Breaking News
0

Nearly 95% of all new jobs during Obama era were part-time, or contract

EconomyDec 21, 2016 12:23AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This article has already been saved in your Saved Items
 
© Reuters. Decline in standard of living for many.

Investing.com -- A new study by economists from Harvard and Princeton indicates that 94% of the 10 million new jobs created during the Obama era were temporary positions.

The study shows that the jobs were temporary, contract positions, or part-time "gig" jobs in a variety of fields.

Female workers suffered most heavily in this economy, as work in traditionally feminine fields, like education and medicine, declined during the era.

The research by economists Lawrence Katz of Harvard University and Alan Krueger at Princeton University shows that the proportion of workers throughout the U.S., during the Obama era, who were working in these kinds of temporary jobs, increased from 10.7% of the population to 15.8%.

Krueger, a former chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, was surprised by the finding.

The disappearance of conventional full-time work, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. work, has hit every demographic. “Workers seeking full-time, steady work have lost,” said Krueger.

Under Obama, 1 million fewer workers, overall, are working than before the beginning of the Great Recession.

The outgoing president believes his administration was a net positive for workers, however.

"Since I signed Obamacare into law (in 2010), our businesses have added more than 15 million new jobs," said Obama, during his farewell press conference last Friday, covered by Investing.com.

Nearly 95% of all new jobs during Obama era were part-time, or contract
 

Related Articles

Add a Comment

Comment Guidelines

We encourage you to use comments to engage with users, share your perspective and ask questions of authors and each other. However, in order to maintain the high level of discourse we’ve all come to value and expect, please keep the following criteria in mind: 

  • Enrich the conversation
  • Stay focused and on track. Only post material that’s relevant to the topic being discussed.
  • Be respectful. Even negative opinions can be framed positively and diplomatically.
  •  Use standard writing style. Include punctuation and upper and lower cases.
  • NOTE: Spam and/or promotional messages and links within a comment will be removed
  • Avoid profanity, slander or personal attacks directed at an author or another user.
  • Don’t Monopolize the Conversation. We appreciate passion and conviction, but we also believe strongly in giving everyone a chance to air their thoughts. Therefore, in addition to civil interaction, we expect commenters to offer their opinions succinctly and thoughtfully, but not so repeatedly that others are annoyed or offended. If we receive complaints about individuals who take over a thread or forum, we reserve the right to ban them from the site, without recourse.
  • Only English comments will be allowed.

Perpetrators of spam or abuse will be deleted from the site and prohibited from future registration at Investing.com’s discretion.

Write your thoughts here
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
Post also to:
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Thanks for your comment. Please note that all comments are pending until approved by our moderators. It may therefore take some time before it appears on our website.
Comments
Reginald Rice
Reginald Rice Oct 17, 2018 1:28AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
It must be 'selective memory' time.  The study can't include things that Mitch McConnell wouldn't allow to happen.  The GOP blocked the American Jobs Act.  According to Mark Zandi, Chief Economist of Moody’s Analytics before the plan could be stalled, “The plan would add 2 percentage points to GDP growth next year, add 1.9 million jobs, and cut the unemployment rate by a percentage point.  There should be nothing controversial about this piece of legislation.  Everything in here is the kind of proposal that’s been supported by both Democrats and Republicans – including many who sit here tonight.  And everything in this bill will be paid for. Everything. “Senate Republicans blocked the $447 billion measure, and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell denounced it as “a charade that’s meant to give Democrats a political edge” in 2012.  Just like blocking the Russian interference into our election that didn't happen as planned, ask the Senate Majority Leader, you know, the GOP Congress.
Reply
0 0
Bob Lasocki
Bob Lasocki Sep 08, 2018 7:38AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
During Obama's tenure, Liberals were telling us to get used to 1 percent growth as being the new norm in the US. Well under Trump we're at over 4 percent growth. So how can Obama take credit for any of it if in his own words he said it was impossible
Reply
5 1
Reginald Rice
Reginald Rice Sep 08, 2018 7:38AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
The next volunteer for the ‘I won’t admit, or, I don’t understand, the difference between quarterly GDP (4%) and annual GDP (no one said 1%. You made that up.)   Further, a one-time Q2 GDP of 4.1% is not a trend, since it was heavily influenced, by as much as 0.7%, by one-time events like tax cuts, and, more importantly, a 9300% rise in soybean exports, reduction in soybean inventories, as well as exports in oil, steel, aluminum, corn, just to beat late June/early July tariff deadlines. You should go back to whatever else that keeps you paid, because, economic analysis isn’t it. https://www.newsmax.com/t/finance/article/853625?section=edwardyardeni&keywords=fed-study-new-normal&year=2018&month=04&date=10&id=853625&aliaspath=%2FFinance%2FArticle%2FFinance-ArticleTemplate
Reply
0 0
Bob Lasocki
Bob Lasocki Sep 08, 2018 7:37AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
During Obama's tenure, Liberals were telling us to get used to 1 percent growth as being the new norm in the US. Well under Trump we're at over 4 percent growth. So how can Obama take credit for any of it if in his own words he said it was impossible
Reply
2 1
Judyann Joyner
Judyann Joyner Jul 24, 2018 11:40AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
I don't understand why this should come as any surprise to Mr Krueger.  Small business is the backbone of our economy and ObamaCare mandates we're breaking that back. Their only escaping the pain of ObamaCare was to reduce the positions of their employees to part time. ..It sure does not take an advance degree in economics to figure that out.  This is the result when you hire academics instead of "do'ers" to these government positions.
Reply
7 0
Judyann Joyner
Judyann Joyner Jul 24, 2018 11:33AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
What I DO not understand, why this should come as a surprise to Mr. Kruger?  Small business is the backbone of our economy.  The ObamaCare mandates were devasting to small business owners. Their only way to avoid the crippling pain of ObamaCare was to reduce employees to part time positions  It does not take an advance degree in economics to figure that out.
Reply
2 0
Shlomo Goldberg
Shlomo Goldberg Feb 01, 2018 8:22PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
This is really going to mess with everyone who says that Trump's job growth is the same as Obama's in terms of numbers, supposedly discrediting Trump's success with the market.
Reply
7 0
Judyann Joyner
Judyann Joyner Feb 01, 2018 8:22PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
The notion that today's booming economy is in any way related to Obama is just laughable. . Remember, Obama was over seeing america's decline and we were told to get used to it, it's our "new norm.". ONE MONTH post 2016 elections, consumer confidence levels soared to a 15 year high and has not looked back ever since. . The Left seems to be stuck in a perpetual state of depression. The rest of America is still rejoicing!
Reply
5 0
John Lenkiewicz
linkster Jan 26, 2017 4:33PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
The largest demographic taking those PT jobs are the elderly, whose IRA's 401k's got destroyed in the last financial collapse and now are earning virtually nothing on their savings, forcing them to supplement their income.. Among the 25-50 year old population, unemployment is much higher and those are the people who are suffering.
Reply
2 0
Not Blindly Following
Not Blindly Following Dec 22, 2016 10:27AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
I'm not sure who wrote this article but it's incredibly intellectually dishonest. . . Number 1, the study wasn't new, it was written in April, 2. the study wasn't political and covered years 1995 to 2005 then 2005 to 2015 (Ie did not isolate presidency). 3. They author of this article have take alternative work arrangement to mean part time and contract rather than what was written in the study.
Reply
4 4
Shlomo Goldberg
Shlomo Goldberg Dec 22, 2016 10:27AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Why does it matter when the study was taken?  If it was taken from 2005 to 2015, that is majority of Obama's presidency, facts don't lie.. . And alternative work arrangement does also mean part-time, so you're wrong there.
Reply
4 0
Elven Mage Jr
Elven Mage Jr Dec 22, 2016 10:27AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Not Blindly Following. It's 94% dude... NINETY-FOUR PERCENT! Even if Obama was given the absolute benefit of the doubt and we bent over backwards to say that the 4 years of Bush that was included in the study consisted of 100% temporary part-time jobs, which isn't plausible, that still leaves Obama's 6 years with AT LEAST 90% of his jobs being temporary & part-time. You are reaching as far as you can to find an excuse to latch onto to make your Lord and Savior, Obama, not look as bad. It's pathetic really. Obama was a failure. Bush was a failure. They were both horrible presidents. Now that we actually have a president who wants to bring long-term jobs and manufacturing careers back to America through protectionist policies and better trade deals, democrats have a problem with it, because "racism" and "sexism" although he has done more for blacks and women than Obama did in 8 years. The proof is in this article and in Trump's 500 day accomplishments.
Reply
7 0
Mark Scott
Mark Scott Dec 22, 2016 8:07AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
he was a failed president who promised change and delivered none. Instead of uniting a country that was ready for an african american president he went out his way to race bait and drive division deep among the poor and middle class why his elites flourished. Now step aside obama and let a leader run the country. Trump has done more as president elect for workers than obama did in 8 years.
Reply
7 3
Tony Sousa
Obsidian Dec 22, 2016 8:07AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Haha so if you don't like Obama you are automatically racist? Facts are facts Jamar. Wake up and realize the Democratic party has suppressed and held down your people for decades. This is coming from a Portuguese immigrant. African American unemployment has stayed this same (and actually risen in some parts of the US) during his presidency while other minorities and whites unemployment rates have gone down. These are all facts.
Reply
3 0
Kasper Nielsen
Kasper Nielsen Dec 22, 2016 8:07AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
isn't that really only because he couldn't actually get anything passed by the House of Congress ? or the Senate? due to low Democrats.. Obama had the right intension but lacked the support to do anything about it.
Reply
0 4
Shlomo Goldberg
Shlomo Goldberg Dec 22, 2016 8:07AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Jamar EdgarThat's right, when you don't have an argument or a refutation to someone saying something about your hero Obama, just call them a racist.. . Good job.
Reply
5 0
Elven Mage Jr
Elven Mage Jr Dec 22, 2016 8:07AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Kasper Nielsen Actually Obama and the democrats controlled congress in both chambers for 2 years, the house and the Senate and he even had a supermajoity with 60 out of 100 seats in the Senate.
Reply
2 0
Elven Mage Jr
Elven Mage Jr Dec 22, 2016 8:07AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Kasper Nielsen No. Obama and the democrats have complete *******over the congress for 2 whole years. They had a supermajority over both chambers of congress, including 60 out of 100 Senate seats.
Reply
1 0
Siva Arul
Siva Arul Dec 21, 2016 7:36PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
you are allowed to claim unemployment benefit only for 6 months, after that you are considered employed, so all the people who lost the job & pass 6months not counted in this 4.6%, so figure out the real unemployment, no body can fix it, all the companies move to China,Mexico & helping those countries & bring the goods back here and marketing our people, who has no jobs,With governments quantitative easing,corporations have good time,pumping more air Dow 20,000,ordinary people become more more homeless,all the public parks doesnt need security any more, they are fill with homeless.
Reply
1 1
Robert Ace
Robert Ace Dec 21, 2016 2:21AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
And something like 94 million not working, but 4.6% unemployment so you know...stats and stuff.
Reply
4 0
Mark Scott
Mark Scott Dec 21, 2016 2:21AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
haha totally. is a disgrace and finally the people have woken up
Reply
5 1
MELQUIOR CHAVES
MELQUIOR CHAVES Dec 21, 2016 2:21AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Are you guys serious about this figure? 94M unemployed in America? OMG
Reply
0 3
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Add Chart to Comment
Confirm Block

Are you sure you want to block %USER_NAME%?

By doing so, you and %USER_NAME% will not be able to see any of each other's Investing.com's posts.

%USER_NAME% was successfully added to your Block List

Since you’ve just unblocked this person, you must wait 48 hours before renewing the block.

Report this comment

I feel that this comment is:

Comment flagged

Thank You!

Your report has been sent to our moderators for review
Disclaimer: Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. All CFDs (stocks, indexes, futures) and Forex prices are not provided by exchanges but rather by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual market price, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Therefore Fusion Media doesn`t bear any responsibility for any trading losses you might incur as a result of using this data.

Fusion Media or anyone involved with Fusion Media will not accept any liability for loss or damage as a result of reliance on the information including data, quotes, charts and buy/sell signals contained within this website. Please be fully informed regarding the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, it is one of the riskiest investment forms possible.
Continue with Google
or
Sign up with Email