Newt downsized executive branch staff in the 90’s
I found this link in Sitemeter and am in a quixotic mood. I couldn’t resist chasing it down as I wondered what Free Republic was and how Mike’s material could be used in a debate there.
Lifted from comments at Free Republic website regarding Newt’s speech at CPAC earlier this week (and a spirited debate of advocates for Santorum and Romney) comes this note from a Newt admirer regarding Newt’s downsizing the ‘federal government’ in the 1990’s (and to his credit linked appropriately). He uses one of Mike’s early charts on executive branch civilian employment measures of compararing Presidents:
To: American Constitutionalist
Chart of federal civilian employees…big decline under the Newtster, even while the economy was booming. The decline leveled off post-Newtster. We can see the Carter/Bush eras saw declines in their recessions but Newt kept it going in good economic times.
Another commenter not linked to here chased the link (to his/her credit) to the OMB tables and but then came to the conclusion Mike made up the numbers.
I am not proposing cosmic signigicance here, but a scratch of the head and a ‘WTF’. As a leftie I suppose the conclusion could be that President Clinton found Newt’s tenure as Speaker so less than challenging he decided that he didn’t need the staff. Aside from all the other business. Thanks Ken for the idea. 🙂
Now the circus comes to Michigan – Lord help us.
What does this look like in raw numbers? The per thousand metric is less helpful I think.
Hi Steve. Note the date….2007.
The circus is everywhere…
Every system is perfectly .. perfectly.. designed to yield the results it gets…
Saturation Macroeconomics: Gobbledy-Gook or the Real Deal?
Time for a new mathematical model, a new paradigm, for macroeconomics?
Is there a patterned science representing the time dependent evolution of macroeconomics?
The last paragraph of the Economic Fractalist main page http://www.economicfractalist.com/ ….
The ideal growth fractal time sequence is X, 2.5X, 2X and 1.5-1.6X. The first two cycles include a saturation transitional point and decay process in the terminal portion of the cycles. A sudden nonlinear drop in the last 0.5x time period of the 2.5X is the hallmark of a second cycle and characterizes this most recognizable cycle. After the nonlinear gap drop, the third cycle begins. This means that the second cycle can last anywhere in length from 2x to 2.5x. The third cycle 2X is primarily a growth cycle with a lower saturation point and decay process followed by a higher saturation point. The last 1.5-1.6X cycle is primarily a decay cycle interrupted with a mid area growth period. Near ideal fractal cycles can be seen in the trading valuations of many commodities and individual stocks. Most of the cycles are caricatures of the ideal and conform to Gompertz mathematical type saturation and decay curves.
For the Wilshire, the US composite equity index March 09 to October 2011 was a 4 phased Lammert growth and decay fractal series..
x/2.5x/2x/1.5x :: 5/13/10/7 months. That’s an empirical real system observation – available to all – of the time dependent workings of the macroeconomic system.
2005 was the description, the hypothesis – March 2009 to October 2011 was the empirical asset valuation evolution…
The flash crash on 6 May 2010 ….. does that not meet second fractal criteria?
“A sudden nonlinear drop in the last 0.5x time period of the 2.5X is the hallmark of a second cycle and characterizes this most recognizable cycle.“
Maybe this is all occurring by chance alone …. Likely…. Very very very likely ….not.
Ummm. When Clinton/Gore were running, they promised to reduce the federal workforce by 275K FTE. And they kept their promise in SSA, anyhow. Many of fed employees in DOD just walked across the beltway and signed up with contractors, but in SSA, that didn’t happen. We got down to about 60K FTE, as I recall. Of course. Nobody likes SSA. Nancy
interesting post i found. thanks for sharing.