Employment, in thousands:
| Category | 2000 | 2006 | 2012 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Private sector employment | 111,101 | 114,155 | 111,820 |
| Government employment | 20,790 | 21,975 | 21,915 |
Source: FRED graph, establishment survey. Private sector employment increased less than 1 percent from 2000 to 2012, while government employment (Federal, state, and local) increased more than 5 percent.
Spending, millions of dollars:
| Category | 2006 Q4 | 2012 Q4 |
|---|---|---|
| Total GDP | 13584.2 | 15851.2 |
| Government Expenditures | 4325.9 | 5704.9 |
Source: FRED graph, national income accounts. Government spending (again, including state and local government) is up 32 percent since 2006.
In my view, these facts can provide some perspective on the issue of spending cuts and austerity. Draw your own conclusions.
As an aside, two documents that usually come out in February were not available when this was written (on March 6th, scheduled for posting March 8th). One is the President’s Budget. The other is the Economic Report of the President. I wonder if they are being planned for release at “news graveyard” time, which is late afternoon on a Friday.
Can these numbers being used to argue that all of the stimulus was wasteful at least in sofar as it should help keep employment up? It might have boosted economic activity while being jobless nonetheless. This would mean that only insiders gained anything from the additional money spent. Seems to me a powerful argument against stimuli or at least for more inclusive policy.
Why not make the comparison to 2008 when government employment peaked?.
Beware of economists who cherry (?) pick single data points when much longer data series are available.