Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2012
- Messages
- 4,809
- Reaction score
- 4,343
Brookings: Without government job cuts, unemployment would be at 7.1 percent:
"Without those job losses, the unemployment rate would be more than a full percentage point lower:
Had the percentage of people working for government held at the 2001-2007 average of 9.7 percent, about 1.7 million more Americans would have been employed in June and the jobless rate would have been 7.1 percent rather than 8.2 percent, according to economists Michael Greenstone and Adam Looney of the Hamilton Project at the Brookings Institution in Washington."
"Government employment is at historic lows, largely due to draconian budget cuts at the state and local levels throughout the recession. The sector has now lost more jobs than any other major industry over the past three years, Bloomberg Government points out:"
View attachment 9607
Of course many on the right would have you believe that the size of government has increased under Obama. The federal government workforce that has not been downsized, has faced a pay freeze for 3 years.
Here is one of our sitting Senator's who goes on a national talk show armed with nonsense, and is called out by the Nobel prize winning economist on his error:
"Sen. Rand Paul believes that the size of the U.S. government has increased under President Obama. So when Paul Krugman explained on ABC’s “This Week” that there have been significant cuts to government jobs under Obama, in fact more cuts than any other sector in the past three years, Paul was just incredulous."
“The thing I don’t understand is that you’re arguing that the government sector is struggling,” Paul said. “Are you arguing that there are fewer government employees under Obama than there were under Bush?”
“Of course. That’s a fact. That’s a tremendous fact,” Krugman replied.
“No, the size of growth of government is enormous under President Obama,” Paul returned.
"Without those job losses, the unemployment rate would be more than a full percentage point lower:
Had the percentage of people working for government held at the 2001-2007 average of 9.7 percent, about 1.7 million more Americans would have been employed in June and the jobless rate would have been 7.1 percent rather than 8.2 percent, according to economists Michael Greenstone and Adam Looney of the Hamilton Project at the Brookings Institution in Washington."
"Government employment is at historic lows, largely due to draconian budget cuts at the state and local levels throughout the recession. The sector has now lost more jobs than any other major industry over the past three years, Bloomberg Government points out:"
View attachment 9607
Of course many on the right would have you believe that the size of government has increased under Obama. The federal government workforce that has not been downsized, has faced a pay freeze for 3 years.
Here is one of our sitting Senator's who goes on a national talk show armed with nonsense, and is called out by the Nobel prize winning economist on his error:
"Sen. Rand Paul believes that the size of the U.S. government has increased under President Obama. So when Paul Krugman explained on ABC’s “This Week” that there have been significant cuts to government jobs under Obama, in fact more cuts than any other sector in the past three years, Paul was just incredulous."
“The thing I don’t understand is that you’re arguing that the government sector is struggling,” Paul said. “Are you arguing that there are fewer government employees under Obama than there were under Bush?”
“Of course. That’s a fact. That’s a tremendous fact,” Krugman replied.
“No, the size of growth of government is enormous under President Obama,” Paul returned.