“It’s very clear that private-sector jobs are doing just fine.”
Sound familiar? These words are not President Obama’s. They were spoken eight months ago by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. While pushing a Democratic proposal to spend another $35 billion we don’t have to help states hire more public workers, Reid declared: “It’s very clear that private-sector jobs have been doing just fine; it’s the public-sector jobs where we’ve lost huge numbers.” At last week’s news conference, Obama simply repeated the point Reid made last October.
Jared Bernstein, a former Obama economic adviser, said the president’s gaffe won’t do lasting damage “because that’s not the way he sees it.” But as Reid’s comment demonstrates, that is precisely how Obama and Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill see it. They’ve been saying for months that the private sector is doing fine and that the solution to our unemployment problems is to spend even more taxpayer money to hire more government workers.
Obama and Reid have it precisely backward: It’s the public sector that’s doing fine. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate for government workers last month was just 4.2 percent (up slightly from 3.9 percent a year ago). Compare that to private-sector industries such as construction (14.2 percent unemployment), leisure and hospitality services (9.7 percent), agriculture (9.5 percent), professional and business services (8.5 percent) and wholesale and retail trade (8.1 percent). As Andrew Biggs of the American Enterprise Institute points out, the public-sector unemployment rate “is the lowest of any industry or class of worker, even including the growing energy industry.” If the rest of Americans enjoyed the same unemployment rate as government workers, Obama would be cruising to re-election.
Meanwhile, the private sector continues to struggle under the weight of Obamacare, the spiraling national debt, the $46 billion in annual costs of the new regulations imposed by Obama and the looming threat of “taxmageddon” — when, come January, the private economy will get hit with hundreds of billions in higher taxes.
The result? In the first quarter of this year, private-sector gross domestic product grew by a meager 2.6 percent. That is certainly better than the pathetic 1.2 percent growth rate last year, but compared to previous recoveries, it is anemic.
Obama and Reid may think 2.6 percent private-sector GDP growth is “just fine,” but the 23 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed or have quit looking for work don’t share their complacency.
That is why Obama’s gaffe is so damaging to his prospects for re-election. It feeds a growing public perception — which is being actively cultivated by the Romney campaign — that when it comes to the economy, Obama is out of his depth and hostile to private business.
That perception was fed by Obama’s attacks on Bain Capital and their subsequent public repudiation by leading Democrats from Bill Clinton to Deval Patrick. The perception was further hardened in the public consciousness by Romney’s response, which highlighted Solyndra and Obama’s other failed “green energy” investments — ventures that left taxpayers on the hook for billions. That was soon followed by the Labor Department’s May jobs report showing rising unemployment — the sting of which had not yet subsided Friday when the president told Americans that the private sector is doing “fine.” All this helps Romney sell his narrative that Obama is “in over his head” and “is simply not up to the task of fixing our economy.”
How bad is all this for the president? Here’s how bad: Last week Mitt Romney accused President Obama of being “out of touch with the American people.” When a guy building a California vacation mansion with a car elevator for his wife’s two Cadillacs calls you “out of touch” — and no one laughs — you know you are in trouble.
Marc A. Thiessen, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, writes a weekly online column for The Post.



Harry Reid and BO and Nancy Pelosi are just as far out as Mutt Romney. I will take my chances with the Mutt.Not Nancy Pelosi, you wise guys…
The economy is not doing fine, The private sector for the most part has been doing fine, over 4 million jobs added in the last 27 months. Everything in this editorial is all economic factors. Nothing about how the private sector is doing.
4 million jobs may sound like a lot, but in fact this has been the most anemic jobs recovery since World War II. In fact all of the economic statistics cited in this article clearly support the argument that the economy still has not regained its footing. This administration does not seem to have any idea at all of what could and should be done to get the American economy to grow and produce jobs.
Yes, and you can thank the GOP dolts in congress for limiting stimulus that stemmed job losses with police, firefighters, and teachers, fight tooth and nail to prevent jobs legislation from passing, prevent meaningful reform to take place to reign in too big to fail banks that privatize their profits but socialize their risks, and demand austerity measures that continue to drag down economic growth and leave millions of people homeless, children without food… You can thank the GOP for this situation… They have been obstructions and disablers every step of the way.
How is taxing people into poverty to not receive any of the money you like to throw around help?
We the people cannot afford to pay for more public sector. We cannot afford to have three generations living off of one generation’s social security.
Public sector has been doing better than the private sector, but do to cuts they are starting to feel the pain the private secotr has been feeling for years. Many can say, welcome to the club.
How is it republicans fault?
Quite frankly, you don’t know what you are talking about. You are believing the crap you have been told by liars whining, and whining, and whining about “big gummint.” The TOTAL number of govt employees right now, and that includes all state and municipal and federal govt employees, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL SOURCES and not the liars on Faux News or in some special interest PAC or SuperPAC that has an agenda they are using you to push out their lie with…the TOTAL number of govt employees is just about the SAME as it was in the 1960’s…
I’m not even interested in arguing about this when such a BASIC, PROVABLE FACT is ignored.
The right LIES about this ALL THE TIME, and you have fallen for the lie hook, line and sinker…
well maybe we had too many government employees in the 60’s.
I’m having difficulty finding statistics that back your claim. Do you have a source that I can get to in order to enlighten myself? I can easily obtain the Federal worker numbers, but state and municipal worker numbers pose a bigger challenge without going to each and every state.
These will provide some resources, thoughtful analysis, and charts from official sources.
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/04/ideology-and-facts-in-the-economic-policy-debate.html
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H8axT0gq-Os/T5kblbQKdsI/AAAAAAAAAVY/0tT5od-H-rw/s1600/042512krugman4-blog480.jpg
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/04/the-change-in-public-sector-employment-during-the-recovery-is-a-drag.html
I appreciate the readings, and have gone through them and now understand why you feel the way you do. These facts are all presented on a blog that is supported by people in the company of Paul Krugman. I could hardly call this an unbiased “official source”. Not to diminish your sources, but I consider an “official source as any state and federal government site that provides these employment statistics, which they do. If one flounders through the writings of this blog, it is readily apparent it is far from “official” and “unbiased”. One has to be careful on the source of information before a conclusion can be drawn about anything political in nature in this country.
I agree in so far as needing to be careful what one is using as source material. A very middle of the road blogger convinced me at one time to take seriously many of the things David Frum says or writes, the former Bush speech writer who coined the term “axis of evil…” Being able to look at data objectively is key. Shooting the messenger because you don’t like the message, or because they have been painted with a broad, partisan brush by their opponents, is not being objective.
That said, take Krugman’s or any academic’s word with a grain of salt. I don’t simply “appeal to authority” in using Krugman as a reliable, knowledgable source. Besides the fact that his work on international ecoonomics won him a Nobel, his use of the official sources of information and data provides official source material that I can judge for myself. Which I do. Mark Thoma uses that data, all of the other economists that I have been reading use it or similar data: Nouriel Roubini, Joseph Stiglitz (another Nobel winner), Robert Reich, Jareb Bernstein, Mike Konczal, Brad Delong. Is there a bias in how these economists talk about the economy… probably. The question is is it fact based, empirically driven analysis of established data sets, or is it wishful thinking without the historical data supporting the assertions? More than one of the charts I’ve presented from official sources shows, for instance, huge tax cuts to the wealthy did not spur job growth, a favorite misleading meme by people on the right looking to give the wealthy large tax cuts. What the data shows is, large tax cuts enrich the wealthy with minimal to no job growth.
And I agree, as I stated to cheesecake here somewhere, when I come across the direct Bureau of Labor statistics, or GAO, or CBO data which I have heard quoted regarding comparing the size of government then and now, I will post it… It sounds as though you have waded through govt reports and statistics before and know the challenge…
I stand by what I said above. My anger at the misuse of information in this debate drives my sharp delivery. Misinformation does no one any good, and that is what the GOP thrives on these days, in campaigning, in talking about the environment, in talking about economics. The data I’ve posted to you and cheesecake is a sound, legitimate part of the picture supporting my opinions, and derives from published reports from the official sources: CBO, GAO, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Fed. When I find the direct quote that this background supports, I’ll share it.
Here is an interesting pdf from the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1980:
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1981/10/art3full.pdf
Most of the growth in government jobs is from teachers and staff related to education.
Another interesting pdf from the Bureau of Economic Research looking at government employment stabilizing the economy during recessions. This data stands in direct contrast to the notion that laying off teachers, police, firefighters is somehow good for an economy in recession, the notion the GOP pushes heavy and hard.
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c9089.pdf
And this fact-check article does a good job showing how a conservative editorialist at the WSJ makes an apples to oranges comparison of govt employment to manufacturing, and misrepresents actual job numbers of government jobs 1960 to 2011. Govt jobs as percentage of the total labor force: 15% in 1960, 17% in 2011. That supports my contention that the number of govt employment is little different than it was in 1960… with the understanding the entire economy grew and the labor force grew as well… contentions I didn’t make in my original statement.http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/06/steve-moore/steve-moore-says-ratio-people-working-government-m/
If you are going to make such an unequivocal statement you are going to have produce a reputable source yourself. Your obvious anger makes it appear your judgement is clouded and you would say anything. Perhaps you are.
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/06/tax-cut-history-lesson.html
While this doesn’t directly relate to govt employment, it is apropos to tax cuts “stimulating” employment. And see some of the links below… I’ll provide more as they come up…
Like this, be sure to scroll down the charts… it covers a range of information and govt employment numbers:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/05/government-spending-sometimes-things-are-not-what-we-think-they-are.html
Or this, giving an excellent historical perspective to why government jobs have been lost over the past 40 years. When I find the actual statistic that I’ve heard quoted… and I know that is what you are fishing for in spite of all this background… I’ll forward that along.
And yes, I am angry. What the gop is doing is obscene and destructive. The current crisis could be over if not for the gop’s pigheaded obstructionism. The slow recovery is due to a lack of political will, not the means to address high unemployment.
First of all ” reign in too big to fail banks that privatize their profits but socialize their risks”, These are Democrat and Republican policies. supported by the President. It is probably the only thing the Tea Party and OWS (remember them) have in common.
Money spent on Democratic constituencies is not stimulative. It was proved last time when a stimulus that amounted to 14% of GDP was thrown away. (if stimulating the economy was the real goal.)
You leave so much out of this “analysis” that it is difficult to even respond… And you seem to be having trouble reading and understanding what I’ve said.
The stimulus that was used DID prevent further job loss, and DID, ACCORDING TO MANY, MANY OFFICIAL and INDEPENDENT analysis DID slow the loss of jobs… Lying about intentions when you can’t prove those intentions is no argument… it is a value judgment… and in my judgment a poor and not particularly honest one. Saving a policeman’s job, or a firefighter’s job, or a teacher’s job because they are public sector jobs NOT STIMULATIVE is moronic… sorry.
It isn’t stimulus in the traditional sense, It is not what passed for stimulus with every other stimulus package passed over the last 40 years, by Carter, Clinton and Bush.
I have also found another way to identify extremists.
Their posts have an overabundance of words capitalized.
whatever…
its not stimulative. maybe it is morally righteous to save those public jobs. However, those people don’t produce anything.
There are certain services society needs and I think we can all agree on… emergency services being a big part of them. Some form of military/defense. Education. Transportation or DPW…
However, we have become less and less selective of what is truly needed and what the government shall provide.
The out of work policeman, fireman, teacher doesn’t spend money they don’t have… When they have a job they buy things and contribute to the economy…
It should be so difficult to understand that consumer demand as nearly 70% of aggregate demand in our economy, according to official calculations, drives job creation, the need for more employees, the need for more widgets for the widget dealer, manufacturing of more widgets…? Of course it is stimulative…
Why does the Obama stimulis seemingly focus on union jobs?
Because the GOP prevented doing little else. It was part of the package that got passed… And firefighters, police, teachers all are part of the economy, all buy goods and services, and if they don’t have jobs… they don’t make these purchases and don’t add to the economy… Your bias against the good that unions have given to this country appears to prevent you from seeing that getting money into the hands of people, common people, who then spend that money is a good thing, not a bad thing. If the stimulus package had been larger and focussed on getting MORE money into the hands of people who would spend it in the economy, giving BUSINESSES reasons to hire more workers, and sell more of the goods and services the recovery would be stronger…
The GOP prevented that from happening. Isn’t about making government big for the sake of making it big, it is about government spending more so more people can use that money to make the economy work… When the economy is working again on its own, reign in govt spending to avoid inflation and other problems too much govt spending creates. This is what all sorts of economists have been saying and even conservative economists if you go back and looks at past recessions.
4 million jobs in the scheme of a normal recovery is not much. (148k per month) The metric used during normal times just to keep up with new workers entering the workforce is about 300k and that is just a number aimed at maintenance. A growing economy needs to provide more jobs than that and in times like these a lot more than that. (400-500k)
Obama’s theoreticians really have no idea how to do that.
And neither do the morons claiming that taking money in the form of unemployment benefits out of the hands of the long term unemployed, or taking money out of govt revenues in the form of huge tax breaks to the wealthy is “stimulative.” The Bush $1.8Trillion tax cuts were completed in 2003… those tax cuts did nothing to boost job growth, boost income for the middle class worker, make any significant difference in the debt or the record deficits of the Bush admin. THOSE ARE THE PLAIN, PROVABLE FACTS.
Take off your partisan blinders and face those facts. The GOP has obstructed EVERYTHING this president has tried to do, whether right or wrong, OUT OF PRINCIPAL… TO MAKE HIM FAIL…. Not because they have a better solution and will compromise to get their solutions enacted… the ACA health care reform bill came out of the HERITAGE FOUNDATION you god’s sake… IT IS ROMNEY’S health care program… The extremists don’t care about policy, or the people that policy is supposed to HELP, they want Obama to FAIL and they will do everything in their power to gain power and make that happen… DISGUSTING. And hearing you come up with this BS line is equally disgusting…
It is a B*STARDIZATION of how Congress is supposed to work… IT IS DISGUSTING, and COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY. Moderate republicans are vocal about how disgusting the extreme reactionaries in the GOP have become… the extremists, yourself included, could care less how much destruction you are causing. I’ll give this perversion of civic duty no quarter. These people serve their own narrow interests and the narrow interests of those that have bought them, not the American people…
May I request some help in flagging sdementri before he/she hurts its self? Thanks.
I know he/she gets pretty worked up with the ol’ shift key.
The effect of the Bush tax cuts passed May 2003 was this.
Unemployment was 6.1 % which was considered high for the time. Almost immediately the Unemployment rate started to move lower and continued the trend for the next 3.5 years to a low of 4.4% according to the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.
http://www.doleta.gov/Performance/Charts/Unemployment_Jan03_08.cfm
Federal revenue growth: between 2003 and 2006 Federal revenue increased by $625 billion according to the CBO.
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8116/05-18-taxrevenues.pdf
Do you have any facts that don’t involve capital letters?
Check out this interesting slide show with its attendant data: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/jobs-318060-president-year.html?pic=1 . I found it quite interesting.
Thanks I missed that.The Orange County Register has some real good things. It’s url is in my bookmarks.
You are such a funny guy, she says tongue in cheek. Don’t take issue with the stats though? There is some good reporting outside of mainstream propaganda…. people who go looking for information rather than just regurgitating what they have been handed. I am more interested in insight than spin. This I thought was a good example of investigative reporting, but hey if you only are interested in what NYT, WSJ, WP report then you will just miss out on all the rest. But, now and then I will try to broaden your horizon. I consider it a civic duty.
Pro-torture, former Bush official, pro-predatory capitalist republican Marc Theissen is lecturing on the great recession that started in the Bush admin… That’s pretty rich. Bush tax cuts, Bush wars strangled revenues, conservative laissez faire policies allowed the greed and hubris of vulture capitalists to crash the world financial system, and this nimrod thinks he’s qualified to scold the administration that has been trying to pick up the pieces ever since… Yep, that’s very rich… Dolt.
Is it only polarization that you spout. Were there only Republicans that caused the meltdown? If the Bush tax cuts are so bad why are they being extended?
First, no the bush tax cuts aren’t being extended. The GOP wants them extended, but it isn’t a done deal… And no, both parties have supported policies that brought about this AVOIDABLE crisis. The dolt that writes this ridiculous denial of the rightwing policies that both parties signed onto doesn’t acknowledge that his party is largely responsible for the policies that caused the crisis. He is a liar in intent and in fact. Deregulation that started with Reagan and the policies that allowed investment banks to put at risk the entire global financial system. Nothing partisan about doing the right thing, and the right thing is to speak the truth. Theissen fails completely.
Ummm….. Obama agreed to the current extension we are under now. President Clinton, just the other day, advocated keeping the tax cuts in place.
Ummmmm… who cares? It is not a done deal… What is it with you extremists?
You just said they weren’t being extended. I was merely pointing out the politics of the situation.
I have learned that it is possible to identify extremists by their camping habits.
The politics of the situation are that Clinton is wrong to want to extend them again, Obama was wrong to extend them, and Bush was wrong in enacting these tax cuts. When you’ve got both Clinton (Mr. 3d way triangulation moderate Republican) and Obama (Mr. appease the financial clowns who tanked the economy in 08) v. vulture capitalist Romney, there is no right way.
You very very funny!
You must be a liberal – you can’t follow the basic rules:Keep it civil and stay on topicNo vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
Can we stop? This isn’t even a substantive debate. Constantly amplifying gaffes that have no basis in reality. That’s not what he meant and he reiterated that and yet we’re obsessing. It’s ridiculous, stupid and a waste of time.
I remember when I was in middle school, I accidentally called one of my female teachers mom. It was embarrassing and obviously a mistake, but never did I actually think that the teacher was my mom. My friends joked about this and then we moved on in a few days we had something new to laugh about. That’s what this reminds me off and it’s pathetic. We need to act like adults here.
Is is a gaffe when it reveals your real world views?
These extremists aren’t interested in a substantive debate. They don’t have substance. They have talking points, they have obfuscation, they have lies, exaggerations and hyperbole, and they have faux news to cover their backs…
A least we are not bitter, humorless ex-campers.
It’s doing better now than under Bush and the GOP
In January 2009 the US economy lost 800,000 jobs.
Obama turned it around and we have has 27 months of private sector growth since mid-2009 when the Stimulus took effect.
GOP nonsense fail.
Yessah
Big Fail… L… (losers…)
So you think 8% unemployment is better than 5% unemployment?
By the way, Obama and his liberal friends have been in charge of Congress since 2007. How was the economy before they took over the House and Senate? What did they do for those two years before the meltdown other than defend Fannie and Freddie?
The only reason the economy has shown any signs of life recently has to do with the elections of 2010 putting the brakes on Obama’s out of control spending. Mitt will create more jobs in his first year than any president in history, because so many businesses are just waiting for the Obama experiment to end.
I think the businesses that are playing the blame game are the big guys who do not want to see their tax rates raised. Many business owners are Democrats and would and do support the current policy. Growth, any growth, in this economic disaster brought to you by the Bush administration needs to be celebrated. Given what hit us 4 years ago I am amazed that any jobs have been added. Public sectors jobs are declining. For his part Obama cut the federal workforce. Taxpayers are saying they want austerity budgets. And that is fine. But don’t blame Obama for decisions made in state capitals, Congress or on Wall Street. And slow and steady progress in my mind is something he deserves to be credited with given the Bush tax cuts and corporate gluttony. Here is an interesting slide show putting the top five economic growth eras soundly in Democrats laps, with the only exception being Reagan’s second term. http://www.ocregister.com/articles/jobs-318060-president-year.html?pic=1
Federal government jobs have risen 11.4% under Barack Kardashian, while we have lost millions of private sector jobs. Time to give up this experiment and put someone with maturity and experience in charge.
You want to see a real budget deal, try this. The GOP gets to keep their Bush tax cut’s, in return for the Oversea’s Profit Repatriation Tax being taxed at a reduced rate of 30% AND all said tax revenue being directed at the current deficit reduction effort’s and any revenue after that directed to the current healthcare reform effort’s. Now, if Boehner, McConnell and Cantor can’t agree to that then at lest we all see them for what they are and can now vote accordingly.