Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
If production came back to this country under Trump you would see it reflected in manufacturing payrolls
but you don't https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...uring-payrolls
Maybe you would see a jump in total employment https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...ployed-persons
Oops, no jump there either
Oddly enough, democratic presidents have better results with jobs and the economy than republicans.
The Democratic presidents were in office for a total of 429 months, with 164,000 jobs per month added on average, while the Republicans were in office for 475 months, with a 61,000 jobs added per month average. This monthly average rate was 2.4 times faster under Democratic presidents. |
Don't know what that has to do with what I said. And it's too sketchy to mean much. It doesn't consider a whole host of conditions, world conditions at the time, wars, market collapses and timing of recoveries, types of jobs (government or private), sectors of the economy, small business growth, etc., etc.
My response was to wdmso's noting the current "hot labor market" under Biden. I noted that it was also under Trump until the pandemic.
As noted by this Forbes article:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckde...h=2c8227f55635
Which was a kind of apples to oranges thing. When Trump took office, the economy had already recovered from a disaster, but much more slowly than it had traditionally recovered from previous meltdowns. Large and rapid growth is expected in a recovery from disaster. But it was growing far more slowly than it normally should have before the Trump administration came to power. So the growth was substantial considering Trump's starting point in an already growing economy.
The economic recovery happening now is shortly after its destruction, so it would be expected to have a larger percentage growth until it reaches a more normal status, from which the percentage of growth would decrease because a given percent (say 6%) growth from a smaller number of jobs, (during the beginning stages of recovery) would be difficult to sustain, would probably be an over-heating, in the latter stages of recovery in which many of the jobs, etc. had already grown in number--e.g.:6% of 10 is a much smaller number than 6% of 100, and 2 or 3% of 100 is a great deal larger than 6% of 10. It would not be possible to constantly sustain a 6% growth rate. The rate of growth would substantially decrease as the recovery progressed.
So the growth rate under Trump's recovery, considering its later position, was substantial. And the growth under Biden is to be expected considering its starting point. The Trump administration predicted that there would be a V shaped, "hot" recovery.
Which is not to retract from any good news now. Just to say, as wdmso would probably say if it were a Trump recovery at this time, that it's to be expected.