A lot of talk about Jobs in the last debate, and in the new employment numbers released yesterday.
Bush claims 1.7 million jobs created. Kerry counters "ah, but they're not private sector jobs" (hey, doesn't the money spend the same?). And in the end there is some factiod about 1.6 fewer private sector jobs than when Bush took office.
And my response is....????
So what?
Does anyone honestly thing that Bush's policies have Jack to do with the bulk of these numbers? Geez, I'm glad we didn't have a nation-wide drought on Bush's watch. We could blame that on him, too.
The economy can certainly be affected by Federal policy, but it's very hard to correlate and it's usually quite slow in reacting. For one thing, the economy is always an up-and-down thing. It has it's own cycles, and on top of that there are other factors in this economy that have had far more impact, not the least of which was 9/11 and fear-driven oil prices. To say that Bush's policies led to huge job losses is ludicrous.
Don't let Kerry slip crap like that by you tonight, Mr. President.
1 comment:
Well, the free market is the free market. In my world view, Indians gotta eat, too.
Matter of fact, I'm working with a consultant this week who's probably here on an H1B.
It also looks like the Bush administration has cut the number of allowable H1B visas more than in half, roughly to the original 1990 levels.
I wonder if Kerry is elected if Heinz Corp will cut its outsourcing? At any rate, the economy isn't bad because of outsourcing. It isn't absorbing the impact as it would in better times.... but times will get better.
As a Libertarian, I think the government has no business micromanaging the economy anyway... but that's a different discussion altogether.
Post a Comment