Is this graph accurate?

Yes, because it shows private sector job growth. It does not include public sector job changes, as the States have been cutting government jobs like a farmer reaping wheat with a scythe.

I have no idea why Obama’s ads are not focusing on his economic achievements.
Sure, he has not exactly created a boom, but he stopped the massive jobloss and created a constant growth.

Well, that was just a random thing that popped up on FB @ragingloli.

Thanks @zenvelo. So what is “Private sector?”

“Private Sector” jobs are those hired by businesses. Public sector jobs are those employed by government agencies. Businesses have hired tons of people, but not as fast as government has laid them off, so the unemployment rate has stayed high.

Thanks. Yeah, I’m a teacher…in a Jail/Prison! I’ve survived two cuts by the skin of my teeth (....that was a weird metaphor, wasn’t it! :). But this past July I got a hefty raise because I went through the hoops to become re-certified to teach. I’ve been very lucky.

There is an interesting graph that shows how many people are in the workforce. The number has been and continues to decline. If we are creating jobs, no one is getting. Workforce participation is at the lowest point since the 70s. Obama has no economic achievements, that’s why he doesn’t tout them. They are all bleak when held up to the light of day.

“Number of people not in the workforce” doesn’t seem like a fair yardstick to use. Unemployment statistics don’t include children or the elderly, while (I’m guessing) the graph you linked, @Jaxk, does. Considering the baby boomers are reaching retirement age and population is always growing exponentially, it doesn’t surprise me that that figure is declining. Please correct me if I’m wrong though.

@zenvelo Ummm… that graph most definitely does include the public sector jobs. The private sector gains have outweighed the public sector losses.

@Jaxk I think saving our economy from complete economic collapse thanks to the failed principles of trickle down economics and cutting taxes and regulations… is a pretty solid accomplishment…. Especially in the face of a global financial crisis and a Republican caucus determined to fight him on even the most trivial of issues.

@Jaxk has championed the (relatively miniscule) economic recovery after the Bush tax cuts. By the same exact rubric, Obama’s recovery deserves even more praise.

And of course Bush didn’t have to contend with the worst financial crisis since the great depression—and he added public sector jobs, rather than cut them.

Jaxk is, as usual, just being dishonest.

@Qingu Yah, anymore I only respond to his posts so other people know how much sh*t he’s full of.

Your graph looks much the same as the Bureau of Labor’s graph of monthly change in total non-farm jobs.

@tedd The graph is titled Private Sector Monthly Change, thousands

@tedd No. It’s specifically labeled “Private sector.” Well, maybe it could be looked at as an indication that government is backing off….like the Republicans want.

@Mariah

Here is the Department of Labor graph on workforce participation rate. It measures the percentage of working age people in the the workforce and it is dropping at an alarming rate. You are right in that we have more retirees but that rate has accelerated because the older generation is not finding jobs and are retiring or dropping out of the workforce, prematurely. This lower participation rate is the primary reason for the unemployment rate being as low as it is. If you can call 8.3% low.

It dropped during your fabled “Bush recovery” too, Jaxk. And never recovered.

What’s your point.

@Jaxk Interesting…I sorted it from 1968 to 2012 (if you go lower than ‘68 it doesn’t show 2012.) Try it…tell me what you think. These last few years certainly aren’t the lowest we’ve ever seen. Look at 1949 to 1973, for example.

@Dutchess_III, that’s the period when women weren’t in the labor force much.

Hm. I sorted from 1948. It really looks like a baby boomer thing to me.

@Dutchess_III

If you recall, there was a change in the workforce between 1960 and 1990. It was call the sexual revolution. Women entered the workforce in large numbers which expanded it considerably. I always hate to agree with @Qingu but this is a rare instance where he has a point.

I agree with his point, too.