Bush declared the economy solid and strong because of tax cuts his administration pushed through Congress. He rattled off a series of economic indicators, including the nation's 4.8 percent jobless rate in July and 4 percent annual economic growth rate through the first half of the year.
But House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi took issue with Bush's upbeat comments on the economy, saying, "President Bush may think the economy is moving forward, but many hard working Americans are stuck living paycheck to paycheck.
"Under President Bush and the Republican Congress, the economic situation for too many Americans is going in the wrong direction," said the California Democrat. Since Bush took office, she said, "real median family income has dropped by $1,700 while families are paying $3,200 more in household costs."
only 37 percent of Americans support Bush's handling of the economy, according to AP-Ipsos polling in early August.
Bush did not mention that the July unemployment rate had inched up from 4.6 percent in June, reflecting a slowdown in job creation that reflects weaker economic growth. And while the gross domestic product expanded at an annual rate of 5.6 percent in the first quarter, it slowed to just 2.5 percent in the April-June quarter.
While such claims may be true, it is a fact that the Clinton administration revamped the missions of the FBI and CIA following the fall of the Soviet Union, directing large segments of our national intelligence apparatus toward conducting commercial espionage.
In short, President Clinton assigned the CIA, NSA and FBI to help U.S. corporations win foreign contracts. Clinton diverted our intelligence and law enforcement agencies to "commercial" espionage when he classified some economic programs to be of national security. www.papillonsartpalace.com...
The problem is that Bush hatred does not explain away the healthy economy, great job growth and the spread of success overall.
As stated before, you can point out individual cases of desperation and poverty, looking at the entire economy finds no merit in your arguments at all.
Every time anyone on here gives actual numbers that have been verified, the "negativites" emerge with their crys of "Smoke Screen" or "Bogus" information.
*Long-term unemployment at the highest levels ever. FACT.
*More educated and skilled unemployed than ever before. FACT.
*Minimum wage insufficient to meet the cost of living. FACT.
*Healthcare costs through the roof, far outpacing inflation and wage increases. FACT.
*Food prices outpacing inflation, routinely by double digits. FACT.
*Real-estate prices grossly inflated. (maybe this more opinion...)
*More part-time positions without benefits, compared to full-time with benefits. FACT.
Consumer prices were up 0.7 percent in January, after dropping by 0.1 percent in December and falling 0.7 percent in November, the Labor Department reported. Excluding food and energy, the so-called core index was up 0.2 percent last month, after a 0.1 percent increase in December and 0.2 percent rise in November.
TOP 10 JOBS LOST (2001Q1 to 2003Q4)
Employment Sector Total Job Losses Wage Per Job
Durable Manufacturing -144,289 $56,511.79
Administration & Support Services -36,043 $30,940.81
Non-durable Manufacturing -29,044 $45,753.03
Retail Trade -28,316 $23,326.85
Professional, Scientific & Tech. -24,730 $64,759.52
Accommodation & Food -18,594 $12,596.83
Construction -11,160 $43,804.69
Wholesale Trade -10,586 $54,738.89
Transportation & Warehousing -7,102 $42,388.41
Real Estate, Rental & Leasing -4,081 $33,136.01
Compared to the wages of the jobs lost in 2001-2003, wages of those employment
sectors forecast to add jobs is somewhat lower. The top 10 sectors expected to add
over 150,000 jobs through 2006. These new jobs will have an average annual wage
of $39,400, considerably lower than the average wage of those jobs lost by the top
10 sectors to lose jobs between 2001 and 2003.
TOP 10 JOBS GAINED (2004Q1o 2006Q4)
Employment Sector Total Job Gains Wage Per Job
Professional, Scientific & Tech. 27,900 $64,759.52
Health Care & Social Assistance. 22,560 $38,484.63
Administration & Support Services 21,919 $30,940.81
Accommodation & Food 16,632 $12,596.83
Wholesale Trade 13,850 $54,738.89
Transportation & Warehousing 13,000 $42,388.41
Construction 11,219 $43,804.69
Retail Trade 11,000 $23,326.85
Other Services 6,700 $24,648.59
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 5,342 $24,832.81
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services, paying just under $65,200 annually,
lost almost 25,000 jobs from the beginning of 2001 through end of 2003. This sector
is expected to gain more jobs through 2006 than it previously lost. The Professional,
Scientific, and Technical sector is part of the professional and business services
NAICS super-sector, encompassing accounting, architectural, computer systems
design, management consulting, scientific research and development and
advertising. The Ann Arbor, Saginaw, and Kalamazoo, high tech sectors will
contribute significantly to this growth, particularly in the dynamic life sciences fields.
Employment growth in Administration and Support services is expected to far
outreach total U.S. employment growth over the next two years. Job gains are
expected to tally more than 21,000 jobs through 2006 and average wages in
Administration and Support services are $30,900 annually per job. Another big job
gainer with relatively low wages is the Accommodation and Food Services sector.
Wages in this sector, however, are the lowest of the top 10 employment gainers,
with an average wage of slightly under $13,000 annually per job. Retail trade,
$23,000 per job, also accounts for a significant fraction of the gains.
The downturn was remarkably broad-based by historical standards, with similar
declines across the US. The jobs recovery will also be broad-based, though the
Southern states of Florida and Georgia, and the Mountain states of Nevada and
Arizona will lead the nation. The industrial Midwestern states, which have lost
manufacturing jobs since 2000, will see the smallest gains. While 40 of 50 states will
regain their pre-recession peak levels of employment by the end of 2005, Michigan
This report has highlighted the National wage gap of 18% and the Michigan wage
gap of over 15% between jobs lost and jobs gained in this business cycle. In the
coming years, global competition will continue to exert wage pressures on American
workers. While the economy is expected to continue growth, it will continue to
transition away from the older manufacturing economy to one of a new, new
economy. Intangibles will become of greater and greater importance in the
composition of our output of goods and services. In this century, therefore, the
education and training of the workforce in efforts to secure jobs and compete
globally becomes of paramount importance. Increasing skill levels will lead directly to
higher productivity and thence to higher wages.
The foundation of US economic growth is the ability of its metro area economies to
generate an environment in which business and labor can productively provide
services and goods to the nation and the world. Investment in training, education,
and infrastructure will better enable us to increase productivity, wage levels, and
long term growth, as well as provide jobs during this significant transition.