Bush created 4.8 million jobs while ‘tax and spend’ Clinton created 23 million.
By on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Bush created 4.8 million jobs while ‘tax and spend’ Clinton created 23 million.
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has been attacking Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) as a “tax-and-spend liberal” for his plan to roll back the Bush tax cuts. Under President Bush, however, whose tax plan McCain wants to make permanent, only 4.8 million jobs were created. President Clinton, however, created 23 million jobs after raising income taxes and investing at home, as the Wonk Room notes:
Obama wants to return the top two tax rates to where they were under Clinton, at 36 and 39 percent. Bush lowered those tax rates to 33 and 36 percent.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Oh, how they do scream and howl about those 3 per cent.
3 pennies on the dollar!? that’s communism!
…talk about weak and hypersensitive.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:18 pmAnd those who can afford to contribute more, those who have benefitted from the system, can damn well pay their fair share.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:19 pmOh, and re: #2, Palin, I’m talkin to and about YOU!
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:19 pmThe Right will still blame it on Clinton, probably saying something like ‘Clinton used up all the new jobs’.
¶ AIO
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:22 pmLast week, the New York Times performed an election year public service with an analysis that was part history lesson and part thought exercise. Taking the example of the S&P 500 going back to Herbert Hoover, the Times rightly concluded that the Democratic Party “has been better for American pocketbooks and capitalism as a whole.” But the Democrats’ proven track record isn’t limited to the S&P index. As history has proven time and again, Wall Street and the economy overall simply do better under Democratic presidents.
For the details, see:
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:25 pm“The Record: Stock Market, Economy Do Better Under Democrats.”
Facts like this are just to be refutiated with lies by the right. You can’t believe their facts, listen to us….
If people really understood this simple fact they would never vote for a republican again.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:25 pmThey already blamed the stock market crash on Obama. I’m betting the Republicans announce the beginning of the recession on Jan. 21.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:28 pmI’m just waiting for the trolls to come in and claim that presidents don’t “create” jobs. Which is technically true — they don’t. But they can certainly create a climate that promotes job growth, as Clinton did.
Meanwhile, the wingnuts STILL think that cutting taxes for the rich will result in lots of jobs. This doesn’t work, but they keep thinking that if they just wish harder…
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:28 pmYou guys need to design a better graph
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:29 pmOh, and “tax and spend” is worse than “borrow and spend”…how?
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:30 pmBecause their kids are too young to vote.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:30 pmThose 8 years Clinton worked his ass off for the American people have been forgotten. Now as the Republicans say Clinton made this mess and those 8 years of Clinton never happen. What’s suprising is people believe the Republican lies. That is one reason why we’re in this mess today people didn’t stand up and stop it they sit back and watched the Bush Administration rob this country blind.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:32 pmDammed LIBRUL media showing facts again. why do facts matter anyway ?? DUH!!!
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:32 pmRemember everyone, a 36% top marginal rate is “socialism,” but a 33% top marginal rate is “country first.”
Everybody got that? Somewhere between 33 and 36% our tax policy turns socialist.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:35 pmRepublican politicians said that their paid partizan economists told them that trickle down economics works, and that if we just let the businesses and rich people keep their money they will help out the poorer people, and the poorer people can pay the taxes and everything to keep the system running and it all works out, and any time any of this does not seem to be working it is either because the media is lying or because the liberal Democrats are blocking it from working. Republicans are never ever wrong, because the republicans tell you that they are never wrong, so it must be true.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:35 pmLast night, I heard a clip from a Sarah Palin rally. When she said, “Obama wants to cut taxes for 95% of the people,” everyone booed, and started yelling, “Bolshevik!”
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:37 pmAs Begalla said, I’ll take Bill Clintons taxes and Bill Clinton’s economy any day over a Republican one.
Hey Republicans – tax cuts during times of deficits aren’t tax cuts at all – they are merely cowardly tax deferments onto your children and grandchidlren.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:38 pmi wonder what
“joe the architect”
would say about this?
^
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:39 pmIt’s amazing that the rich people don’t see that they make more when their CUSTOMERS have more money to spend and that MORE than makes up for a few percentage points added to their taxes.
“Hope Defeats Hate 2008″
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:40 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfZxP3hOCcc
———————————————
Progressive Jazz:
http://ere.digi-one.com
Become a Fan:
http://www.reverbnation.com/ere
——————————————–
misshusseinmolly Says:
Oh, and “tax and spend” is worse than “borrow and spend”…how?
Well, borrow and spend means it is not OUR money that is being spent: we borrowed it.
See.
That’s easy.
And it won’t BE our money in the future either, because we hope to win and have our taxes lowered even more. Defecits don’t matter. And we, the individual taxpayers, didn’t actually sign a loan or nuthin’, so WE don’t owe the money: that evil government thing owes that money, and so that government thing needs to pay it back. Or we won’t pay it back at all, ‘cuz it’s mostly from that communist China, and we hate all communists, or anything else that isn’t 100% American free capitalism and democracy (except when we want some kind of socialist program but we won’t call it socialist cuz we hates them, too), oh, and democracy is good, but it would be a better democracy if we could outlaw liberals and democrats and anyone who doesn’t agree with us — then it would be a perfect democracy.
There. No trolls, so I did my best.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:42 pmLord knows I’m no apologist for the GOP, but I have to at least suggest that a lot of jobs lost early in Bush’s Administration occurred when the internet bubble burst. Jobs that were created during Clinton’s watch but had no chance of lasting.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:46 pmOh, how they do scream and howl about those 3 per cent.
I really find that quite incomprehensible. Especially since some of that will be offset by the shifts in the lower brackets, yes?
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:48 pmA return to the Clinton economy would be good for Sarah Palin’s kids. So many jobs created, you don’t even need a H.S. diploma to have one.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:52 pmCageyCretin Says:
There. No trolls, so I did my best.
An A+ for style, but a B- overall for not mentioning that Clinton got a hummer.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:53 pmBut creating jobs in American is Socialist, or is it Communist, or maybe Marxist, or it might be just Un-American, or what ever the uptighty-righties are spewing out their pie holes today.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:55 pmRather than just the absolute numbers, it is also important to look at the growth in jobs vs. the growth in the number of workers. Using the population line as a surrogate, looks like Clinton increaed jobs above the growth in workers (more employment) while Bush hasn’t kept up (mor UN-employment).
And Angy One in #5 is quite right. I keep a graph going of the 3 major stock indicies at the first of each month, going back to the mid 60s. I correct the stock prices for inflation (using the CPI).
For the recent 2-term presidents, Reagan’s first term was lackluster, second term picked up so the total effect was pretty good. Clinton went like gangbusters. Bush ? So far the DJI is about 70% down.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:55 pmWhat they do with tax rates and the tax money that we pay shouldn’t concern us.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:58 pmThey figure that we should just be glad that they don’t round us all up and send us off to war.
Buckie Boy Says:
——————————————————————————–
But creating jobs in American is Socialist, or is it Communist, or maybe Marxist,
Oh, that explains why all of the Republican CEOs of major corporations moved the jobs to Communist China.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:01 pmDumb_Hussein_Fox Says:
An A+ for style, but a B- overall for not mentioning that Clinton got a hummer.
Well, gosh darn it! O.k. — but Clinton didn’t create jobs, and neither did his policies: those jobs were created from the trickle down effect from Raygun’s policies that just happened to trickle over into Clinton’s time in office, but while he was givng private dictation lessons in the oval office, his failed policies were setting the stage for Bush’s first term to look bad (see the chart), but when Bush got his trickle down to work (that sounds vaguely naughty) in his second term the employment went up (see chart above). Whew!!!
This twisted logic stuff is harder than it looks. Guess I need to drink the kool aid to really get the flow.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:03 pmjoe cantwell Says:
——————————————————————————–
i wonder what
“joe the architect”
would say about this?
You mean Tracy? He would tell us that having lots of money does not mean a person is rich.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:03 pmAh, but Bush kicked Clinton’s butt on CEO pay increases!
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:04 pmTracy’s goldfish says that rich people are a myth created by the lefties to stoke fear.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:11 pmLets see more jobs, more collected in tax money = surplus at the close of 8 years. That would be a Clinton Presidency.
Those still undecided ask yourself are you better off now than with a Democrat for a President.
And as for no terriorist attacks, WHY WAS 9/11 ALLOWED UNDER BUSH PRESIDENCY WHEN A MEMO IN AUGUST ALERTED TO AN ATTACK.
I am sick to death of hearing under bush we haven’t been attacked, who allowed the first one, that would be bush.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:16 pmI’m looking forward to the Heritage Foundation report proving that the whole George W. Bush administration was Bill Clinton’s fault.
The nice Democrats:
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:18 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYxqSipov5E
Tracy’s goldfish says that 9/11 was Clinton’s fault for letting bin laden get away. See, when republicans take office, any failings are due to the democrats that were in office before. When democrats take office (as Obama will be doing), everything is their fault because they are democrats and they just messed up the perfect republican policies that were in place. Just like when there is another, even more devestating attack after Nov 4 it will be Obama’s fault for his planned policies, but not Bush’s fault, however Bush is prepared to sacrafice himself to being the first totalitarian dictator in the New World Order of the Fascist State of America, land of the Neo-cons, after he is forced to tearfully order martial law. It will all be the fault of those traitorous progressive liberals.
Tracy’s fish predicts that the stock value in companies manufacturing white sheets will rise after November 4th (with or without martial law).
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:25 pmTo keep up with population growth, Bush needed to add ~14 million., so he’s added at least 9 million to the unemplyed or ~ 6%.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:51 pmCageyCretin Says
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Tracy’s goldfish says that 9/11 was Clinton’s fault for letting bin laden get away.
___________________________________________________________
As do a fair number of people on the Rabid Right. Yet, when Obama claims that if he gets actionable intelligence showing where OBL is hiding out, he’s going to go after him, with or without the permission of the country he’s in, the conservatives are all up in arms at the possibility he might “invade a sovereign country” (I guess Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran aren’t sovereign countries?).
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:23 pmTax and spend is just another bogus but very useful talking point for the right to say. What we should be pointing out..
October 22nd, 2008 at 8:26 pm“Bush Borrowed More Than All Previous Presidents Combined, Group Says”