Paul Krugman finds Mitt Romney's claim that Pres. Obama lost 2M jobs "deeply misleading," since...

Paul Krugman finds Mitt Romney's claim that Pres. Obama lost 2M jobs "deeply misleading," since the U.S. economy lost 3.1M jobs in the president's first six months but has since gained 1.2M jobs. Yet Romney takes credit for creating 100K jobs at Bain Capital “based on current employment figures, not the period when Romney worked at Bain."

Comments (14)
  • Grand Nagus Kelly
    , contributor
    Comments (1828) | Send Message
    The only thing I agree with Newt Gingrich on is that Mitt Romney is indeed a liar.
    6 Jan 2012, 06:08 PM Reply Like
  • Tricky
    , contributor
    Comments (2036) | Send Message
    Romney's reign at Bain will be interesting fodder, should he sew up the nomination. The Dem's are lying in wait, at the moment. Gonna be really interesting to see what the data shows. How many companies created/destroyed; how many jobs created/destroyed; average compensation of jobs created/destroyed. I have to believe that if it was really a positive story, Mitt would be using it now during the nomination fight.
    6 Jan 2012, 06:14 PM Reply Like
  • Losing Paper While Gaining ...
    , contributor
    Comments (488) | Send Message
    At least we now know Krugman can do basic addition and subtraction.
    6 Jan 2012, 06:24 PM Reply Like
  • User 487974
    , contributor
    Comments (1101) | Send Message
    Hey Paul, are you down with a "King Obama", because he is ascending to the thrown and idiots like you are rolling out the red carpet for him!
    Your progressive nightmare is going to be the death knell for the republic!
    We are the most stupid people ever recorded in history who allowed their personal freedoms and liberties to be confiscated by the likes of such immoral knuckle heads as you and Obummer!
    God help us all!
    6 Jan 2012, 07:15 PM Reply Like
  • SoldHigh
    , contributor
    Comments (991) | Send Message
    Hey Krugman, if you take into account all the jobs that have been lost and uncreated due to the jack-booted moves of our Dear Leader's Obamacare, excessive Obama-supported regulations, and Obama-thugs (such as appointments at anti-business NLRB, etc), and his anti-energy stance, then the numbers are far worse than what's being reported!
    6 Jan 2012, 07:56 PM Reply Like
  • phxcrane
    , contributor
    Comments (707) | Send Message
    Krugman not as good with math when it comes to Democrats claims about who paying taxes and how much.
    6 Jan 2012, 08:38 PM Reply Like
  • august1
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
    I can't believe we waste our time on commenting on anything Krugman has to say
    6 Jan 2012, 09:42 PM Reply Like
  • Tricky
    , contributor
    Comments (2036) | Send Message
    Seeking Alpha needs to page views to generate revenue. It's the least we can do to help them out ;-)
    6 Jan 2012, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS-2.0
    , contributor
    Comments (528) | Send Message
    - 1.2


    1.9M = pretty close to 2M


    I am certain Krugman has rounded in his favor to even greater extent in the past.
    7 Jan 2012, 12:16 AM Reply Like
  • That tax guy
    , contributor
    Comments (8) | Send Message
    First off espousing opinions with such vile appears as the rantings of pusillanimous reprobates and is cause for sacrificing other contributions. Please stop. That said what confounds me is the shrinkage in public sector employment while the private sector at the same time seems to be showing signs of potentially facilitating sustainable job growth in the US. Isn't smaller government with sustainable industry driven employment what we all see as a solution to recovery? It seems that is what the President is doing. Perhaps not at the speed the right prefers.
    7 Jan 2012, 11:21 AM Reply Like
  • phxcrane
    , contributor
    Comments (707) | Send Message
    Most of the public sector job losses are at the local level not the federal. Should be the other way around. Also the president has created an environment very hostile to business. Not good for job growth. Not to mention the regulation. No matter how bad this president is and he is really bad. Jobs will come back. Albeit not at the speed of light.
    7 Jan 2012, 11:35 AM Reply Like
    , contributor
    Comments (10765) | Send Message
    Tax guy....thanks for your big words....but guess what? Vile is an adjective.


    Second, got any stats to support your contention that "public sector" jobs are shrinking? And how about the compensation levels of those jobs?
    8 Jan 2012, 12:35 AM Reply Like
    , contributor
    Comments (10765) | Send Message
    1980....ta ta !!!! you got it dude again. How is this not the first response to this article. "Deeply Misleading" PU' LEEEEEASE.
    8 Jan 2012, 12:37 AM Reply Like
  • Sp0ck
    , contributor
    Comments (25) | Send Message
    I believe the reason that this statement is thought by Krugman to be "deeply misleading" is not because the net jobs lost is 1.9 million instead of the claimed 2 million, but because the 2.1 million jobs lost occurred in the first sixth months. Thus it can be chalked up as downward economic momentum from the Bush administration and the burden of blame can be partially shifted over to the back of the previous administration.


    Although I do believe this to an extent, in that he took office at an incredibly bad time, I wonder what kind of jobs the 1.2 million created are.
    8 Jan 2012, 02:22 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs