Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests 300,000 new jobs last month..

After a few months of 100,000 new jobs, followed by a month of no new jobs, the last month recorded 300,000 new jobs. This exceeded expectations and basically met the forecast a month ago...basically, it was a month late. Dems will have to revise there jobs lost figure...they still are saying 3 million. It was actually 2.5 million 6 months ago, had dropped to 2.2 million by Feb and now should be 1.9 million.

Hmmm..6 months to election at 300,000+ jobs a month = about 1.9 million new jobs. Wouldn't that be interesting?

Also, new unemployment claims hit lowest point since 2000 and unemployment rate down to 5.6% support the claim that the anticipated job recovery is comming..

Another interesting fact I recently learned (I'll admit this was from Bill O'Rielly but he had the qoutes)...Kerry's own economic adviser admitted that outsourcing was a relatively minor contributing factor to US job loss (despite the fact that Kerry is making this the corerstone of his anti Bush economic policy rally cry). Furthermore in 2002, outsourcing in US was eclipsed by "insourcing"...jobs brought to US by other countries by a record 47 billion dollars.

Good news for the economy = bad news for Kerry..a "win - win" senerio for all of us...well, except Kerry.

Sounds great...

My mom just lost her insurance advising job and has been searching for one for a month now, hopefully the insurance companies will rebound as well. Thanks for the good news .

I don't want 300,000 jobs. I just want one!

I'll believe the job market is recovering as soon as I'm employed..

Good News?!
What these bums don't tell you is the new jobs created are the $8 per hour ones, with no insurance, no pensions, no paid vacation or any other benefits to speak of.
There's a bunch of these type jobs (the "New" economy type) out there. Trouble is, how can one support a family on these slave wages?

I've contested some of this points before and I don't personally know the answer to my questions but I would like to know how "spun" are these numbers.
What are the quality of these jobs that are being created?
Do they pay a living wage or is it just minimum wage? If jobs that are being lost are being replenished with lower paying job then people are still losing ground.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that unemployment benefits run out after 6 months. In these figures do you still count if you remain unemployed when your benefits run out?
What's been insourced? I think they threw that number out to see if it would stick.

God, this is typical. Job creation under this administration is equated to an influx of janitor and fast-food positions, while job loss is put in the light of outsourcing of 6-figure, white-collar jobs to India.


The job growth under Clinton was great; it had little to NOTHING to do with his policies, though. It was more an indication of the economic boom (bubble) that was going on.

Job loss under Bush, Jr. is representative of the fallout from 9/11, dot-com bust, the telecom fallouts, etc.; the current gain or loss has little to do with his policies, but (hopefully ) more from the stabilization and slow growth of businesses that now need growth over cost-cutting to facilitate profit margins...

The health of the economy and job gain/loss is a political double-edged sword and one with NEITHER party wields. The perceptions of the Democratic and Republican parties are VERY much influenced by the public's perception of growth/shrinkage of it.

Although it invariably is made into a political issue, I just don't see it as being something that would sway my vote one way or the other.

At the same time, high-paying outsourced jobs do hit the US tax base somewhat. If it's middle and upper-class jobs that are being moved, that really puts a kink in the tax base IF the person can't find a job of equal or higher pay.

This becomes a concern if outsourcing takes a far more aggressive stance in US business practice in a stagnant economy, as it makes it harder for jobs to come by.

There was a lot of crying wolf on outsourcing when the media first latched onto it; I must say I was one of the ones that hollered against it rather loudly, too (due to misperceptions and ignorance on my part). Now that I'm beginning to understand it better, it's nowhere near as bad as Kerry and the media is making it sound.

I do strongly agree that the US government needs to keep a careful eye on this practice, though: I don't want regulation or oversight, but it needs to be made PERFECTLY clear to US-based businesses that there's a difference between taking advantage of the cost savings of this practice and flagrantly abusing it to the detriment of US workers and our economy as a whole...