This table is misleading because it doesn’t give any statistics on the number of new jobs that were created. It only lists the net loss, that doesn’t mean jobs weren’t created. You can find job creation statistics on the internets and they are, unsurprisingly in many cases, much lower than the predictions. Omitting statistics that are immediately pertinent to your point that also support your point is baffling to me. Are these republicans afraid that putting up more than two numbers for each state would be too confusing? Or maybe it just looks really awesome to show a positive prediction next to a negative result and pin it to a democrat controlled government.
The republicans could have used the administrations own numbers against it and made a strong point. Instead they used real numbers that aren’t directly related. Comparing the number of jobs lost to the number of jobs projected to be created? How about comparing the number of jobs projected to be created to the number of jobs that were actually created? That makes too much sense.
23 October 2009 | Peter Said:
This table is misleading because it doesn’t give any statistics on the number of new jobs that were created. It only lists the net loss, that doesn’t mean jobs weren’t created. You can find job creation statistics on the internets and they are, unsurprisingly in many cases, much lower than the predictions. Omitting statistics that are immediately pertinent to your point that also support your point is baffling to me. Are these republicans afraid that putting up more than two numbers for each state would be too confusing? Or maybe it just looks really awesome to show a positive prediction next to a negative result and pin it to a democrat controlled government.
23 October 2009 | patti-kgmi Said:
Peter,
Maybe this link will help you a little more.
http://www.bls.gov/web/laumstrk.htm
27 October 2009 | Peter Said:
That’s a good site but I was thinking something more along the lines of this: http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/TextView.aspx?data=recipientTopJobs&ViewAll=100#at
The republicans could have used the administrations own numbers against it and made a strong point. Instead they used real numbers that aren’t directly related. Comparing the number of jobs lost to the number of jobs projected to be created? How about comparing the number of jobs projected to be created to the number of jobs that were actually created? That makes too much sense.
29 October 2009 | Patti Brooks Said:
Maybe Peter, Peter can chew on this.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091029/D9BKMVMG0.html