Harry Reid: "Private Sector Jobs Have Been Doing Just Fine"

[Patranus]

Private sector jobs have been doing just fine, its the public scetor jobs where we have lost huge numbers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Kk6D1-ECnQ
Talking about Obama jobs bill and the need to pass it.

Private Sector Unemployment: ~9%
Government Sector Unemployment: ~5%

 

[woolfe9999]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Kk6D1-ECnQ
Talking about Obama jobs bill and the need to pass it.

Private Sector Unemployment: ~9%
Government Sector Unemployment: ~5%

In terms of what has been happening recently, he's correct in a relative sense. If you look at 2011 BLS numbers, month over month, most months we're seeing private sector job gains and public sector job loss, which is mostly layoffs on the state and local level due to budget problems.

Where are you getting your numbers from BTW? How can you distinguish public and private sector "unemployment?"

 

[PingSpike]

I'd have to guess that is mostly just because public entities have been able to deny reality for longer than private ones, due to federal government printing press and pie in the sky thinking coupled with a more captive revenue source.

 

[Lithium381]

because the gobernment doesn't watch it's bottom line as closely so not as many layoffs, even if they COULD layoff due to Union contracts that were poorly negotiated.. . .

all of obummmers jobs that he's "creating "are government jobs....

 

[woolfe9999]

You guys are just flat wrong. Here is the latest BLS report:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Private sector job growth, losses in the public sector. It's what Reid was referring to and he's exactly right.

Yet another Patranus thread with a bullshit premise followed up by a litany of mindless "me toos".

- wolf

 

[fskimospy]

I'd have to guess that is mostly just because public entities have been able to deny reality for longer than private ones, due to federal government printing press and pie in the sky thinking coupled with a more captive revenue source.

You guys realize this is the exact opposite of what has been happening for the last year or more, right? Every month the public sector has been shedding jobs while the private sector has been adding them. While job growth wouldn't be great, if the public sector were even just holding steady our job numbers over the last year would have looked quite a great deal better.

 

[umbrella39]

Our resident web shooter should be worried the "wife" gravy train is about to tip over?

Oh and posted in yet another Zendari hit piece.

 

[woolfe9999]

I already posted September.

August - private sector no gains or losses, losses in public sector:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_09022011.htm

July - private sector gains, public sector losses:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_08052011.htm

June - small private sector gain, public sector losses:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_07082011.htm

May - private sector gains, public sector losses:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_06032011.htm

April - private sector gains, public sector losses:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_05062011.htm

March - private sector gains, public sector losses:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_04012011.htm

February - private sector gains, public sector losses:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_04012011.htm

January - private sector gains, public sector losses:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02042011.htm

Harry Reid is exactly correct. If the public sector hadn't been shedding jobs all year, the total employment picture would be a lot better.

- wolf

 

[Patranus]

<!-- IRRELEVANT LINKS -->

Irrelevant.

You are ignoring the fact that the public sector "industry" has an unemployment rate of rough 1/2 of the private sector (overall)

 

[woolfe9999]

Irrelevant.

You are ignoring the fact that the public sector "industry" has an unemployment rate of rough 1/2 of the private sector (overall)

First of all, I asked you to source that data. I don't understand how you can even measure a public sector unemployment rate. Furthermore, you said that private sector unemployment is around 9&#37; and public sector around 5%, yet total unemployment is 9.1%. It doesn't even make sense.

Second, no, it isn't irrelevant, because Reid is talking about the recent trend line, and that trend line suggests that the private sector has, ALL year, been hiring at a modest but reasonable clip. If the public sector had not been shedding jobs all year, the employment picture would be much better.

BS thread is BS.

 

[ElFenix]

You guys are just flat wrong. Here is the latest BLS report:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Private sector job growth, losses in the public sector. It's what Reid was referring to and he's exactly right.

Yet another Patranus thread with a bullshit premise followed up by a litany of mindless "me toos".

- wolf

according to that it's about half a million local job losses since 2008.

half a million fewer unemployed served to move the figure from 9.1% to 8.8%.

another half a million would be about 8.5% then.

still not 'fine'

 

[Anarchist420]

If the private sector has such low unemployment, then why didn't Obama replace Bernanke with Hoenig? Why is Obama saying Occupy Wall Street is necessary?

The BLS can also fuck with the numbers and make them look better than they are.

 

[woolfe9999]

according to that it's about half a million local job losses since 2008.

half a million fewer unemployed served to move the figure from 9.1&#37; to 8.8%.

another half a million would be about 8.5% then.

still not 'fine'

It depends on whether Reid is referring to the total health of the private sector job picture, or the recent trending of it. The current trend line for the private sector is indeed "fine." Reid is saying that the jobs bill will prevent public sector layoffs, and that is where the jobs are being shed right now. He is correct. Patranus youtube link has a 30 second clip from a larger presentation.

 

[Genx87]

The govt workers being laid off recently is a result of stimulus money running out that was artificially employing state and fed workers longer than they should have. In other words, the stimulus money created an employment bubble in the public sector that is now being popped 2 years after it should have.

 

[xBiffx]

How does Reid say this with a straight face when the people that elected him are dealing with the highest level of unemployment in all the states. Oh yeah, I forgot, casinos are public sector right.

 

[Genx87]

Watched the video and what a toolbox. In what ways are private sector jobs doing fine?

But I will say it is nice for him to admit what the jobs bill really is and isnt. Clearly it isnt about building long term private sector job growth but instead to prop up govt workers and kick the can down the road.

 

[xj0hnx]

Better than the public sector would have been a more true statement, hardly "just fine". If a patient has a weak and thready pulse, but it's stable, that's not "fine", it's just better than no pulse.

 

[woolfe9999]

Better than the public sector would have been a more true statement, hardly "just fine". If a patient has a weak and thready pulse, but it's stable, that's not "fine", it's just better than no pulse.

Yeah maybe, but we're kind of getting to word parsing here. In context, as the full video shows, he is talking about the jobs bill and saying that it will prevent public sector layoffs, which is where the real bleeding is occurring right now. This youtube clip, and the entire thread, is typical "gotcha" style politics, nothing more.

 

[woolfe9999]

The govt workers being laid off recently is a result of stimulus money running out that was artificially employing state and fed workers longer than they should have. In other words, the stimulus money created an employment bubble in the public sector that is now being popped 2 years after it should have.

It didn't "create a bubble" because there weren't gains in the public sector while the stimulus money was being spent. There were actually losses, just very modest losses. The point of the stimulus with respect to the public sector was to prevent losses, not to add jobs. Adding total net jobs in the public sector was never a realistic possibility given the budgetary crisis that most states have been experiencing.

 

[xBiffx]

Yeah maybe, but we're kind of getting to word parsing here. In context, as the full video shows, he is talking about the jobs bill and saying that it will prevent public sector layoffs, which is where the real bleeding is occurring right now. This youtube clip, and the entire thread, is typical "gotcha" style politics, nothing more.

The democrats are starting their job crusade with public sector jobs focus so I'm not sure that this is "gotcha" politics. This is just pointing out where the democrats' loyalties really lie.

 

[woolfe9999]

The democrats are starting their job crusade with public sector jobs focus so I'm not sure that this is "gotcha" politics. This is just pointing out where the democrats loyalties really lie.

No it isn't. The point of it is to "prove" that Reid is out of touch with the economy, to pretend that he thinks everything is just rosy and grand. If you actually listen to the full speech, not to mention numerous other remarks of Reid over time, that is total BS. This is a remark taken out of context, possibly not the best choice of words, but it doesn't prove what they intend to prove. It's classic "gotcha" politics.

 

[PingSpike]

You guys realize this is the exact opposite of what has been happening for the last year or more, right? Every month the public sector has been shedding jobs while the private sector has been adding them. While job growth wouldn't be great, if the public sector were even just holding steady our job numbers over the last year would have looked quite a great deal better.

No idea why you replied to me on this since your points essentially back up what I was suggested. Government employment has been in fake-it-until-you-make mode until recently when they've finally stopped faking it.

 

[Ausm]

First of all, I asked you to source that data. I don't understand how you can even measure a public sector unemployment rate. Furthermore, you said that private sector unemployment is around 9% and public sector around 5%, yet total unemployment is 9.1%. It doesn't even make sense.

Second, no, it isn't irrelevant, because Reid is talking about the recent trend line, and that trend line suggests that the private sector has, ALL year, been hiring at a modest but reasonable clip. If the public sector had not been shedding jobs all year, the employment picture would be much better.

BS thread is BS.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Lemon law]

Its one thing to talk about unemployment, its another thing to talk about the quality of public sector employment that has produced a large expansion in mainly minimum wage jobs.

 

[1prophet]

Private sector jobs is what funds public sector jobs through taxes and fees,


To the common everyday person the job market is terrible, pitting one against the other is like arguing who has more chairs on the Titanic.