The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux) - Page 624

JWBear · 09-22-2011, 10:45 AM

Interesting...

Number of federal employees (excluding military) in 1980: 1.2 million
Number of federal employees (excluding military) in 2010: 1.3 million
An 8% increase

Population of the US in 1980: 226 million
Population of the US in 2010: 312 million
A 38% increase

Federal spending as a percent of the GDP in 1980: 21.7%
Federal spending as a percent of the GDP in 2010: 25.4%

So much for "out of control government spending"!

Alex · 09-22-2011, 11:22 AM

Well, that shows that the government has certainly become more productive at spending money (they spend much more money, relative and absolute, with only a few more employees), but I'm not sure I see how how a 17% increase in the relative size of government is a repudiation of the idea that government has become too big.

It isn't evidence of it either, but I don't how your first two numbers have much connection to your third in reaching your conclusion.

JWBear · 09-22-2011, 11:57 AM

According to the right, the ranks of federal employees have swelled all out of proportion. We are also told that government spending has multiplied. These numbers clearly show that neither talking points are true. While government spending has increases slightly in regards to the GDP (almost completely due to military spending, TARP, and the stimulus), the federal workforce as a percentage of the total population has shrunk.

The Federal Government is in no way "out of control".

alphabassettgrrl · 09-22-2011, 01:41 PM

Aww, come on, why let the facts get in the way of a good sound-bite?

Alex · 09-22-2011, 03:11 PM

A 17% increase, especially if you thought something was too big to begin with doesn't strike me as "slight."

And the employment number (I see sources online that give a different larger number for civilian federal employees but the relatively static nature remains the same) is somewhat deceptive if, as is often complained about, the growth in government employment has not been in direct federal employees but rather through conversion of direct employment to contracted employment.

I tried to look it up but it would appear that the government doesn't actually keep count of how many people performing government jobs do so as contractors.

Alex · 09-22-2011, 03:23 PM

Finally figured out some better search terms. Several different sources indicate that there are at least 10 million people working in government as contractors (not counting the several million more military and post office) contractors. Here's one article (which does mention that while official employment has remained flat, contractors have exploded during the last 20 years.

Here's a 2006 Washington Post article (which is pointing out that Bush was hiding the peanut in claming smaller government while hiring more contractors) that estimates 2.5 additional contractor positions between 2002 and 2006.

Morrigoon · 09-22-2011, 07:19 PM

So there are more people working... they just don't get benefits. Or job security.

Alex · 09-22-2011, 07:55 PM

Oh, they may very well have benefits and security. They aren't working as freelance contractors. They work for companies that contract with the government.

Prudence · 09-23-2011, 06:32 AM

My experience working for the DoD was that the contractors generally had *better* salary and benefits (by a hefty margin) than we did. Job security was less so, as the government would recompete the support contracts every year or so, so contractors could potentially lose their jobs that way, if they were neither picked up by the new contracting agency nor found a new gig by their existing agency.

JWBear · 09-23-2011, 10:49 AM

Alex,

In your pursuit to pick apart the details, you miss the overall point. Despite the right-wing retoric, the size of the federal government has not increased significantly in the last 30 years. Since 1980 federal spending in relation to the GDP, although it has fluctuated, has stayed right around 20%. The biggest jump - 20.7% to 24.7% - was in 2009 due to TARP and the stimulus. Interestingly enough, Federal receipts (the money it takes in - mostly from taxes) went down from 17.5% in 2008 to 14.8% in 2009. In fact, federal receipts as a percentage of the GDP are currently the lowest they have been since 1950.

In other words... We don't have a spending problem, we have a revenue shortfall.

Link

(ETA: Take a look at the chart I linked to. Notice which president spent the most money before 2009, and look who spent the least.)

09-22-2011, 10:45 AM	#1
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	Interesting... Number of federal employees (excluding military) in 1980: 1.2 million Number of federal employees (excluding military) in 2010: 1.3 million An 8% increase Population of the US in 1980: 226 million Population of the US in 2010: 312 million A 38% increase Federal spending as a percent of the GDP in 1980: 21.7% Federal spending as a percent of the GDP in 2010: 25.4% So much for "out of control government spending"! __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes

09-22-2011, 11:22 AM	#2
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Well, that shows that the government has certainly become more productive at spending money (they spend much more money, relative and absolute, with only a few more employees), but I'm not sure I see how how a 17% increase in the relative size of government is a repudiation of the idea that government has become too big. It isn't evidence of it either, but I don't how your first two numbers have much connection to your third in reaching your conclusion.
	Submit to Quotes

09-22-2011, 11:57 AM	#3
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	According to the right, the ranks of federal employees have swelled all out of proportion. We are also told that government spending has multiplied. These numbers clearly show that neither talking points are true. While government spending has increases slightly in regards to the GDP (almost completely due to military spending, TARP, and the stimulus), the federal workforce as a percentage of the total population has shrunk. The Federal Government is in no way "out of control". __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes

09-22-2011, 01:41 PM	#4
alphabassettgrrl Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 4,978	Aww, come on, why let the facts get in the way of a good sound-bite? __________________ Why cycling? Anything [sport] that had to do with a ball, I wasn't very good at. -Lance Armstrong
	Submit to Quotes

09-22-2011, 03:11 PM	#5
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	A 17% increase, especially if you thought something was too big to begin with doesn't strike me as "slight." And the employment number (I see sources online that give a different larger number for civilian federal employees but the relatively static nature remains the same) is somewhat deceptive if, as is often complained about, the growth in government employment has not been in direct federal employees but rather through conversion of direct employment to contracted employment. I tried to look it up but it would appear that the government doesn't actually keep count of how many people performing government jobs do so as contractors.
	Submit to Quotes

09-22-2011, 03:23 PM	#6
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Finally figured out some better search terms. Several different sources indicate that there are at least 10 million people working in government as contractors (not counting the several million more military and post office) contractors. Here's one article (which does mention that while official employment has remained flat, contractors have exploded during the last 20 years. Here's a 2006 Washington Post article (which is pointing out that Bush was hiding the peanut in claming smaller government while hiring more contractors) that estimates 2.5 additional contractor positions between 2002 and 2006.
	Submit to Quotes

09-22-2011, 07:19 PM	#7
Morrigoon I throw stones at houses Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Location: Location Posts: 9,534	So there are more people working... they just don't get benefits. Or job security. __________________ http://bash.org/?top "It is useless for sheep to pass a resolution in favor of vegetarianism while wolves remain of a different opinion." -- William Randolph Inge
	Submit to Quotes

09-22-2011, 07:55 PM	#8
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Oh, they may very well have benefits and security. They aren't working as freelance contractors. They work for companies that contract with the government.
	Submit to Quotes

09-23-2011, 06:32 AM	#9
Prudence Beelzeboobs, Esq. Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Gavel - I haz it Posts: 6,287	My experience working for the DoD was that the contractors generally had better salary and benefits (by a hefty margin) than we did. Job security was less so, as the government would recompete the support contracts every year or so, so contractors could potentially lose their jobs that way, if they were neither picked up by the new contracting agency nor found a new gig by their existing agency. __________________ traguna macoities tracorum satis de
	Submit to Quotes

09-23-2011, 10:49 AM	#10
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	Alex, In your pursuit to pick apart the details, you miss the overall point. Despite the right-wing retoric, the size of the federal government has not increased significantly in the last 30 years. Since 1980 federal spending in relation to the GDP, although it has fluctuated, has stayed right around 20%. The biggest jump - 20.7% to 24.7% - was in 2009 due to TARP and the stimulus. Interestingly enough, Federal receipts (the money it takes in - mostly from taxes) went down from 17.5% in 2008 to 14.8% in 2009. In fact, federal receipts as a percentage of the GDP are currently the lowest they have been since 1950. In other words... We don't have a spending problem, we have a revenue shortfall. Link (ETA: Take a look at the chart I linked to. Notice which president spent the most money before 2009, and look who spent the least.) __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes