The Bureau of Labor Statistics announced this morning that the unemployment rate jumped to 9.8 percent last month. As you can see from the chart, the White House claimed that if we enacted the so-called stimulus, the unemployment rate today would be about 7 percent.
It’s never wise to over-interpret the meaning on a single month’s data, and it’s also a mistake to credit or blame any one policy for the economy’s performance, but it certainly does seem that the combination of bigger government and more intervention is not a recipe for growth.
Maybe the President should reverse course and try free markets and smaller government. Here’s a helpful six-minute tutorial.
[…] If jobs are the yardstick, Obama doesn’t get a passing grade. Look at these two charts: https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/12/29/obamanomics-vs-reaganomics/ and https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/hows-that-stimulus-working-mr-president/. […]
[…] has been going on for a while and today’s new data is another good example. As this chart indicates, the White House promised […]
[…] has been going on for a while and today’s new data is another good […]
[…] has been going on for a while and today’s new data is another good […]
[…] has been going on for a while, and today’s new data provide another good […]
[…] has been going on for a while and today’s new data is another good […]
[…] there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
Please do you have an update on this graph, Dan?
[…] there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] chart below shows the administration’s prediction of what would happen to unemployment if the so-called stimulus was enacted. The dots represent the actual unemployment […]
[…] this chart shows the Administration’s prediction of what would happen to unemployment if the so-called stimulus was enacted. The dots represent the actual unemployment […]
[…] this chart shows the Administration’s prediction of what would happen to unemployment if the so-called stimulus was enacted. The dots represent the actual unemployment […]
[…] this chart shows the Administration’s prediction of what would happen to unemployment if the so-called stimulus was enacted. The dots represent the actual unemployment […]
[…] there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] Obama wanted to spend about $1 trillion on a failed “stimulus,” did the Washington Post write that he wanted to “bloat” or “explode” the budget? I […]
[…] continued the spending spree, adding more TARP bailouts, and then giving us the boondoggles of a fake stimulus and government-run […]
[…] continued the spending spree, adding more TARP bailouts, and then giving us the boondoggles of a fake stimulus and government-run […]
[…] continued the spending spree, adding more TARP bailouts, and then giving us the boondoggles of a fake stimulus and government-run […]
[…] continued the spending spree, adding more TARP bailouts, and then giving us the boondoggles of a fake stimulus and government-run […]
[…] I certainly hope the White House is correct about faster growth and more job creation, but they've been radically wrong for the past two years and it might not be wise to rely on optimistic […]
[…] and there's good news and bad news. The good news is that there's no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] course. There may not be any major initiatives to expand thee burden of government, love thee failed stimulus or thee budget busting government-run healthcare scheme, but certainly does not seem love there are […]
[…] I certainly hope the White House is correct about faster growth and more job creation, but they’ve been radically wrong for the past two years and it might not be wise to rely on optimistic […]
[…] there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] I certainly hope the White House is correct about faster growth and more job creation, but they’ve been radically wrong for the past two years and it might not be wise to rely on optimistic […]
[…] good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] good news and bad news. The good news is that there’s no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big […]
[…] course. There may not be any major initiatives to expand the burden of government, like the failed stimulus or the budget busting government-run healthcare scheme, but it certainly does not seem like there […]
[…] course. There may not be any major initiatives to expand the burden of government, like the failed stimulus or the budget busting government-run healthcare scheme, but it certainly does not seem like there […]
[…] course. There may not be any major initiatives to expand the burden of government, like the failed stimulus or the budget busting government-run healthcare scheme, but it certainly does not seem like there […]
[…] course. There may not be any major initiatives to expand the burden of government, like the failed stimulus or the budget busting government-run healthcare scheme, but it certainly does not seem like there […]
[…] course. There may not be any major initiatives to expand the burden of government, like the failed stimulus or the budget busting government-run healthcare scheme, but it certainly does not seem like there […]
[…] The employment chart below provides an equally stark comparison. If anything, this second chart is even more damning since employment has not bounced back from the trough. But that shouldn't be too surprising. Why create jobs when government is subsidizing unemployment and penalizing production? And we already know the so-called stimulus has been a flop. […]
[…] The employment chart below provides an equally stark comparison. If anything, this second chart is even more damning since employment has not bounced back from the trough. But that shouldn’t be too surprising. Why create jobs when government is subsidizing unemployment and penalizing production? And we already know the so-called stimulus has been a flop. […]
[…] The employment chart below provides an equally stark comparison. If anything, this second chart is even more damning since employment has not bounced back from the trough. But that shouldn’t be too surprising. Why create jobs when government is subsidizing unemployment and penalizing production? And we already know the so-called stimulus has been a flop. […]
[…] The employment chart below provides an equally stark comparison. If anything, this second chart is even more damning since employment has not bounced back from the trough. But that shouldn’t be too surprising. Why create jobs when government is subsidizing unemployment and penalizing production? And we already know the so-called stimulus has been a flop. […]
[…] The employment chart below provides an equally stark comparison. If anything, this second chart is even more damning since employment has not bounced back from the trough. But that shouldn’t be too surprising. Why create jobs when government is subsidizing unemployment and penalizing production? And we already know the so-called stimulus has been a flop. […]
[…] The employment chart below provides an equally stark comparison. If anything, this second chart is even more damning since employment has not bounced back from the trough. But that shouldn’t be too surprising. Why create jobs when government is subsidizing unemployment and penalizing production? And we already know the so-called stimulus has been a flop. […]
[…] The employment chart below provides an equally stark comparison. If anything, this second chart is even more damning since employment has not bounced back from the trough. But that shouldn’t be too surprising. Why create jobs when government is subsidizing unemployment and penalizing production? And we already know the so-called stimulus has been a flop. […]
[…] The employment chart below provides an equally stark comparison. If anything, this second chart is even more damning since employment has not bounced back from the trough. But that shouldn’t be too surprising. Why create jobs when government is subsidizing unemployment and penalizing production? And we already know the so-called stimulus has been a flop. […]
[…] an “investment.” But Senator Durbin of Illinois committed a gaffe and admitted this is just a repeat of the failed stimulus. “It’s part of a stimulus. but we’re sensitive to the deficit,” Durbin said on “Fox News […]
[…] But Senator Durbin of Illinois committed a gaffe and admitted this is just a repeat of the failed stimulus. “It’s part of a stimulus. but we’re sensitive to the deficit,” Durbin said […]
[…] But Senator Durbin of Illinois committed a gaffe and admitted this is just a repeat of the failed stimulus. “It’s part of a stimulus. but we’re sensitive to the deficit,” Durbin said […]
[…] found that reducing spending promotes faster economic growth. In other words, Obama did exactly the wrong thing with his so-called stimulus. The U.S. economy would have enjoyed much better performance if the burden of spending had been […]
[…] found that reducing spending promotes faster economic growth. In other words, Obama did exactly the wrong thing with his so-called stimulus. The U.S. economy would have enjoyed much better performance if the burden of spending had been […]
[…] found that reducing spending promotes faster economic growth. In other words, Obama did exactly the wrong thing with his so-called stimulus. The U.S. economy would have enjoyed much better performance if the burden of spending had been […]
[…] found that reducing spending promotes faster economic growth. In other words, Obama did exactly the wrong thing with his so-called stimulus. The U.S. economy would have enjoyed much better performance if the burden of spending had been […]
[…] From Dan Mitchell. […]
I strayed from my point a bit, but the tl;dr version is:
Out of all the millions currently unemployed there’s nobody with the get-up-and-go to create a new business, and not only take themselves off the unemployment line, but absorb a large portion of all that available labour too?
I don’t think so Tim.
A more likely scenario is that excessive unemployment benefits, minimum wage laws, and onerous regulation on anyone who so much as thinks about hanging out a shingle is chilling productive behaviour, at a devastating cost to the population and economy as a whole.
I think I’m personally a good example of why government over-regulation has a dampening effect on economic growth and employment.
I don’t mind working for someone else as an employee, but I’ve been self-employed on more than one occasion in the past. I’ve found it convenient to switch between the two depending on my motivation level, opportunities, and chosen lifestyle at any particular time.
So if the unemployment rate was so high that I couldn’t find a job, I’d simply employ myself in response. I’d create my own opportunity. Though admittedly it would have to get pretty damn high for me to personally have a problem finding employment. I’m an employer’s wet dream in terms of personal and professional attitude. And that’s not immodesty – I actually WANT to make my boss money, (and get a handsome percentage of it).
But I can tell you from experience that government BS makes me less likely to take on the headaches of running a business myself – let alone a big one that employs other people and provides them additional opportunities. The latest maternity leave garbage in Australia is just another nail in that coffin, (google that if you can stand the nausea).
I’m a creative entrepreneur, and an able, honest businessman. I love business – a lot, but I’ve got an extreme aversion to bureaucratic nonsense. Fortunately I’ve been able to sic my wife onto them in the past. She’s positively awesome at hammering government idiots with calls and other unwanted work until they beg for mercy. Watching her deal with them is actually quite entertaining.
But at the end of the day, I’m a simple guy with inexpensive tastes, so opting-out of such bald-faced exploitation and life-wasting problems is all too easy.
I remember in school how we were taught to “get a job”, as if that was the be-all-and-end-all of adult life, and I don’t recall anyone ever mentioning starting your own business. Maybe your average teacher just doesn’t know, or it’s some kind of hand-me-down post-depression attitude, (considering the emphasis on job security, etc.) But whatever the case, I had to learn about that option myself.
The whole damn system seems geared to funnel everyone into an average wage job. As soon as you stray outside that little box you can expect unwarranted resistance, disincentives, and in many cases outright pain – the progressive tax system being just one example.
But where are all these jobs supposed to come from if we’re teaching kids to just “get a job” and keep their heads down?
There’s are of course difficulties in starting your own business that aren’t related to government, and I have no problem with those. But that’s a far cry from having your head shot off by an army of bureaucratic naysayers the second you upset the status quo. And that army just seems to get bigger every day.
I think it’s worse than that actually. With exploitive across-the-board taxes, bigger more intrusive government, and an increasingly numerous and comfortable non-working population, earning an average wage and keeping your nose clean isn’t the refuge from intrusion it used to be. In many ways you’re better off on Social Security.
This is what worries me the the most. Being an average law-abiding, taxpaying citizen used to be the path of least resistance, and cause for personal pride – not just the “right thing to do”. Now people are law-abiding more out of habit and social expectation than any actual benefit. When they realise en masse that, not only is there no net benefit, but doing the “right thing” is an invitation to a royal screwing by those who don’t, then we’ve got a big problem. And a problem fundamental to civil society as a whole.
Perhaps that’s a good thing in the sense of long-term political change.
At any rate, at the moment I can tell you there’s ample disincentive preventing me from going out there and banging my head against the wall.
I think your chart is missing some valuable context. I’ve created my own version with key dates highlighted. (I got my data on spending from ProPublica.)