thew Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Just in time for the DNC... And then the debates of coarse.. http://www.iht.com/articles/527088.html Poll finds approval of Bush at a new low Adam Nagourney and Janet Elder/NYT NYT Tuesday, June 29, 2004 But his decline does little to boost Kerry President George W. Bush's job approval rating has fallen to the lowest number of his presidency, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll, amid stiffening opposition to the Iraq war, anxiety that the invasion is inviting domestic terrorist attacks and skepticism that the White House has been truthful about the war or about prison abuses at Abu Ghraib. . A solid majority of Americans in the Times/CBS poll, which was completed before the handover of power on Monday to an interim Iraqi government, said the war has not been worth its cost in American lives. In addition, most said that the Bush administration did not have a clear plan to restore order to Iraq, and 40 percent said they supported withdrawing troops from the country as soon as possible, even if Iraq had not become stable. . The Times/CBS News poll also found concerns, albeit not as sharp, about Bush's likely Democratic challenger, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts. . While nearly 40 percent of Americans said they did not have an opinion about Kerry, despite the earliest and most expensive television advertising campaign ever conducted by both sides, he was disliked more than he was liked. . More than 50 percent of respondents said Kerry tells voters what they want to hear, suggesting success by Bush in one of his main political efforts this spring: to portray Kerry as a flip-flopper. . Perhaps even more significant in this election, more Americans said they trusted Bush more than Kerry to steer the nation through a foreign crisis, and to protect Americans from terrorism. . Beyond that though, the Times/CBS News poll contained a series of warning flags for Bush, and strong evidence that his decision to take the nation to war against Iraq had placed him in a precarious political position. From that perspective, Bush appears to have a lot riding on the transfer of power that he celebrated Monday. . Just 42 percent of Americans said they approved of the way Bush was handling his job, the lowest finding in a Times survey since the beginning of Bush's presidency; 51 percent said they disapproved. In the past 25 years, presidents with job approval ratings below 50 percent in the spring have gone on to lose in the fall; Bush's father had a 34 percent job approval rating at this time in 1992. . Similarly, 45 percent said they had an unfavorable opinion of Bush, again the highest measure the Times has found since the beginning of Bush's presidency. And 57 percent said the country was going in the wrong direction, also a revealing measure used by pollsters to gauge discontent with an incumbent office holder. . But for all the signs of trouble for Bush, the poll found little evidence that Kerry has been able to take advantage of the president's difficulties, a finding that is all the more striking, given that Kerry has spent $60 million on television advertising over the past three months. . The poll found the two men tied, with Kerry supported by 45 percent of registered voters and Bush supported by 44 percent. Of those voters, three-quarters said their minds were made up and nothing could change them. When Ralph Nader, who is running as an independent was included, he drew 5 percent, leaving 42 percent for Kerry and 43 percent for Bush. . The nationwide poll of 1,053 adults, including 875 registered voters, was taken by telephone June 23 through 27. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. . The finding left little doubt about how much Bush's decision to go to war was proving to be perhaps the most fateful decision he has made as president. . Sixty percent of respondents including a majority of independents said the war had not been worth the cost. About half said that the White House did not have a clear plan to accomplish the transfer of power that began Monday. . The New York Times See more of the world that matters - click here for home delivery of the International Herald Tribune. < < Back to Start of Article But his decline does little to boost Kerry President George W. Bush's job approval rating has fallen to the lowest number of his presidency, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll, amid stiffening opposition to the Iraq war, anxiety that the invasion is inviting domestic terrorist attacks and skepticism that the White House has been truthful about the war or about prison abuses at Abu Ghraib. . A solid majority of Americans in the Times/CBS poll, which was completed before the handover of power on Monday to an interim Iraqi government, said the war has not been worth its cost in American lives. In addition, most said that the Bush administration did not have a clear plan to restore order to Iraq, and 40 percent said they supported withdrawing troops from the country as soon as possible, even if Iraq had not become stable. . The Times/CBS News poll also found concerns, albeit not as sharp, about Bush's likely Democratic challenger, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts. . While nearly 40 percent of Americans said they did not have an opinion about Kerry, despite the earliest and most expensive television advertising campaign ever conducted by both sides, he was disliked more than he was liked. . More than 50 percent of respondents said Kerry tells voters what they want to hear, suggesting success by Bush in one of his main political efforts this spring: to portray Kerry as a flip-flopper. . Perhaps even more significant in this election, more Americans said they trusted Bush more than Kerry to steer the nation through a foreign crisis, and to protect Americans from terrorism. . Beyond that though, the Times/CBS News poll contained a series of warning flags for Bush, and strong evidence that his decision to take the nation to war against Iraq had placed him in a precarious political position. From that perspective, Bush appears to have a lot riding on the transfer of power that he celebrated Monday. . Just 42 percent of Americans said they approved of the way Bush was handling his job, the lowest finding in a Times survey since the beginning of Bush's presidency; 51 percent said they disapproved. In the past 25 years, presidents with job approval ratings below 50 percent in the spring have gone on to lose in the fall; Bush's father had a 34 percent job approval rating at this time in 1992. . Similarly, 45 percent said they had an unfavorable opinion of Bush, again the highest measure the Times has found since the beginning of Bush's presidency. And 57 percent said the country was going in the wrong direction, also a revealing measure used by pollsters to gauge discontent with an incumbent office holder. . But for all the signs of trouble for Bush, the poll found little evidence that Kerry has been able to take advantage of the president's difficulties, a finding that is all the more striking, given that Kerry has spent $60 million on television advertising over the past three months. . The poll found the two men tied, with Kerry supported by 45 percent of registered voters and Bush supported by 44 percent. Of those voters, three-quarters said their minds were made up and nothing could change them. When Ralph Nader, who is running as an independent was included, he drew 5 percent, leaving 42 percent for Kerry and 43 percent for Bush. . The nationwide poll of 1,053 adults, including 875 registered voters, was taken by telephone June 23 through 27. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. . The finding left little doubt about how much Bush's decision to go to war was proving to be perhaps the most fateful decision he has made as president. . Sixty percent of respondents including a majority of independents said the war had not been worth the cost. About half said that the White House did not have a clear plan to accomplish the transfer of power that began Monday. . The New York Times But his decline does little to boost Kerry President George W. Bush's job approval rating has fallen to the lowest number of his presidency, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll, amid stiffening opposition to the Iraq war, anxiety that the invasion is inviting domestic terrorist attacks and skepticism that the White House has been truthful about the war or about prison abuses at Abu Ghraib. . A solid majority of Americans in the Times/CBS poll, which was completed before the handover of power on Monday to an interim Iraqi government, said the war has not been worth its cost in American lives. In addition, most said that the Bush administration did not have a clear plan to restore order to Iraq, and 40 percent said they supported withdrawing troops from the country as soon as possible, even if Iraq had not become stable. . The Times/CBS News poll also found concerns, albeit not as sharp, about Bush's likely Democratic challenger, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts. . While nearly 40 percent of Americans said they did not have an opinion about Kerry, despite the earliest and most expensive television advertising campaign ever conducted by both sides, he was disliked more than he was liked. . More than 50 percent of respondents said Kerry tells voters what they want to hear, suggesting success by Bush in one of his main political efforts this spring: to portray Kerry as a flip-flopper. . Perhaps even more significant in this election, more Americans said they trusted Bush more than Kerry to steer the nation through a foreign crisis, and to protect Americans from terrorism. . Beyond that though, the Times/CBS News poll contained a series of warning flags for Bush, and strong evidence that his decision to take the nation to war against Iraq had placed him in a precarious political position. From that perspective, Bush appears to have a lot riding on the transfer of power that he celebrated Monday. . Just 42 percent of Americans said they approved of the way Bush was handling his job, the lowest finding in a Times survey since the beginning of Bush's presidency; 51 percent said they disapproved. In the past 25 years, presidents with job approval ratings below 50 percent in the spring have gone on to lose in the fall; Bush's father had a 34 percent job approval rating at this time in 1992. . Similarly, 45 percent said they had an unfavorable opinion of Bush, again the highest measure the Times has found since the beginning of Bush's presidency. And 57 percent said the country was going in the wrong direction, also a revealing measure used by pollsters to gauge discontent with an incumbent office holder. . But for all the signs of trouble for Bush, the poll found little evidence that Kerry has been able to take advantage of the president's difficulties, a finding that is all the more striking, given that Kerry has spent $60 million on television advertising over the past three months. . The poll found the two men tied, with Kerry supported by 45 percent of registered voters and Bush supported by 44 percent. Of those voters, three-quarters said their minds were made up and nothing could change them. When Ralph Nader, who is running as an independent was included, he drew 5 percent, leaving 42 percent for Kerry and 43 percent for Bush. . The nationwide poll of 1,053 adults, including 875 registered voters, was taken by telephone June 23 through 27. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. . The finding left little doubt about how much Bush's decision to go to war was proving to be perhaps the most fateful decision he has made as president. . Sixty percent of respondents including a majority of independents said the war had not been worth the cost. About half said that the White House did not have a clear plan to accomplish the transfer of power that began Monday. . The New York Times But his decline does little to boost Kerry President George W. Bush's job approval rating has fallen to the lowest number of his presidency, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll, amid stiffening opposition to the Iraq war, anxiety that the invasion is inviting domestic terrorist attacks and skepticism that the White House has been truthful about the war or about prison abuses at Abu Ghraib. . A solid majority of Americans in the Times/CBS poll, which was completed before the handover of power on Monday to an interim Iraqi government, said the war has not been worth its cost in American lives. In addition, most said that the Bush administration did not have a clear plan to restore order to Iraq, and 40 percent said they supported withdrawing troops from the country as soon as possible, even if Iraq had not become stable. . The Times/CBS News poll also found concerns, albeit not as sharp, about Bush's likely Democratic challenger, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts. . While nearly 40 percent of Americans said they did not have an opinion about Kerry, despite the earliest and most expensive television advertising campaign ever conducted by both sides, he was disliked more than he was liked. . More than 50 percent of respondents said Kerry tells voters what they want to hear, suggesting success by Bush in one of his main political efforts this spring: to portray Kerry as a flip-flopper. . Perhaps even more significant in this election, more Americans said they trusted Bush more than Kerry to steer the nation through a foreign crisis, and to protect Americans from terrorism. . Beyond that though, the Times/CBS News poll contained a series of warning flags for Bush, and strong evidence that his decision to take the nation to war against Iraq had placed him in a precarious political position. From that perspective, Bush appears to have a lot riding on the transfer of power that he celebrated Monday. . Just 42 percent of Americans said they approved of the way Bush was handling his job, the lowest finding in a Times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 While nearly 40 percent of Americans said they did not have an opinion about Kerry, despite the earliest and most expensive television advertising campaign ever conducted by both sides, he was disliked more than he was liked.. More than 50 percent of respondents said Kerry tells voters what they want to hear, suggesting success by Bush in one of his main political efforts this spring: to portray Kerry as a flip-flopper. Even though most people are not happy with Bush they will not vote for someone they don't like and even they see as a flip-flopper I feel bad for the dems because they could have stole this election if Edwards or someone likeable was running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I think no matter what they say about them... Dean or Edwards would be crushing right now... 121 million in ads and 40% don't know him???? boggles the mind on 2 fronts. 1. The people that just don't care and feel it doesnt matter. 2. How can you spend that much money and not be "known". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by Thiebear I think no matter what they say about them... Dean or Edwards would be crushing right now... 121 million in ads and 40% don't know him???? boggles the mind on 2 fronts. 1. The people that just don't care and feel it doesnt matter. 2. How can you spend that much money and not be "known". Easy he isn't liked at all. This is how it is in his state, he isn't liked there. He has always been a flip-flopper and mass people know this. You are right about Edwards because with his charm everyone would think he is the second Clinton, but not Dean, he was way to liberal to ever be president. I think even the other candidates would have an easy time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Being in MD, I haven't seen an ad yet. I suspect if you're not in a "battelground" state, the money spent by Kerry (and for that matter Buch) probably hasn't added to what you know about Kerry. Getting to 40% in a nationwide poll probably isn't too hard. Of course, I wonder how much ads on either side can really help you "know" the canidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=836 Since we're talking about polls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thew Posted June 29, 2004 Author Share Posted June 29, 2004 Wow Zogby has bush up in four new states and Kerry up in only one. That is interesting. I wonder if Zogby's numbers disagree with Gallup's numbers nationally? jbooma Even though most people are not happy with Bush they will not vote for someone they don't like and even they see as a flip-flopper guess again there jbooma. Presidencial elections are always a reforandum on the incumbant. This race will be won or lost on Bush's record. The incumbant is what drives voters. 121 million in ads and 40% don't know him???? boggles the mind on 2 fronts. 1. The people that just don't care and feel it doesnt matter. 2. How can you spend that much money and not be "known". First it's always been this way. The majority of the country is just now starting to pay attention. The decisions won't be made until after the conventions and probable debate night. Ronald Reagan was behind Jimmy Carter the day of the first national debate by a point and he won in a landslide. The country will get to know what kerry's message is because he or his advocates will be on TV for five straight nights saying what their platform is. Bush will of course have this opprotunity too, but it will be less effective because after four years of Presidency his actions in office have already defined him. suffice it to say it's a much stronger position to be even with a very unpopular incumbant and nobody knowing what your platform is. Once he defines himself he has nowhere to go but up. Likewise Bush will have a hard time running away from his track record of failures. Two primary voting issues will be Iraq and the economy. Bush has already lost the economic issue. Large deficites, increasing government spending, increasing goverment by 400k jobs. Net losse of jobs over his term. Even if he breaks even or creats a few thousands jobs, which is possible, this news will only highlight what a desaster his presidencey has been economically. Bush's potential strength is Iraq. It is the stronger of the two issues this election period too, which is good for Bush. If the insurgency dies down after the turn over, Bush could still possible pull this off. If hundreds of Iraqis are still being killed weekly by the insurgents in multiple car bombings then bush is Done. Also if a few more American folks get beheded on the internet, Bush is Done. Still the turn over represents some hope for Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by thew guess again there jbooma. Presidencial elections are always a reforandum on the incumbant. This race will be won or lost on Bush's record. The incumbant is what drives voters. Show me one sitting president that lost the election when the economy was doing well?? I will give you hint, it hasn't happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief skin Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Kerry picks Edwards as his VP and they kick Bush's a$$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by Chief skin Kerry picks Edwards as his VP and they kick Bush's a$$ I would vote if that ticket was reversed and would agree many more would but as long as Kerry is the lead he will not win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thew Posted June 29, 2004 Author Share Posted June 29, 2004 Show me one sitting president that lost the election when the economy was doing well?? I will give you hint, it hasn't happened. The economy isn't doing well their my friend. We're still down 1.5 million jobs under Bush. He very likely will be the first president since Herbert Hoover (The Great Depression finish a four year term with a net loss of jobs. Clinton Created 11 million jobs in his first four years.... Bush so far has lost 1.5 million private sector jobs. The economy isn't a plus for Bush.. Presients who were not re-elected even though the economy was strong... Ford, Economically America was doing great. But nobody could forgive him for pardoning Nixon. The country wanted a change. The Economy was trumped by other issues. Johnston, Economically America was doing well in the late 60's. The Economy didn't factor into voters thoughts though. Everybody was thinking about Vietnam. Johnston didn't even run for re-election. Truman. Economically America was doing great. But the economy didn't factor into voters thoughts. Everybody was focused on Korea and China and the Soviet Union. Truman didn't even run for re-election. It is true that economic issues usually drive elections but not in times of war.... Good thing for Bush too, because he still has some hope for pulling out a W in Iraq. Slim one though. The incumbant is the one who's record controls the election. The vote is a refferendum on the incumbant always. The only caviot is if the challenger is seen to be an unacceptable alternative, which is what you're point is I think. My point is that Bush's attempt to frame Kerry as unacceptable have failed. Kerry currently doesn't draw voters because they don't know him. After the DNC and the Debates that won't be a problem anylonger and it will be all about Bush. It's much easier for Kerry to become known going into the DNC and six or seven nights of continous prime time coverage than it is for Bush to convince voters that they're wrong about him after having lived through his first four years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by thew The economy isn't doing well their my friend. We're still down 1.5 million jobs under Bush. He very likely will be the first president since Herbert Hoover finish a four year term with a net loss of jobs. Clinton Created 11 million jobs in his first four years.... The economy isn't a plus for Bush.. Can we agree that it wasn't clinton but the internet that created those jobs :doh: After this month it will be 1.2 million jobs, by november at this rate it will be a positive Exactly how long are you going to keep saying this 1.5 million However most of those 11 million jobs were not needed :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wicked Wop Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Jbooma, take some advice, its like talking to a wall. Apparently Thew thinks recessions don't happen for specific reason other than whose president, we didn't have 9-11, and there was no corporate scandal that actually had its roots during the Clinton Administration. Apparently the economy should grow exponentially with no let up.....and the words market corrections should never occur in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I am getting so tired of the "Party" line that is spewed forth when discussing the economy. I understand 100% the real problems that President Bush has been involved in, but the CURRENT state of the economy is simply not one of them. My career is based upon Six Sigma philosophy/methodology, in short, I help to create efficiencies in poorly designed processes and to minimize waste. This is where I see the county has corrected itself over the past 4 years. Yes, most major corporations are running more lean now. It was a very needed change in increasing worker productivity in the long run. We have accomplished that and will continue to pursue the elimination of wasted efforts in the workplace. In no way, should a more efficient and effective workplace indicate an economic problem for our country. There are much bigger fish to fry! Get off the "lost 1.5 mill jobs" bandwagon. See reality and understand that carte blanche job creation isnt always the ideal. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by skin-n-vegas My career is based upon Six Sigma philosophy/methodology, in short, I help to create efficiencies in poorly designed processes and to minimize waste. Did you start at motorola?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thew Posted June 29, 2004 Author Share Posted June 29, 2004 Can we agree that it wasn't clinton but the internet that created those jobs At it's peak the computer industry in this country employes fewer than 2 million folks. And fewer than half of those jobs were dot com jobs. The eleven million jobs of the 90's were not dot com jobs. We live in the information age. Lots of industries require computer workers. After this month it will be 1.2 million jobs, by november at this rate it will be a positive I don't know what would be worse. Ending down a few hundred thousand jobs or finishing up a few hundred thousands jobs. If he's up then it will be a major press story that he finally actually created net positive jobs. Then they will compare those jobs created with other presidents and the failure will become very obvious. Hoover and Bush locked together through history. appropiate. If he remains down a few hundred thousand jobs he can just continue to run on the last three months of job creation rather than his record in it's totality. Exactly how long are you going to keep saying this 1.5 million As soon as Bush creates three jobs. Three net positive jobs since taking office, I'll stop calling him an incompetent boob and the worst President since Jimmy Carter. I'll even stop comparing him to Herbert Hoover. 3 jobs...... Or is the bar too high? However most of those 11 million jobs were not needed All the jobs which where created under Clinton were certainly needed... I mean folks have been in those jobs for almost a decade now. Pretty hard to convince anybody that the private sector was duped into creating, and staffing almost 11 million jobs for almost a decade. Hell Clinton even added more net jobs his second term after the dot com bust... Also the jobs which Bush have lost haven't disappeared. Bush's job creation record is quite spectacular in China and India where all the Bush recovery jobs have gone. Too bad George isn't running in one of those country's he might have a better chance of running on his economic record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by thew At it's peak the computer industry in this country employes fewer than 2 million folks. The eleven million jobs of the 90's were not dot com jobs. Please tell my you have some facts to back that up, because it was a lot more then 2 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by jbooma Did you start at motorola?? Wow! You are good! Most don't know that Six Sigma helped turn Motorola around! I actually started with the program with Ford Financial (Division of Ford Motor) The Ford "Consumer Driven Six Sigma" program began in 2001 and is really doing great things (ie: new F150, Mustang, and Mazda 6) in our production lines and has established a firm foothold in our Financial community. It's been a very interesting Career move for me so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by skin-n-vegas Wow! You are good! Most don't know that Six Sigma helped turn Motorola around! Most also don't know what the Malcolm Baldridge award is. Thew doesn't know who he is messing with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by thew "All the jobs which where created under Clinton were certainly needed... I mean folks have been in those jobs for almost a decade now. " Interesting, if they have all been in those 11 million jobs for a decade now, then how can you say that the Bush Administration lost those jobs. Thew, are you an unemployed software designer or something? (no disrespect intended, just curious as to where your strong negativity comes from at a personal level. Helps me put your comments into context) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by skin-n-vegas Originally posted by thew Thew, are you an unemployed software designer or something? (no disrespect intended, just curious as to where your strong negativity comes from at a personal level. Helps me put your comments into context) Or are you one of those college kids who walked into the $70k job with $100k in stock options and thought that was realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by jbooma Most also don't know what the Malcolm Baldridge award is. Thew doesn't know who he is messing with :notworthy Now you have truly convinced me of your knowledge!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thew Posted June 29, 2004 Author Share Posted June 29, 2004 2003 Computer and mathematical science occupations Computer and information scientists, research 23,210 Computer programmers 431,640 Computer software engineers, applications 392,140 Computer software engineers, systems software 285,760 Computer support specialists 482,990 Computer systems analysts 474,780 Database administrators 100,890 Network and computer systems administrators 237,980 Network systems and data communications analysts 148,030 Total around 2.4 million.. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.t01.htm 1998 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ocwage.12221999.news 1999 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ocwage.12202000.news Computer and mathematical operations occupations Computer and information scientists, research..........26,280 Computer programmers (2)...............................528,600 Computer software engineers, applications..............287,600 Computer software engineers, systems software..........209,030 Computer support specialists...........................462,840 Computer systems analysts..............................428,210 Database administrators (2)............................101,460 Network and computer systems administrators............204,680 Network systems and data communications analysts.......98,330 roughly 2.4 million jobs prior to dot com bust 2000 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ocwage.11142001.news 2001 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ocwage.11062002.news 2001 Computer and mathematical operations occupations Computer and information scientists, research 25,620 Computer programmers 501,580 Computer software engineers, applications 361,660 Computer software engineers, systems software 261,520 Computer support specialists 493,230 Computer systems analysts 448,260 Database administrators 104,250 Network and computer systems administrators 227,830 Network systems and data communications analysts 126,060 roughly 2.5 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by thew 2003 Computer and mathematical science occupations Computer and information scientists, research 23,210 Computer programmers 431,640 Computer software engineers, applications 392,140 Computer software engineers, systems software 285,760 Computer support specialists 482,990 Computer systems analysts 474,780 Database administrators 100,890 Network and computer systems administrators 237,980 Network systems and data communications analysts 148,030 Total around 2.4 million.. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.t01.htm 1998 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ocwage.12221999.news 1999 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ocwage.12202000.news 2000 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ocwage.11142001.news 2001 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ocwage.11062002.news 2001 Computer and mathematical operations occupations Computer and information scientists, research 25,620 Computer programmers 501,580 Computer software engineers, applications 361,660 Computer software engineers, systems software 261,520 Computer support specialists 493,230 Computer systems analysts 448,260 Database administrators 104,250 Network and computer systems administrators 227,830 Network systems and data communications analysts 126,060 roughly 2.5 million Thew I thought you were better then that. You do know when you start an internet company you need more then just technical people. The .dot com layoffs include sales, hr, accounting, management, project managers, etc... Shall I go on. Not including the buzz on wall street, all the new companies that opened to deal with buying stock, etc... You can't pinpoint dot com layoffs to the technical side only since everyone was rewarded by it. You would also have to look to the tellcom industry since they were the ones that were the ones who took the brunt. So lets then add MCI, BellSouth, etc... to your list. I will be waiting for your final number, don't be surprised if it gets close to maybe 7 to 9 million So can we drop your 1.5 case now :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by jbooma Thew I thought you were better then that. You do know when you start an internet company you need ore then just technical people. The .dot com layoffs include sales, hr, accounting, management, project managers, etc... Shall I go on. Not including the buzz on wall street, all the new companies that opened to deal with buying stock, etc... You can't pinpoint dot com layoffs to the technical side since everyone was rewarded by it. I can list at least 30 people that took the chance and jumped ship from secure corporate positions for the .com bubble. Accross the board, they all regretted it now. It looked to be the best thing since sliced bread and those that left for greed have now paid the price. I feel badly for any one who lost employment when the bubble popped, but the critics during that era had warned over and over again that rampant growth without profit would spell doomsday for any but the elite at their positions. It's common sense that jobs would be lost in that environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.