B-Large Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 It's so important to his administration that his campaign team is working diligently at manipulating the data to reach 8% by election day! ko, if you can't win, cheat.... That's what I always say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Sad that "8.6%" and "good news" are put in the same sentence. The fourth thing I thought when I heard the numbers: "I can't want for the liberal idiots to crow about how this is good news, when the drop from ~6% to about ~4% between '03 and '07 was evidence of Bush's failed economic policies?" (First thought was "Wonder how much of that is people giving up?" #2: "Wonder if those numbers are seasonally adjusted, or if that's holiday hiring?" #3: "Wonder what this'll do for my portfolio?" And the fifth thought was: "Sure as ****, none of those OWS clowns added to the employment numbers.") I suppose...but unemployment is 3.7% in my province, so I suppose "good news" is a relative term. Wow...with the exchange rate, that's like 2% when you convert it to American unemployment. It's so important to his administration that his campaign team is working diligently at manipulating the data to reach 8% by election day! No need. Just increase the general sense of hopelessness, combined with feeding the mass delusion that "We're the government, we'll provide all your needs." Can get that number down to 4% by November, with everyone giving up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 The fourth thing I thought when I heard the numbers: "I can't want for the liberal idiots to crow about how this is good news, when the drop from ~6% to about ~4% between '03 and '07 was evidence of Bush's failed economic policies?" (First thought was "Wonder how much of that is people giving up?" #2: "Wonder if those numbers are seasonally adjusted, or if that's holiday hiring?" #3: "Wonder what this'll do for my portfolio?" And the fifth thought was: "Sure as ****, none of those OWS clowns added to the employment numbers.") Wow...with the exchange rate, that's like 2% when you convert it to American unemployment. No need. Just increase the general sense of hopelessness, combined with feeding the mass delusion that "We're the government, we'll provide all your needs." Can get that number down to 4% by November, with everyone giving up. Oh Tom... Can we agree that the economic conditions before and after Bush are horses of a different color? If we are going to give Georgie boy credit for the housing bubble and the good stuff, should his stamp be smack boom on the aftermath too... It seems like no one is able to mention Bush theses days without being accused of blaming.... So credit of the glory, but free of the pain? I can't say I would argue that a decade of cheap credit expansion, and goverment ver reach in the residential and commercial mortgage market was sound or sustainable policy.... Because we can see where that brought us today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 No need. Just increase the general sense of hopelessness, combined with feeding the mass delusion that "We're the government, we'll provide all your needs." Can get that number down to 4% by November, with everyone giving up. That may work in the short term, but the October 2012 jobs report, released days prior to the election, will have to contain the numbers of jobs created in such congressional districts as Wyoming's 6th, Florida's 87th, Ohio's 45th and North Carolina's 23rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Without checking any numbers, I wonder how many of these jobs are specific to the Christmas season? Retail stores stocking up on employees for a couple of months, and will let them go come the new year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted December 3, 2011 Author Share Posted December 3, 2011 Without checking any numbers, I wonder how many of these jobs are specific to the Christmas season? Retail stores stocking up on employees for a couple of months, and will let them go come the new year. It's the best in two and a half years...do you understand how that shoots a hole through your argument? Let's hope it's a positive trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 It's the best in two and a half years...do you understand how that shoots a hole through your argument? Let's hope it's a positive trend. A) I didn't make an argument. I posed a question. B) Even if that was an argument, nothing in your statement there refutes it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted December 3, 2011 Author Share Posted December 3, 2011 A) I didn't make an argument. I posed a question. B) Even if that was an argument, nothing in your statement there refutes it. Really? So this season being better than the last two seasons doesn't show improvement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 The Unemployment rate has dropped to 8.6% or Santa Claus.....................which is the bigger myth ? The Department of Labor announced today that the unemployment rate fell from 9.0 percent in October to 8.6 percent for November. DOL estimates that 120,000 jobs were created last month. However, nearly 315,000 people dropped out of the labor market in November and the labor participation rate fell to 64 percent (from 64.2 percent in October). Further, the number of long-term unemployed (27 weeks or more) increased to 43 percent. The unemployment rate has been over 8 percent for nearly three years. The unemployment rate has never been so high for so long since World War II. Just a couple weeks ago, it was reported that holiday hiring was below normal. Firms hired for the holiday's month's ago so there will be no more hiring going forward. There are no jobs. This unemployment rate reflects only the dishonest practice of not counting unemployed persons who are no longer looking for jobs. Eventually, the unemployment rate will keep dropping, not because people are employed, but because they simply wont be counted. Ask of the 16 million people out of work if that makes them feel any better. Or helps to put food on the table. The books have been cooked............... . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted December 3, 2011 Author Share Posted December 3, 2011 The Unemployment rate has dropped to 8.6% or Santa Claus.....................which is the bigger myth ? The Department of Labor announced today that the unemployment rate fell from 9.0 percent in October to 8.6 percent for November. DOL estimates that 120,000 jobs were created last month. However, nearly 315,000 people dropped out of the labor market in November and the labor participation rate fell to 64 percent (from 64.2 percent in October). Further, the number of long-term unemployed (27 weeks or more) increased to 43 percent. The unemployment rate has been over 8 percent for nearly three years. The unemployment rate has never been so high for so long since World War II. [url=" . ww2 the unemployment rate in ww2 was like 2 % so what are you talking about??? And the pe pole dropping out of the work force, are they the baby boomers retiring? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Oh Tom... Can we agree that the economic conditions before and after Bush are horses of a different color? If we are going to give Georgie boy credit for the housing bubble and the good stuff, should his stamp be smack boom on the aftermath too... It seems like no one is able to mention Bush theses days without being accused of blaming.... So credit of the glory, but free of the pain? I can't say I would argue that a decade of cheap credit expansion, and goverment ver reach in the residential and commercial mortgage market was sound or sustainable policy.... Because we can see where that brought us today... You'll be hard-pressed to find where I give Bush credit or blame for much of anything, frankly. Or Obama, for that matter. Foreign policy...that's about it (though Obama could take a lesson from Bush and sign the NDAA, with a signing statement saying "We're going to ignore the part we don't like.") The White House doesn't have nearly as much control over things as people think. The housing bubble and crash is the culmination of 30 years of unsound housing policy (which one could argue that by definition is invariably unsound). And most of the blame for that, frankly, is in Congress' lap rather than the Oval Office's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 ww2 the unemployment rate in ww2 was like 2 % so what are you talking about??? And the pe pole dropping out of the work force, are they the baby boomers retiring? You are incorrect with both statements.................to no ones suprise. You can can attribute these numbers to "seasonal" adjustments...................................................Election Season . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Good point! Most of the jobs lost have been in the public sector. Local and state governments shed jobs left and right during the recession and they have not come back, and the private sector has not picked up the slack, though they private sector has returned to pre- recession levels of employment A lot of people are also retraining right now and will fill jobs that are open now when they are ready to So the public sector has shed jobs left and right and the private sector has not picked up the slack. So how do you explain the drop in the unemployment rate Dave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted December 3, 2011 Author Share Posted December 3, 2011 So the public sector has shed jobs left and right and the private sector has not picked up the slack. So how do you explain the drop in the unemployment rate Dave? You understand that the rate is still higher than it was before the recession, right? Most of that is public sector jobs. What's so hard to understand about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Every day DIN comes up with another statement further out in space. Either he is Connor or he is channeling him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 You understand that the rate is still higher than it was before the recession, right? Most of that is public sector jobs. What's so hard to understand about that? So how do you explain the drop in the unemployment rate Dave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 So how do you explain the drop in the unemployment rate Dave? Math is fun. Numbers don't lie. Dave?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Math is fun. Numbers don't lie. Dave?? Untrue. "Three" has been known to dissemble, and "seven" is a right dishonest B word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Untrue. "Three" has been known to dissemble, and "seven" is a right dishonest B word. That's just what twelve wants you to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted December 3, 2011 Author Share Posted December 3, 2011 You are incorrect with both statements.................to no ones suprise. You can can attribute these numbers to "seasonal" adjustments...................................................Election Season . Ummm, no, there was very low unemployment in ww2 And if you don't trust the good numbers nothing I can do to chug your mind that it's all a conspiracy So how do you explain the drop in the unemployment rate Dave? Some job creatn in the public sector and people dropping out of job market. What's your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts