truthfulpolitics.com

Apr 212013
 
Share

This article contains information and statistics from several sources about income and/or wealth distribution in the United States.

G. William Domhoff in February of 2013 wrote about the distribution on income & wealth in the U.S.A.  The definition of wealth used in the article is the value of everything a person or family owns, minus any debts.

Income, net worth, and financial worth in the U.S. by percentile, in 2010 dollars

Wealth or income class Mean household income Mean household net worth Mean household financial (non-home) wealth
Top 1 percent $1,318,200 $16,439,400 $15,171,600
Top 20 percent $226,200 $2,061,600 $1,719,800
60th-80th percentile $72,000 $216,900 $100,700
40th-60th percentile $41,700 $61,000 $12,200
Bottom 40 percent $17,300 -$10,600 -$14,800

 

Net worth and financial wealth distribution in the U.S. in 2010

2011 U.S. Federal Government Spending by Agency

 

Income and wealth by race in the U.S.

2011 U.S. Federal Government Spending by Agency

 

CEOs’ pay as a multiple of the average worker’s pay, 1960-2007

2011 U.S. Federal Government Spending by Agency

 

CEOs’ average pay, production workers’ average pay, the S&P 500 Index, corporate profits, and the federal minimum wage, 1990-2005 (all figures adjusted for inflation)

2011 U.S. Federal Government Spending by Agency

 

Distribution of Income:
  • In 2008, 13,480 individuals or families made over $10 million.
  • 19% of the income reported by those individuals or families came from wages and salaries.

Distribution of income in the United States, 1982-2006

Income
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent
1982 12.8% 39.1% 48.1%
1988 16.6% 38.9% 44.5%
1991 15.7% 40.7% 43.7%
1994 14.4% 40.8% 44.9%
1997 16.6% 39.6% 43.8%
2000 20.0% 38.7% 41.4%
2003 17.0% 40.8% 42.2%
2006 21.3% 40.1% 38.6%
2009 17.2% 41.9% 40.9%

Distribution of Wealth:
  • As of 2010, the top 1% of households owned 35.4% of all privately held wealth
  • The next 19% of households had 53.5%
  • Therefore, 20% of the people owned 89% (35.4% + 53.5%).
  • Thus, the bottom 80% of people owned 11% of the wealth.
  • 1.6% of Americans receive $100,000 or more in inheritance.
  • 1.1% receive $50,000 to $100,000.
  • The remaining 91.9% receive $0.

Share of wealth held by the Bottom 99% and Top 1% in the United States, 1922-2010.

Bottom 99 percent Top 1 percent
1922 63.3% 36.7%
1929 55.8% 44.2%
1933 66.7% 33.3%
1939 63.6% 36.4%
1945 70.2% 29.8%
1949 72.9% 27.1%
1953 68.8% 31.2%
1962 68.2% 31.8%
1965 65.6% 34.4%
1969 68.9% 31.1%
1972 70.9% 29.1%
1976 80.1% 19.9%
1979 79.5% 20.5%
1981 75.2% 24.8%
1983 69.1% 30.9%
1986 68.1% 31.9%
1989 64.3% 35.7%
1992 62.8% 37.2%
1995 61.5% 38.5%
1998 61.9% 38.1%
2001 66.6% 33.4%
2004 65.7% 34.3%
2007 65.4% 34.6%
2010 64.6% 35.4%


Percentage of wealth held in 2000 by the Top 10% of the adult population in various Western countries

wealth owned
by top 10%
Switzerland 71.3%
United States 69.8%
Denmark 65.0%
France 61.0%
Sweden 58.6%
UK 56.0%
Canada 53.0%
Norway 50.5%
Germany 44.4%
Finland 42.3%

 

Distribution of Taxes:

When all taxes (not just income taxes) are taken into account:

  • The lowest 20% of earners (who average about $12,400 per year) paid 16.0% of their income to various forms of taxes in 2009
  • The next 20% (about $25,000/year) paid 20.5% in taxes
  • The middle 20% (about $33,400/year) paid 25.3% in taxes
  • The next 20%, (about $66,000/year) paid 28.5% in taxes
  • The next 10%, (about $100,000/year) paid 30.2% in taxes
  • The next 5% ($141,000/year) paid 31.2% in taxes
  • The next 4% ($245,000/year) paid 31.6% in taxes
  • The top 1% (those who take in $1.3 million per year on average) paid 30.8% of their income to taxes.

Share of income paid as tax, including local and state tax

2011 U.S. Federal Government Spending by Agency

 

U.S.A. Income Inequality Compared to Other Countries:

“The degree of income inequality in the United States can be compared to that in other countries on the basis of the Gini coefficient, a mathematical ratio that allows economists to put all countries on a scale with values that range (hypothetically) from zero (everyone in the country has the same income) to 100 (one person in the country has all the income).”

Income equality in selected countries

Country/Overall Rank Gini Coefficient
1.  Sweden 23.0
2.  Norway 25.0
8.  Austria 26.0
10.  Germany 27.0
17.  Denmark 29.0
25.  Australia 30.5
34.  Italy 32.0
35.  Canada 32.1
37.  France 32.7
42.  Switzerland 33.7
43.  United Kingdom 34.0
45.  Egypt 34.4
56.  India 36.8
61.  Japan 38.1
68.  Israel 39.2
81.  China 41.5
82.  Russia 42.3
90.  Iran 44.5
93.  United States 45.0
107.  Mexico 48.2
125.  Brazil 56.7
133.  South Africa 65.0


To read the entire article, click on Wealth, Income, and Power.


David Cay Johnston in Reuters in October 2011 wrote the following:

  • About half of Americans paid no income taxes in 2009
  • The top 1 percent of Americans paid about 37 percent of the income taxes
  • Households “making less than $75,000 collectively paid more federal income tax than those making $1 million or more”
  • Income “taxed at the next-to-lowest rate, 15 percent, brought in more government revenue than all capital gains taxes plus the two top brackets, which apply only to the top 2 percent of earners”
  • Almost “half of the top 1 percent made less than $500,000″ and five out of six of the top 1% made less than $1 million
  • “Someone at the entry point for the top 1 percent would need 29 years to make $10 million, and more than 2,900 years to make $1 billion”
  • The “top one-in-a-thousand taxpayers had average income in recent years that ranged between $5.2 million and $7.5 million annually.  Just investing that much in corporate bonds will produce enough interest income to keep someone in the top 1 percent.”
  • “The top 1 percent paid an average income tax rate of 24 percent in 2009, IRS data shows. That is almost exactly the rate paid by those making $500,000 to $1 million.  Those who made $1 million to $10 million paid a higher rate, 26 percent.  But those making more than $10 million paid a significantly lower rate, 23.3 percent.”
  • “The top 400 taxpayers paid a much lower rate. On an average income of $270 million each, their effective federal income tax rate was 18.1 percent in 2008, the latest year for which we have IRS data. A single worker earning less than $90,000 pays a higher rate than that.”

To read the entire article, click on Beyond the 1 percent.


According to the U.S. Census, 1.9% of all households earn more than $250,000 annually. To view the table, click on Income Distribution to $250,000 or More for Households: 2007.


 

Apr 082013
 
Share

Below is information from many different sources on how the U.S. federal government spends money. Several bar and pie charts are also included. All the charts expand to make the data easier to view. Click on a chart to expand it, and click on the expanded chart to shrink it back to its original size.

The first three charts are from the Office of Management and Budget, which provides the official numbers for the annual budget for the U.S.

  • The first chart shows spending by government agency as of 2011 (the most recent numbers available as of the writing of this article).
  • “Undistributed Offsetting Receipts” are not included.
  • Some of the percentages are 0% due to rounding.
  • To view the source data, please refer to Table 4.1 of the budget.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

2011 U.S. Federal Government Spending by Agency

  • The second chart shows spending by government agency as of 2010.
  • Some of the percentages are 0% due to rounding.
  • To view the source data, please refer to Table 4.1 of the budget.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

2010 U.S. Federal Government Spending by Agency

  • The third chart shows spending by government program as of 2010 (the most recent numbers available as of the writing of this article).
  • Some of the percentages are 0% due to rounding.
  • To view the source data, please refer to Table 27-14 of the budget.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

2011 U.S. Federal Government Spending by Category or Program

To read additional information, including the source data, click on Budget of the United States Government.


The website Federal Budget Spending, Deficits, and the National Debt has the following graph:

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

How the Federal Government Spends Money

Click on Federal Budget Spending, Deficits, and the National Debt to visit the website.


The Perot Charts website illustrates trends in federal government spending:

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

How the Federal Government Spends Money Pie Chart

Additional information and charts are no longer available as Perot Charts is now discontinued.


Project America illustrated overall U.S. federal government spending by department. The Department of Defense is not shown:

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Federal Spending by Department

For additional information, click on Project America: Budget: Spending: Spending By Department.


Project America illustrated the overall U.S. federal government spending by program:

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Federal Spending by Program Pie Chart

For additional information, click on Project America: Budget: Spending: Spending by Program.


MSN Money had an article summarizing how the US spends tax dollars:

  • The biggest single chunk of that so-called nondiscretionary spending — more than 20% of the total budget — is used to pay Social Security benefits to retirees
  • Another 15% pays the tab for Medicare health benefits
  • An additional 7% goes for Medicaid, 3% for veterans’ benefits and 1.3% for supplemental security income used to assist the aged, disabled and blind
  • Aid to poor families with children (welfare, which accounts for about 1% of the budget), food stamps (about 1.3%), farm subsidies (1%)
  • Interest on the debt claims about 10% of the budget

To read the entire article, click on How Uncle Sam spends your tax dollar.

Sep 222012
 
Share

truthful politics reviewed U.S. debt statistics provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. The Office of Management and Budget provides the official numbers on debt for the U.S. Below are several charts and pieces of information on U.S. federal debt.

  • The first chart below shows the amount of U.S. federal debt in U.S. dollars.
  • Blank years of 1937, 1938, and 1939 have been added to make the year markers match presidential terms.
  • The transition quarter, or TQ, in 1976 has been removed.
  • The 2011 and 2012 numbers are estimates.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

United States Federal Debt by President and Political Party

The second chart below shows the amount of U.S. federal debt as a percentage of GDP.

  • GDP stands for Gross Domestic Product and measures the size of the economy.  Therefore, the chart shows the debt as a percentage of the U.S. economy.
    • I.e., in 1940, the federal debt equaled $50.6 billion and the economy was $96.8 billion.  Therefore, the federal debt as a percentage of GDP equaled 52.4%.
  • Blank years of 1937, 1938, and 1939 have been added to make the year markers match presidential terms.
  • The transition quarter, or TQ, in 1976 has been removed.
  • The 2011 and 2012 numbers are estimates.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

United States Federal Debt as a Percentage of GDP by President and Political Party

From 1940 to the end of year 2012 (the latest figures available as of the writing of this article):

  • The average increase in the federal debt was 9.2% under a Democratic President and 8.2% under a Republican President when including World War II.
  • When excluding World War II (therefore, 1946 to end of year 2009), the average increase in the federal debt was 4.8% under a Democratic President and 8.2% under a Republican President.
    • The Republican President percentage remains the same in the two time frames because the United States had Democratic Presidents during World War II.

The table below shows the increase in U.S. federal debt during the tenure of the respective President:

Increase in Billions US $ President Political Party
$153 Franklin D. Roosevelt Democratic
$55 Harry S. Truman Democratic
$31 Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican
$20 John F. Kennedy Democratic
$58 Lyndon B. Johnson Democratic
$115 Richard Nixon Republican
$145 Gerald Ford Republican
$280 Jimmy Carter Democratic
$1,692 Ronald Reagan Republican
$1,401 George H.W. Bush Republican
$1,627 Bill Clinton Democratic
$4,357 George W. Bush Republican
$6,668 Barack H. Obama Democratic

 

The third chart below is an older chart that shows U.S. federal debt up to 2010.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

United States Federal Debt by President and Political Party to 2010

To review the source data, click on Budget of the United States Government.


Steve McGourty created the following United States National Debt graph by president:

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

United States National Debt and the Presidents Responsible for It

To read the entire article, click on United States National Debt. To read additional truthful politics article on the federal debt, click on The Federal Debt or U.S. Federal Debt Change (Increase/Decrease) by President.


Sep 132012
 
Share

truthful politics reviewed U.S. government employment statistics provided by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the official numbers on jobs for the U.S.

  • The chart shows the number of employees in thousands.
  • Federal employment is indicated on the left vertical axis (i.e., in January of 2012, federal employees, including the Postal Service, equaled 2.8 million).
  • State and local employment is indicated on the right vertical axis (i.e., in January of 2012, local employees equaled 14.1 million).
  • Blank years of 1937 and 1938 have been added to make the year markers match presidential terms.
  • To see the raw data on the Bureau’s website, use Series IDs CES9091100001, CES9091000001, CES9092000001, and CES9093000001.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Government Employment during Presidential Terms

To read additional information, click on United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.


PLA cited the following statistics:

  • “Under the 20 years of Republican administrations the number of non-defense government employees rose by 310,000.
  • Under the 20 years of Democratic administrations, the number of non-defense government employees rose by 59,000.
  • Of the 369,000 employees added between 1962 and 2001, 84% were added under Republican administrations and 16% were added under Democratic administrations.”

To read the entire article, click on Just for the Record Part II.


truthful politics reviewed the official Executive Branch and Uniformed Military employment numbers provided by the U.S. Government Printing Office.

Executive Branch Increase/Decrease Over Term (thousands) Uniformed Military Personnel Increase/Decrease Over Term (thousands) President Political Party
13 -108 John F. Kennedy Democratic
550 865 Lyndon B. Johnson Democratic
-193 -1301 Richard Nixon Republican
-15 -45 Gerald Ford Republican
-19 -22 Jimmy Carter Democratic
248 54 Ronald Reagan Republican
-47 -320 George H. W. Bush Republican
-308 -318 Bill Clinton Democratic
-4 -1 George W. Bush Republican

For further information, click on Budget of the United States Government: Main Page.


Brian Doherty in Reason in February 2003 reported that over the past 40 years, Democratic administrations have added 31,000 civilian defense jobs and 49,000 non-defense jobs. Republican administrations over the same time have reduced civilian defense jobs by 426,000 and added 320,000 non-defense jobs.

Government Employees Added or (Subtracted)

                  Civilian Defense  Non-Defense

Kennedy               (12,000)           73,000
Johnson                312,000          105,000
Nixon/Ford           (333,000)          213,000
Carter                (25,000)         (14,000)
Reagan                  91,000            3,000
George H.W. Bush     (184,000)          104,000
Clinton              (244,000)        (115,000)

Source: Budget for Fiscal Year 2003 Historical Table 17.1,
"Total Executive Branch Civilian Employees: 1940-2001"

To read the entire article, click on All the presidents’ employees – Data – federal employment growth or shrinkage by president – Brief Article.


Sep 082012
 
Share

This article contains several charts and videos concerning the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. All the charts expand to make the data easier to view. Click on a chart to expand it, and click on the expanded chart to shrink it back to its original size.

The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform was a bipartisan, meaning it involved members from both the Democratic and Republican political parties, commission “charged with identifying policies to improve the fiscal situation in the medium term and to achieve fiscal sustainability over the long run.” The Commission is sometimes referred to as the Bowles-Simpson Commission, Simpson-Bowles Commission, or Fiscal Commission.

The Commission had three groups:

  • Discretionary Working Group to “research and discuss issues related to discretionary spending.”
  • Mandatory Working Group to “research and discuss issues related to mandatory spending.”
  • Tax Reform Working Group to “research and discuss issues related to tax reform.”

Following are some of the charts and information from the report. Click on the chart to expand it for easier viewing, click again on the expanded chart to shrink it back to its original size.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Simpson-Bowles Debt as a Percent of GDP

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Simpson-Bowles Annual Deficits Under Commission Proposal (as percent of GDP)

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Simpson-Bowles Illustrative Individual Tax Reform Plan

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Simpson-Bowles Illustrative Corporate Tax Reform Plan

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Simpson-Bowles Fostering an Economic Recovery

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Simpson-Bowles Commission Social Security Plan and Present Law as Percent of Taxable Payroll

To read the entire report, click on The Moment of Truth. To view the Commission website, click on National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.


Following are three videos with the co-chairmen of the commission, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson.


Sep 052012
 
Share

truthful politics reviewed historical statistics on U.S. federal government revenue as provided by the Office of Management and Budget. The Office of Management and Budget provides the official numbers for the annual budget for the U.S. This article has several charts on U.S. federal government revenue; click on the chart to expand it; click on the expanded chart to shrink it back to its original size.

The first chart shows how much tax revenue was received by the federal government annually since 1934. The raw data comes from Table 2.1 of the budget report.

  • The transition quarter, or TQ, in 1976 has been removed.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Federal Government Revenue by Source

The second chart also shows how much tax revenue was received by the federal government annually since 1934 and its raw data comes from Table 2.1; however, the chart only shows individual and corporate income taxes.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Federal Government Revenue by Source

The third chart shows how much tax revenue was received by the federal government annually since 1940. The raw data comes from Table 1.3 of the budget report.

  • Current Dollars displays the amount of revenue received in the value of the currency at the time received.
  • Inflation Adjusted Dollars displays all dollar amounts in constant fiscal year 2005 dollars, as provided by the Office of Management and Budget. Therefore, dollar amounts prior to year 2005 are inflated and dollar amounts after 2005 are deflated. For example, U.S. federal government revenue in 1940 was $6.5 billion dollars; that revenue level is the equivalent of $81.4 billion in 2005 dollars. Likewise, U.S. federal government revenue in 2010 was $2,162.7 billion dollars; that revenue level is the equivalent of $1,919 billion in 2005 dollars.
  • Percentage of GDP is the revenue received divided by the GDP for the year. GDP stands for Gross Domestic Product and is a measure of the economy as it measures the total market value of all final goods and services produced in a country in a given year. Therefore, tax revenue as a percentage of GDP shows U.S. federal government revenue as a percentage of the economy.
  • The transition quarter, or TQ, in 1976 has been removed.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Federal Government Revenue in Current Dollars, Inflation Adjusted Dollars, and Percentage of GDP

The fourth chart below shows how much tax revenue was received by the federal government annually since 1934 separated by different sources of revenue. The raw data comes from Table 2.3 of the budget report.

  • The transition quarter, or TQ, in 1976 has been removed.
  • Blank years of 1932 and 1933 have been added to make the year markers match presidential terms.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Federal Government Revenue by Source as Percentages of GDP

To read additional information, see the raw data, or view additional tables, click on Government Printing Office.

Aug 152012
 
Share

This article contains statistics on state ranking, economic, education, poverty, debt, and health care areas of Mitt Romney’s record as governor of Massachusetts from 2003 – 2007.

Massachusetts’ ranking in CNBC’s America’s Top States for Business:

Category 2007 2012
Overall 12 28
Cost of Doing Business 40 49
Workforce 26 32
Quality of Life 3 11
Economy 41 21
Infrastructure & Transportation 38 45
Technology & Innovation 4 7
Education 1 3
Business Friendliness 13 29
Access to Capital 2 1
Cost of Living 43 41

To view rankings of all 50 states for both years above, click on America’s Top States for Business 2007 and/or America’s Top States for Business 2012.

Economic statistics:

  • During Romney’s tenure, Massachusetts lost manufacturing jobs faster than the national average
  • Massachusetts rate of losing manufacturing jobs was slower than before and after Mitt Romney took office
  • Massachusetts’ unemployment rate was 5.6% when Romney entered office and 4.7% when he left office
  • Romney vetoed a bill that would ban the state of Massachusetts from “contracting with companies that outsourced labor overseas”
  • In December 2006, Massachusetts’ unemployment rate was 4.7%, while the national average was 4.4%.

To read the entirety of the articles containing the source data, click on Claims and counter-claims on Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts record, Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts record: proof of ‘strong leadership’?, and/or the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Education statistics:

  • During Romney’s tenure, the number of charter schools increased from 46 to 59
  • Massachusetts placed first on the National Assessment of Educational Progress exams from 2005-2011.
  • 2002-2003 high school (grades 9-12) dropout rate was 3.3%
  • 2006-2007 high school (grades 9-12) dropout rate was 3.8%
  • 2010-2011 high school (grades 9-12) dropout rate was 2.7%

To read the entirety of the articles containing the source data, click on Mitt Romney’s education record was mixed, Romney’s record on education includes successes, failures, and/or Dropout Rates.

Poverty statistics:

The table below shows the percentage of the population below the poverty level.

Year Massachusetts U.S.A.
2000 9.3% 12.4%
2007 9.9% 13.0%
2010 11.4% 15.3%

To view the source data or see data for other years and/or states, click on American FactFinder.

Debt statistics:

  • In 2007, Massachusetts had more debt per person, at $4,153, than any other state
  • Romney slowed the rate of debt growth from 5.8% to 1.9%
  • During Romney’s tenure, state debt averaged 9% of personal income, second worst in the nation.

To read the entirety of the article containing the source data, click on Is Romney’s Massachusetts record really as bad as Obama says?

Health Care statistics:

  • 62% of physicians say the law had no adverse effect on waiting times
  • In 2006, 68.5% of nonelderly adults supported the law, and in 2011, 67% supported it
  • In 2006, Massachusetts’ rate of uninsured was 7.7% (the lowest rate in the country) compared to the national average of 14.8%
  • In 2010, 98.1% of Massachusetts residents had health insurance compared to the national rate of 84.6%
  • The “net added cost to Massachusetts taxpayers was $353 million in 2010, or roughly 1.2 percent of the state budget”
  • About “$487 million of the 2010 Medicaid budget, about 5.2 percent, was for expansions under the health care law. (All those figures are before federal reimbursements.)”

To read the entirety of the article containing the source data, click on ‘RomneyCare’ Facts and Falsehoods.

May 232012
 
Share

This article has several statistics from several sources on the U.S. education system compared to other countries.


The Broad Foundation reported the following:

  • U.S. ranks 21st in high school graduation rate compared to other industrialized nations.
  • U.S. students rank 25th in math compared to other industrialized nations.
  • U.S. students rank 21st in science compared to other industrialized nations.

To read additional information from the Broad Foundation on education, click on Background on the Crisis.


The Master of Arts in Teaching at the University of Southern California in February 2011 created the following chart which has spending, literacy, school life expectancy, and test score statistics:

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Education Spending, Literacy, & Test Scores vs. Other Countries

To read the entire article, click on U.S. Education Spending and Performance vs. The World [INFOGRAPHIC].


The OECD created the following charts which compare education spending as a percentage of their respective economy (GDP) across several countries:

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Expenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP, for all levels of education

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Expenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

Expenditure on primary and lower secondary educational institutions as a percentage of GDP and proportion of the population aged 5-14

To view the source data, click on Key indicators on education and use Indicator B2.  To view other charts and statistics, click on Key indicators on education.

May 072012
 
Share

truthful politics reviewed jobs statistics provided by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the official numbers on jobs gained or lost for the U.S.

  • Both charts below show how many jobs annually were created, or lost, nationally during presidential terms and/or political party. The numbers are in thousands.
  • The first chart displays all jobs, including government sector jobs (i.e., in 1939, approximately 1.6 million jobs were created). To see the raw data on the Bureau’s website, use Series ID CES0000000001.
  • The second chart displays all private sector jobs; government sector jobs are NOT included (i.e., in 1939, approximately 1.5 million jobs were created). To see the raw data on the Bureau’s website, use Series ID CES0500000001.

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Job Creation during Presidential Terms or Political Party

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Private Sector Job Creation during Presidential Terms or Political Party

The table below lists the amount of private sector jobs created in thousands during each President’s tenure.  Again, this table displays all private sector jobs; government sector jobs are NOT included (i.e., during the years Harry S. Truman was President (1946 – 1952), approximately 8.75 million private sector jobs were created).  To see the raw data on the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ website, use Series ID CES0500000001.

Jobs Created in Thousands President Political Party
6,551 Franklin D. Roosevelt Democrat
8,752 Harry S. Truman Democrat
1,555 Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican
2,728 John F. Kennedy Democrat
8,892 Lyndon B. Johnson Democrat
5,255 Richard Nixon Republican
2,234 Gerald Ford Republican
8,592 Jimmy Carter Democrat
13,594 Ronald Reagan Republican
1,042 George H. W. Bush Republican
19,495 Bill Clinton Democrat
-563 George W. Bush Republican
-871 Barack Obama Democrat

 

Therefore, the average amount of private sector jobs created during Democratic Presidential terms is 1,463,220 and the average amount during Republican Presidential terms is 642,000.

To read additional information, click on United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.


James Quinn in The Market Oracle in January 2011 displayed the following charts:

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Jobs by Sector from 1970 to 2010

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Jobs that are Goods Producing versus Services

Click on the chart below to see an enlarged, clearer chart.

U.S. Jobs that are Manufacturing versus Financial and Business Services

To read the entire article, click on U.S. Propaganda Ministers Pumping Out Jobs Recovery Propaganda.


David Fiderer in The Huffington Post in September 2008 compared job creation under Democratic and Republican presidential terms. “Since Truman was elected in 1948, 53.2 million new jobs were created during the 24 years when Democrats held The White House, and 38.3 million were created during the 36 years of Republican administrations.”

President Years in Office Millions of Jobs Added
Truman 1949 – 1952 5.2
Eisenhower
1953 – 1956
2.7
Kennedy/Johnson 1961 – 1964 5.7
Johnson 1965 – 1968 9.8
Nixon 1969 – 1972 6.1
Nixon/Ford 1972 – 1976 5.2
Carter
1977 – 1980
10.4
Reagan 1981 – 1984 5.2
Reagan 1985 – 1988 10.8
Bush 1989 – 1992 2.5
Clinton 1993 – 1996 11.6
Clinton 1997 – 2000 11.5
Bush 2001 – 2004 (0.1)
Bush 2005 – 2008 5.1

 

To read the entire article, click on The Simple Arithmetic of Employment: Job Growth Is Always Higher When a Democrat Is In The White House.


Wikipedia has a table with job gain/loss totals by president and political party.  In the “Party” column, “R” means Republican President and “D” means Democratic President.

U.S. President Party Term years Start jobs
(Jan)
Start jobs
(Sept)
End jobs
(Jan)
End jobs
(Sept)
Created
(Jan)
Created
(Sept)
Harding/Coolidge R 1921–1925 25,000 ** 29,500 ** +4,500 **
Calvin Coolidge R 1925–1929 29,500 ** 32,100 ** +2,600 **
Herbert Hoover R 1929–1933 32,100 ** 25,700 ** -6,400 **
Franklin Roosevelt D 1933–1937 25,700 ** 31,200 ** +5,500 **
Franklin Roosevelt D 1937–1941 31,200 ** 34,480 37,836 +3,280 **
Franklin Roosevelt D 1941–1945 34,480 37,836 41,903 38,500 +7,423 +664
Roosevelt/Truman D 1945–1949 41,903 38,500 44,675 43,784 +2,772 +5,284
Harry Truman D 1949–1953 44,675 43,784 50,145 50,365 +5,470 +6,581
Dwight Eisenhower R 1953–1957 50,145 50,365 52,888 52,932 +2,743 +2,567
Dwight Eisenhower R 1957–1961 52,888 52,932 53,683 54,387 +795 +1,455
Kennedy/Johnson D 1961–1965 53,683 54,387 59,583 61,490 +5,900 +7,103
Lyndon Johnson D 1965–1969 59,583 61,490 69,438 70,918 +9,855 +9,428
Richard Nixon R 1969–1973 69,438 70,918 75,620 77,281 +6,182 +6,363
Nixon/Ford R 1973–1977 75,620 77,281 80,692 83,532 +5,072 +6,251
Jimmy Carter D 1977–1981 80,692 83,532 91,031 91,471 +10,339 +7,939
Ronald Reagan R 1981–1985 91,031 91,471 96,353 98,023 +5,322 +6,552
Ronald Reagan R 1985–1989 96,353 98,023 107,133 108,326 +10,780 +10,303
George H. W. Bush R 1989–1993 107,133 108,326 109,726 111,358 +2,593 +3,032
Bill Clinton D 1993–1997 109,725 111,360 121,233 123,418 +11,507 +12,060
Bill Clinton D 1997–2001 121,231 123,418 132,466 131,524 +11,233 +8,106
George W. Bush R 2001–2005 132,466 131,524 132,453 134,240 -13 +2,716
George W. Bush R 2005–2009 132,453 134,240 133,561 129,734 +1,108 -4,506
Barack Obama D 2009–2013 133,561 129,734 132,409
(January 2012)
131,694
(through 2011)
-1,152
(January 2012)
+1,960
(through 2011)

 

U.S. President Party Ave annual increase
(Jan)
Ave annual increase
(Sept)
Harding/Coolidge R +4.23% **
Calvin Coolidge R +2.13% **
Herbert Hoover R -5.41% **
Franklin Roosevelt D +4.97% **
Franklin Roosevelt D +2.53% **
Franklin Roosevelt D +5.00% +0.44%
Roosevelt/Truman D +1.61% +3.27%
Harry Truman D +2.93% +3.56%
Dwight Eisenhower R +1.34% +1.25%
Dwight Eisenhower R +0.37% +0.68%
Kennedy/Johnson D +2.64% +3.12%
Lyndon Johnson D +3.90% +3.63%
Richard Nixon R +2.16% +2.17%
Nixon/Ford R +1.64% +1.96%
Jimmy Carter D +3.06% +2.30%
Ronald Reagan R +1.43% +1.75%
Ronald Reagan R +2.69% +2.53%
George H. W. Bush R +0.60% +0.69%
Bill Clinton D +2.52% +2.60%
Bill Clinton D +2.24% +1.60%
George W. Bush R -0.00% +0.51%
George W. Bush R +0.21% -0.84%
Barack Obama D -0.28%(January 2012) +0.75%(through 2011)

 

To read the entire article, click on Jobs created during U.S. presidential terms. Lastly, Data Politica also has charts on job gains/losses. To view the chart, click on Monthly U.S. Jobs Created 1988-Present including Political Party and President.