The difference with Bush, after September 11th, is he grew the intelligence network to an unsustainable size. There was a lot of spending for creating a 'security network' in the USA. I remember the article in the Washington Post whereby there was this enormous intelligence network in the USA costing the federal government plenty.
Oddly, consolidating departments of the federal government under one new cabinet position called "Homeland Security" was suppose to make the government more efficient, not larger and more ungainly.
Oddly, consolidating departments of the federal government under one new cabinet position called "Homeland Security" was suppose to make the government more efficient, not larger and more ungainly.
...But the real eye-opener (click here) comes when we compare Obama’s numbers to George W. Bush’s. In Bush’s first term, the economy shed 913,000 private sector jobs! 913,000! The only thing that saved Bush’s first term from being a complete economic disaster, in terms of employment, was robust public sector growth: The economy added 900,000 government jobs. One wonders: Without the massive growth in the public sector during Bush’s first term, would he have been reelected?
This is interesting for a number of reasons. First, it punches a big hole in the theory that Bush’s tax cuts were responsible for boosting employment during his first term. Let’s also recall that the Bush recession (which he inherited from Clinton) was far, far milder than the near-Depression Obama inherited from Bush. In that context, Obama’s performance resuscitating the private sector has been miraculous. The Washington Post published an article criticizing Obama for not doing enough to resist job losses in the public sector, without fully acknowledging the political impossibility of additional stimulus after the first round, but we haven’t heard all that much over the years about how the growth of government saved Bush’s bacon.
Of course, Obama isn’t running against Bush, so that’s moot. But as this presidential campaign heats up, it might be worth periodically reminding ourselves: Bush led the U.S. economy out of a weak recession with strong public sector growth. Obama is leading the U.S. economy out of a near-death experience while a steadily shrinking government swells the unemployment rolls. Which magic trick do you think is harder?
