay cut, though, because I at least HAVE a job, and so many don't. Good post, you get *insightful* from me.
on Sep 29, 2004
A very insightful article! It's amazing the things people can say with their eyes shut, isn't it?
on Sep 29, 2004
so, do you have a job? If no, what are your qualifications? Could you be just trying to blame someone else?

on Sep 29, 2004
"Discouraged Workers" (people without a job but who are not actively seeking one) have never been counted as unemployed. They weren't in the 1990s, they aren't now. Unless you have some evidence that there are significantly more discouraged workers now than then, your argument doesn't hold any water.

The average salary of new jobs is higher than the national average. Try looking around at factcheck.org.

What specifically should be done to stop outsourcing? I have an idea; let's cut the payroll tax.
on Sep 29, 2004
I am retired after a successful career
on Sep 29, 2004
reply to Madine:

The proof is the fact five million workers have entered the job maket with a net loss of 1 million jobs since Jan 2001. There is no way the unemployment rate can be the same as in 2001 with a shortfall of six million jobs. Next, I assune what you mean by payroll tax is Soicial Security tax paid by employers. That sounds like a Bush solution - help the Social Security System to fail sooner! We need to impose tax penalities on companies who move American jobs overseas. We need to provide tax credits to companies that create jobs for Americans and level the playing field in our trade policy. For example, we should not allow China to set the currency exchange rates that make it impossible to sell our goods in China and help eliminate jobs in America. Bush needs to employ the same brain trust the created the tax cuts for his wealthy supporters to stem the flow of American Jobs. That has not happened to date!
on Sep 29, 2004



Reply #6 By: COL Gene - 9/29/2004 1:17:19 PM
reply to Madine:

The proof is the fact five million workers have entered the job maket with a net loss of 1 million jobs since Jan 2001. There is no way the unemployment rate can be the same as in 2001 with a shortfall of six million jobs. Next, I assune what you mean by payroll tax is Soicial Security tax paid by employers. That sounds like a Bush solution - help the Social Security System to fail sooner! We need to impose tax penalities on companies who move American jobs overseas.


I hate to say this but, as to jobs going overseas? *Whose* jobs were they in the first place? Did they belong to "America"? NO! They belonged to the employer, NOT the employee! And as such can do with them as they wish!


For example, we should not allow China to set the currency exchange rates


If you stop China from setting currency rates, then you *must* stop the rest of the world from doing the same thing.

on Sep 29, 2004
I wish someone would employ Col Gene and keep him too busy to post these biased and factually incorrect rants
on Sep 29, 2004
Reply to terptan 1980

Please show what information is not correct? The problem with so many is when facts do agree with their position, they try and say the facts are not true. Bush is a past master at this.
on Sep 29, 2004

I dunno...from my perspective it looks like col's facts aren't as inaccurate as you might think.


In 20 years in the workforce, I have worked in foodservice, retail, manufacturing, mining, and home health care. I have solid references, but I'm not where the work is.


The problem we have right now is, many conservatives are so shortsighted that they honestly believe that everyone who's out of work is where they are because they are slackers (an accusation I've never had levelled against me, mind you), and therefore, there should be no attempt to put these people to work; meanwhile, many liberals think the problems can be solved by throwing more money at them. I'm inclined to think that neither is right.

on Sep 29, 2004
Gideon MacLeich

You need to move up to Reno, here in Northern Nevada. The Unemployments rate is at 3.2% and I could personnely direct you to three good jobs. One of them have a Libratarian Boss. I think you would fit in good.
on Sep 29, 2004
Reply to drmiler

Yes the jobs do belong to the companies. We need to make sure our tax laws encourage the companies to keep the jobs in the US. The market sets the exchange rates except for China that sets its rates so low we can not sell our products in China while making their products cheep in America. That is how we are getting to a 600 Billion trade imbalance. That can not be allowed to continue without harmiing our economy!
on Sep 29, 2004

Reply #12 By: COL Gene - 9/29/2004 3:34:47 PM
Reply to drmiler

Yes the jobs do belong to the companies. We need to make sure our tax laws encourage the companies to keep the jobs in the US. The market sets the exchange rates except for China that sets its rates so low we can not sell our products in China while making their products cheep in America. That is how we are getting to a 600 Billion trade imbalance. That can not be allowed to continue without harmiing our economy


We have a trade deficet because *America* won't let a lot of China's goods into the country and so China responds in kind. As far as setting rates what are you reffering to as"the market" setting the rates?
on Sep 29, 2004
drmiler:

We have a trade deficet because *America* won't let a lot of China's goods into the country and so China responds in kind. As far as setting rates what are you reffering to as"the market" setting the rates?


China (and other countries) have used their currency reserves (extra money) to prop up the value of the US dollar to keep their own goods cheap and to make manufacturing attractive, i.e., the labour costs low. Since the US is the dominant consumer economy, it suffers a trade deficit (or current accounts deficit) because its artificially inflated dollar allows the import of cheap foreign goods at the expense of domestically produced ones. The movement of manufacturing overseas accelerates this effect since China's (and others') manipulation of the currency market doesn't allow their currency to gain in value as companies move their production to their countries, boosting their economies.

Naturally, the IMF and the US government are none too happy about this ...
on Sep 29, 2004

Reply #14 By: sunwukong - 9/29/2004 4:07:13 PM
drmiler:

We have a trade deficet because *America* won't let a lot of China's goods into the country


Lets start with, I dunno *Norinco's* products? NONE of which are allowed to be shipped into the US!
2 Pages1 2