Comparing job growth to population is a really poor measure.
What you are measuring is (on the books jobs) / (estimated population). An illegal immigrant contributes to the denominator (perhaps fractionally, depending on how accurate the census is), but not the numerator if his job is off the books.
Jobs/people fails to account for demographic change. We are getting older, and old people work less. Our bubbleicious prosperity also allowed women to stay home if they wanted.
Unemployment is a much better measure; unemployment is (# of job seekers) / (# of workers + # of job seekers). It excludes people who no longer want to work from the denominator, which counting the population does not. I don't know if/how it addresses illegal immigration, however.
Unemployment can be a misleading measure. The number of job seekers is not a particularly meaningful measure, nor is it accurately measured. It's much better to look at how many workers are supporting the population of the country. The proportion paying taxes is getting to be less than half. Anyone not paying taxes doesn't count.
Unemployment is a poor measure, because it doesn't count workers who no longer qualify for unemployment, discouraged workers, people in prison, or those forced into part-time or marginal labor because of being unable to find full-time work with decent pay and benefits. The illegal immigrants would fall into the last of those categories. By the way, if all the other categories are included, we're comparable to the EU countries. The claim that those countries have horrific unemployment compared to us is false.
Comparing job growth and population growth in raw numbers is not a valid comparison, but comparing the percentage changes is reasonable. Population grows by about 1.3% per year, so job growth ought to be at about the same rate for the long-term health of the economy.
What you are measuring is (on the books jobs) / (estimated population). An illegal immigrant contributes to the denominator (perhaps fractionally, depending on how accurate the census is), but not the numerator if his job is off the books.
Jobs/people fails to account for demographic change. We are getting older, and old people work less. Our bubbleicious prosperity also allowed women to stay home if they wanted.
Unemployment is a much better measure; unemployment is (# of job seekers) / (# of workers + # of job seekers). It excludes people who no longer want to work from the denominator, which counting the population does not. I don't know if/how it addresses illegal immigration, however.