I just spent the last hour and a half looking at numbers for jobs in the tech sector from 1990-2010. It seems there is a LOT of disagreement on just how many tech jobs there have been, what percent of the total economy they are, what to even consider “tech” jobs, just how much the dotcom bust affected the total tech job market, as many think the losses were over stated, while other aspects of the tech industry in general were growing faster than ever. Just a lot. Basically, doesn’t seem like anyone actually knows, a lot of places say it is def this, or that, but there is a lot of conflicting information. A lot of places point out that a bunch of stats are unproven, both for the positive, and the negative.
Did it grow particularly more under Clinton than Bush?
Probably, it was the creation of an entirely new sector, and there was a fairly huge bubble that broke right 2000-1, that took years to recover from.
And bush royally fucked the economy with the IRAQ war then removing banking regulations that led to the 2008 collapse.
Don’t get me wrong, I loved Clinton, I’m just pointing out things aren’t always clear cut. There’s many factors and not all of them are controllable.
I just spent the last hour and a half looking at numbers for jobs in the tech sector from 1990-2010. It seems there is a LOT of disagreement on just how many tech jobs there have been, what percent of the total economy they are, what to even consider “tech” jobs, just how much the dotcom bust affected the total tech job market, as many think the losses were over stated, while other aspects of the tech industry in general were growing faster than ever. Just a lot. Basically, doesn’t seem like anyone actually knows, a lot of places say it is def this, or that, but there is a lot of conflicting information. A lot of places point out that a bunch of stats are unproven, both for the positive, and the negative.
Damn. Apparently the answer is 🤷♂️