A really excellent jobs report!

[Sonikku]

Gallop: The Big Lie

This. Sooner we change gears back to conservative policies, the better. The numbers were much better under Bush.

 

[DrPizza]

Gallop: The Big Lie

You're welcome to believe that its "A really excellent jobs report!" Then again, you might also believe that you can keep your health insurance.

Uno

Let's see... that's the way it's always been? Or is that just how unemployment is reported while Obama's in office?

 

[Chaotic42]

U6 Numbers

Seasonally adjusted Jan 2015 is 11.3%, down from 12.7% in Jan 2014.

 

[Bowfinger]

Let's see... that's the way it's always been? Or is that just how unemployment is reported while Obama's in office?

We had that same discussion here, way back during Bush 43's first recession. BLS published both U3 and U6 then, and had been for a long time (i.e., it was not something started under the Bush admin). The media focused on the U3 rate then, just as they do now.

 

[Moonbeam]

Wages up too. Obama bashers are running out of material quickly. I am sure their imagination will get them more.

You can read about it here:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...blockbuster-jobs-report-without-really-trying

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You can read about it here:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...blockbuster-jobs-report-without-really-trying

What an outrageous thing to say! I'm shocked I tell you...shocked! Democrats would never sink this low!

Someone once told me that to a hammer...everything looks like a nail. It appears that you and John Boehner may have something in common in this regard.

 

[unokitty]

This. Sooner we change gears back to conservative policies, the better. The numbers were much better under Bush.

What? You don't like 'Hope and Change?"

 

[Blanky]

lol.

You wrote your response without reading mine? That is funny if so!

 

[Moonbeam]

What an outrageous thing to say! I'm shocked I tell you...shocked! Democrats would never sink this low!

Someone once told me that to a hammer...everything looks like a nail. It appears that you and John Boehner may have something in common in this regard.

What did I say that was shocking. I just provided a link with some republican responses, real ones. I didn't comment on them or do anything else. I am NOT GUILTY of anything as far as I can see.

I didn't accuse anybody of anything. Boehner is a good man as far as I can see. He is just confused as to what good is. He hasn't had the benefits of an enlightened jump of intuition that collapsed opposites in a higher level of understanding. He doesn't know that good and evil don't exist and that everything has always good as it has always been perfect. He is battling an evil that his own mind created and his belief makes the evil real. Of course I'm easily misunderstood because I'm the only enlightened person here. I can say that of course without any hubris whatsoever, because I have no ego. I have no need to compete for such distinctions because I already won. But I naturally already know all this and only protest your accusations which I know are false just for fun.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

What did I say that was shocking. I just provided a link with some republican responses, real ones. I didn't comment on them or do anything else. I am NOT GUILTY of anything as far as I can see.

I didn't accuse anybody of anything. Boehner is a good man as far as I can see. He is just confused as to what good is. He hasn't had the benefits of an enlightened jump of intuition that collapsed opposites in a higher level of understanding. He doesn't know that good and evil don't exist and that everything has always good as it has always been perfect. He is battling an evil that his own mind created and his belief makes the evil real. Of course I'm easily misunderstood because I'm the only enlightened person here. I can say that of course without any hubris whatsoever, because I have no ego. I have no need to compete for such distinctions because I already won. But I naturally already know all this and only protest your accusations which I know are false just for fun.

The article you linked was highly partisan...surely you know this.

 

[Fern]

Whoever wrote that is a moron or is searching for clicks. He is referring to the U6 rate, which is publicly reported every month and has declined at similar rates to the U3 rate.

That "moron" is Jim Clifton, Chairman and CEO at Gallup.

This is the portion of his claims I'm interested in.

There's another reason why the official rate is misleading. Say you're an out-of-work engineer or healthcare worker or construction worker or retail manager: If you perform a minimum of one hour of work in a week and are paid at least $20 -- maybe someone pays you to mow their lawn -- you're not officially counted as unemployed in the much-reported 5.6%. Few Americans know this.

I've been asking about this type of thing here for a long while now. I.e., what counts as a job? How many hours must be worked? Is it possible that some guy gets 3 part time jobs at 10 hours per week, no benefits and only minimum wage - and it counts as 3 jobs in these reports?

If he's correct these numbers taken alone are next to meaningless.

Otherwise, if I had a nickle for every post and article trumpeting our growing economy I'd be wealthier than Bill gates and Warren Buffet combined. And our economy wouldn't just roaring, it would be smokin' volcanic nuclear hot through the roof historic high.

What's tomorrow's thread? We need more stimulus or that the middle class is suffering or we need more unemployment and food stamp benefits?

Why should JUCO be free? The economy is smokin', good jobs are a-plenty etc.

Fern

 

[Moonbeam]

The article you linked was highly partisan...surely you know this.

Do you mean that what the Republicans said in the link makes them look like they have brain defects? I took it as accurate that they said what the link says they said. I could be wrong. The comments of the various Republicans listed was all I was looking at. I am keenly interested in how conservatives protect their ego beliefs with endless rationalizations. It's bigotry. No matter how many reasons you give a bigot for why his bigotry is irrational he will never see it because he believes his bigotry is good and we all, except for me of course, believe in the good. Belief in the good is a delusion that is hard to break.

 

[fskimospy]

That "moron" is Jim Clifton, Chairman and CEO at Gallup.

This is the portion of his claims I'm interested in.



I've been asking about this type of thing here for a long while now. I.e., what counts as a job? How many hours must be worked? Is it possible that some guy gets 3 part time jobs at 10 hours per week, no benefits and only minimum wage - and it counts as 3 jobs in these reports?

If he's correct these numbers taken alone are next to meaningless.

Otherwise, if I had a nickle for every post and article trumpeting our growing economy I'd be wealthier than Bill gates and Warren Buffet combined. And our economy wouldn't just roaring, it would be smokin' volcanic nuclear hot through the roof historic high.

What's tomorrow's thread? We need more stimulus or that the middle class is suffering or we need more unemployment and food stamp benefits?

Why should JUCO be free? The economy is smokin', good jobs are a-plenty etc.

Fern

Ah so you're leaning towards click bait then. Fair enough. Either way it's a ridiculous article.

 

[Fern]

Ah so you're leaning towards click bait then. Fair enough. Either way it's a ridiculous article.

Please address the portion I quoted above.

As I said, I've asked about that several times here. Never got an answer and gave up looking. I'm curious if he's correct.

Do you know?

TIA

Fern

 

[Bowfinger]

Please address the portion I quoted above.

As I said, I've asked about that several times here. Never got an answer and gave up looking. I'm curious if he's correct.

Do you know?

TIA

Fern

There are two different rates, employment and unemployment. When I last dug into this in 2003 or thereabouts, one was counted as employed if he performed any work for pay, even mowing the lawn. Conversely, one was counted as unemployed (U3) only if he was actively seeking employment. This was all documented in detail on BLS.gov, where they documented their methodologies. I expect this info is still documented there, though I haven't confirmed. It probably takes moderate digging to find, if memory serves.

 

[fskimospy]

Please address the portion I quoted above.

As I said, I've asked about that several times here. Never got an answer and gave up looking. I'm curious if he's correct.

Do you know?

TIA

Fern

Not even sure what you asked. U1 through U6 probably cover it though.

They are all looking at the labor market in a different way. Dumb people looking for click bait try to manipulate the published numbers, but I guess that's to be expected. They are just trying to dupe the gullible after all.

 

[werepossum]

Not even sure what you asked. U1 through U6 probably cover it though.

They are all looking at the labor market in a different way. Dumb people looking for click bait try to manipulate the published numbers, but I guess that's to be expected. They are just trying to dupe the gullible after all.

Jim Clifton is dumb? You truly are a legend in your own mind, Brainiac.

Fern, I'd say the exact numbers within each category probably aren't that important compared to the overall percentage employed and the direction of movement.

 

[unokitty]

Jobs Report Isn't Worthy of the Praise It's Getting

... you'd think the economy added a million jobs last month, instead of 257,000.

...the average monthly increase in jobs during the first six years of the Reagan recovery was 252,000. And that was when the working-age population was 28% smaller than it is today.

And in the 84 months from 1993 through 1999, monthly gains topped 257,000 more than half the time...

Think about it this way. Obama likes to brag that there have now been 51 months of uninterrupted monthly job gains, which have resulted in 10.3 million new jobs.

Sounds impressive, doesn't it?

But over that same period, the working-age population increased by 11.2 million. By that measure, the country has actually lost ground over the past four-plus years.

That's why the labor force participation rate is just 62.9%, even with jobs "raining" down last month, which is much lower than the 65.7% rate at the start of the Obama recovery, and even down from where it was early last year...

In the recession we lost 13 million jobs. Only 3 million have come back. You don't see that in that number."

Working age population increases by 11.2 million. Jobs increase by 10.3 million. Labor force participation down to 62.9% compared to 65.7% at the start of the Obama 'recovery.'

Obama administration spins this as a Home Run?

Uno

 

[Engineer]

Thanks Mitch!:awe:

From the New York Times...

Representative Pete Sessions of Texas said the economy had improved because of Republican policies that have cut spending and promoted free enterprise.

“The American economy has begun emerging from the Obama-Pelosi-Reid era of massive government spending, and America is finally seeing positive signs in the job market,” Mr. Sessions said in a statement.

Like I said...Thanks Mitch!!! :biggrin:

 

[werepossum]

Jobs Report Isn't Worthy of the Praise It's Getting


Working age population increases by 11.2 million. Jobs increase by 10.3 million. Labor force participation down to 62.9% compared to 65.7% at the start of the Obama 'recovery.'

Obama administration spins this as a Home Run?

Uno

Agreed, it's a miserable recovery, but at least it's finally acting like a recovery. And I don't think we can necessarily blame Obama. Historically our tools for stimulating the economy to recover more quickly are tax cuts and government giveaways, and employment incentives. That worked well when we largely manufactured our own consumer goods, but now we mostly import them. Thus whatever new money flows into consumers' pockets and into the economy, a big portion flees the nation to pay Chinese workers. We still have employment incentives, but for most jobs it doesn't make economic sense to add workers unless you have increased demand that would otherwise go unmet. We can't sustain artificially increasing demand because of that outflow, and otherwise it makes more economic sense to add jobs in cheap labor countries even in the presence of employment incentives. Unless something changes, the roaring recoveries of the past will be as rare as pileated woodpeckers.

 

[Genx87]

Our trade deficit last year with China was around 385 billion within a 17 trillion dollar economy. The argument any stimulus goes right to China just doesn't compute.

 

[alcoholbob]

Our trade deficit last year with China was around 385 billion within a 17 trillion dollar economy. The argument any stimulus goes right to China just doesn't compute.

Stimulating the bean counters in China while they watch their digital dollars rise while we get real goods and services.

 

[werepossum]

Our trade deficit last year with China was around 385 billion within a 17 trillion dollar economy. The argument any stimulus goes right to China just doesn't compute.

But that $385 billion includes most of our consumer goods - the things people tend to purchase when they get new money. Look at Obama's stimulus; roughly $100 billion in giveaways (called income tax cuts, but actually gifts to people who aren't paying income tax) and $180 billion in actual tax cuts. How much of that went to buy Chinese-made consumer goods? When one compares the size of the stimulus against the size of our trade deficit rather than how much we spend cutting each other's hair, it becomes much more obvious how much the flow of wealth out of our nation hurts.

 

[Greenman]

Not even sure what you asked. U1 through U6 probably cover it though.

They are all looking at the labor market in a different way. Dumb people looking for click bait try to manipulate the published numbers, but I guess that's to be expected. They are just trying to dupe the gullible after all.

Why is it click bait or dumb? I read the article, and while I didn't verify all the information presented, it didn't seem deceptive on the surface. Could you please address the actual information presented and explain why it's flawed, I'd like to know.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Do you mean that what the Republicans said in the link makes them look like they have brain defects? I took it as accurate that they said what the link says they said. I could be wrong. The comments of the various Republicans listed was all I was looking at. I am keenly interested in how conservatives protect their ego beliefs with endless rationalizations. It's bigotry. No matter how many reasons you give a bigot for why his bigotry is irrational he will never see it because he believes his bigotry is good and we all, except for me of course, believe in the good. Belief in the good is a delusion that is hard to break.

What are you talking about? Boehner said "It’s always good news that more Americans are finding work," and added "That said, we know millions are still struggling and searching for a good job." Others clearly said that it was good news but there's still more work to do to improve. This is a brain defect in your world?

Please tell me more about who actually has a brain defect here.