Don't Be Fooled by the Unemployent Rate - Obama's Slight of Hand

[Siete]

Well, here's your answer, RWnuts:

CEA (Council of Economic Advisors) economists note that they believe immigration reform is the single most powerful policy that could counteract a declining labor force.
Immigrants tend to be younger and participate more in the job market, and a report from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office last year estimates that the Senate's immigration reform bill could increase the labor force by 6 million people by 2023.

A rising labor force That s unlikely say White House economists - Jul. 17 2014

Happy now?

lol

and make sure they get a SS card ... that and an electric bill down at the DMV qualifies them for a picture ID card and they can VOTE !!! WOOOOOHOOOOO !!!

lamo

 

[LoneLaugher]

"Don't Be Fooled by the Unemployent Rate - Obama's Slight of Hand"

Yes, let's ignore the facts and just go with how we 'feel.'

Well don't forget, she let us know that Jesus was a capitalist...

You libs wreak of desperation. I have no idea what you're talking about.

But by all means, keep making shit up. The electorate has had it with you liars. Like your lies about jobs.

See the thread about how angry voters are? You libs will be missing parts of your asses after the election.

reek

 

[LoneLaugher]

Unless Americans feel the positive impact of these stats, they really don't matter. If the labor participation rate wasn't so low and the food stamp participation weren't so high, I would say Americans would feel optimistic and good about jobs.

In any case, stats don't matter. How the American voter feels does matter.

Consumer confidence hits 94.5 in October versus 87 estimate

 

[LoneLaugher]

I invite the OP to develop her own formula for determining the actual unemployment rate. Put it here and plug in the numbers.

Then...we will use it to determine that the unemployment rate is lower now than it was in. January of 2009. And...that it was higher in January 2009 than it was in January 2000.

The only question left will be whether or not the OP admits her abject failure.

 

[mudwhistle]

No, that has changed.

Now explain which policies Obama signed that changed that?

From what I see he's done nothing but hold back the improvements and caused some factors to worsen, essentially giving us a slower recovery. Not of his own choice. What he had in mind was much worse.

Ah see, classic derangement.

Give you a good number, it can't have anything to do with Obama.

Give you a bad number, and it's all Obama.

No, both sides skated, but Obozo is abusing the letter of the law by monkeying with the system.

He hasn't done anything to the 'system'. The BLS operates on its own.

And you must believe in Unicorns as well.

No one outside the specific program office at BLS has any kind of access to the raw or pre-release data of that program. There are strict rules and laws governing the handling of statistical data.

Many choose not to work for less money than they made before. Incomes have been stagnant since Obama took office.

When Obama took office we were losing 700,000 jobs a month.

I guess you have some stupid argument that that condition hasn't improved either.

No, that has changed.

Now explain which policies Obama signed that changed that?

From what I see he's done nothing but hold back the improvements and caused some factors to worsen, essentially giving us a slower recovery. Not of his own choice. What he had in mind was much worse.

Ah see, classic derangement.

Give you a good number, it can't have anything to do with Obama.

Give you a bad number, and it's all Obama.

No, both sides skated, but Obozo is abusing the letter of the law by monkeying with the system.

What "monkeying" are you claiming and what is your evidence?

Relaxing standards for disability for one.

I do wish you would pay attention.

 

[mudwhistle]

Well, here's your answer, RWnuts:

CEA (Council of Economic Advisors) economists note that they believe immigration reform is the single most powerful policy that could counteract a declining labor force.
Immigrants tend to be younger and participate more in the job market, and a report from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office last year estimates that the Senate's immigration reform bill could increase the labor force by 6 million people by 2023.

A rising labor force That s unlikely say White House economists - Jul. 17 2014

Happy now?

lol

Wow, good idea.

Bring in millions of unskilled laborers to take all of the jobs.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, here's your answer, RWnuts:

CEA (Council of Economic Advisors) economists note that they believe immigration reform is the single most powerful policy that could counteract a declining labor force.
Immigrants tend to be younger and participate more in the job market, and a report from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office last year estimates that the Senate's immigration reform bill could increase the labor force by 6 million people by 2023.

A rising labor force That s unlikely say White House economists - Jul. 17 2014

Happy now?

lol

Wow, good idea.

Bring in millions of unskilled laborers to take all of the jobs.

Haha. I knew you'd flip flop the minute I posted that.

 

[kiwiman127]

Once again, you post a chart that shows that things were best, if this is a measure, under Clinton.

...with a Republican congress.

And back in the days when Republicans and Democrats actually acted like adults and worked on bipartisan compromise. Things got heated, but on important issues they did work on compromises. Welfare reform, Social Security Reform and Medicare Reform are good examples of bipartisan compromise.
I'm pretty sure in today's super polarization in Washington, none of this would have been accomplished.

 

[Siete]

Once again, you post a chart that shows that things were best, if this is a measure, under Clinton.

...with a Republican congress.

And back in the days when Republicans and Democrats actually acted like adults and worked on bipartisan compromise. Things got heated, but on important issues they did work on compromises. Welfare reform, Social Security Reform and Medicare Reform are good examples of bipartisan compromise.
I'm pretty sure in today's super polarization in Washington, none of this would have been accomplished.

Ronnie and Tip would damn near come to blows, but they worked together, and at the end of the day could have a Scotch together.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Once again, you post a chart that shows that things were best, if this is a measure, under Clinton.

...with a Republican congress.

And back in the days when Republicans and Democrats actually acted like adults and worked on bipartisan compromise. Things got heated, but on important issues they did work on compromises. Welfare reform, Social Security Reform and Medicare Reform are good examples of bipartisan compromise.
I'm pretty sure in today's super polarization in Washington, none of this would have been accomplished.

Yeah! And both sides are equally to blame! Right!???

 

[Carla_Danger]

As has been explained on this board dozens of times....and as everyone knows..... the reason the Unemployment Rate has been dropping is for the WRONG REASON.

It's not dropping because Obama's policies have generated so many jobs....it has dropped because so many people have dropped out of the pool of people COUNTED.

In other words, Obama has used slight of hand. It can be a little complicated to follow but he's basically dropped the number UNEMPLOYED by making the pool of those counted smaller.

The Labor Participation Rate has dropped to its lowest level in over 30 years.

Here is a visual:


View attachment 33535

Can you say "Baby Boomers?"

 

[pinqy]

So, when the Recession started, Labor Force Participation was 66%, and 32% of the population did not want a job. As of September 2014, the Labor Force Participation has dropped to 63%, but the % of the population that doesn't want to work has increased to 35%.

They do "not want a job" or they gave up looking for a job? Those are not the same thing. Also, while the labor participation rate has dropped 3%, it's worse than that because the underemployed has jumped higher as well and you are counting them as employed.

Because they are employed. But how are you defining underemployed and how are you measuring them?

Defining? Um...people who are working part time or in a low wage job because they can't get a job in their profession. I'm not clear how else you would define it, any suggestions?

Gallup's measure of underemployment is part time workers who want to work full time.

Measuring? That's my point, they are not. But if are claiming you don't know that is a lot more common now that before the recession and I have to prove it, then I'm calling you a liar, you do know that.

Ah see, classic derangement.

Give you a good number, it can't have anything to do with Obama.

Give you a bad number, and it's all Obama.

No, both sides skated, but Obozo is abusing the letter of the law by monkeying with the system.

He hasn't done anything to the 'system'. The BLS operates on its own.

And you must believe in Unicorns as well.

No one outside the specific program office at BLS has any kind of access to the raw or pre-release data of that program. There are strict rules and laws governing the handling of statistical data.

When Obama took office we were losing 700,000 jobs a month.

I guess you have some stupid argument that that condition hasn't improved either.

No, that has changed.

Now explain which policies Obama signed that changed that?

From what I see he's done nothing but hold back the improvements and caused some factors to worsen, essentially giving us a slower recovery. Not of his own choice. What he had in mind was much worse.

Ah see, classic derangement.

Give you a good number, it can't have anything to do with Obama.

Give you a bad number, and it's all Obama.

No, both sides skated, but Obozo is abusing the letter of the law by monkeying with the system.

What "monkeying" are you claiming and what is your evidence?

Relaxing standards for disability for one.

I do wish you would pay attention.

you're claiming thAt the reason disability claims were made easier was to make the unemployment rate lower? Really?

 

[NYcarbineer]

So, when the Recession started, Labor Force Participation was 66%, and 32% of the population did not want a job. As of September 2014, the Labor Force Participation has dropped to 63%, but the % of the population that doesn't want to work has increased to 35%.

They do "not want a job" or they gave up looking for a job? Those are not the same thing. Also, while the labor participation rate has dropped 3%, it's worse than that because the underemployed has jumped higher as well and you are counting them as employed.

Because they are employed. But how are you defining underemployed and how are you measuring them?

Defining? Um...people who are working part time or in a low wage job because they can't get a job in their profession. I'm not clear how else you would define it, any suggestions?

Gallup's measure of underemployment is part time workers who want to work full time.

Measuring? That's my point, they are not. But if are claiming you don't know that is a lot more common now that before the recession and I have to prove it, then I'm calling you a liar, you do know that.

No, both sides skated, but Obozo is abusing the letter of the law by monkeying with the system.

He hasn't done anything to the 'system'. The BLS operates on its own.

And you must believe in Unicorns as well.

No one outside the specific program office at BLS has any kind of access to the raw or pre-release data of that program. There are strict rules and laws governing the handling of statistical data.

No, that has changed.

Now explain which policies Obama signed that changed that?

From what I see he's done nothing but hold back the improvements and caused some factors to worsen, essentially giving us a slower recovery. Not of his own choice. What he had in mind was much worse.

Ah see, classic derangement.

Give you a good number, it can't have anything to do with Obama.

Give you a bad number, and it's all Obama.

No, both sides skated, but Obozo is abusing the letter of the law by monkeying with the system.

What "monkeying" are you claiming and what is your evidence?

Relaxing standards for disability for one.

I do wish you would pay attention.

you're claiming thAt the reason disability claims were made easier was to make the unemployment rate lower? Really?

Reagan made the disability claims easier. I already posted that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's still a better employment scene than 2008-09

Really? how many full time jobs do we have versus part time jobs?

 

[LoneLaugher]

It's still a better employment scene than 2008-09

Really? how many full time jobs do we have versus part time jobs?

Ruh Roh, Moonboi, that Reb sure crossed you up with that one! Betchya don't have a good answer!

 

[mudwhistle]

So, when the Recession started, Labor Force Participation was 66%, and 32% of the population did not want a job. As of September 2014, the Labor Force Participation has dropped to 63%, but the % of the population that doesn't want to work has increased to 35%.

They do "not want a job" or they gave up looking for a job? Those are not the same thing. Also, while the labor participation rate has dropped 3%, it's worse than that because the underemployed has jumped higher as well and you are counting them as employed.

Because they are employed. But how are you defining underemployed and how are you measuring them?

Defining? Um...people who are working part time or in a low wage job because they can't get a job in their profession. I'm not clear how else you would define it, any suggestions?

Gallup's measure of underemployment is part time workers who want to work full time.

Measuring? That's my point, they are not. But if are claiming you don't know that is a lot more common now that before the recession and I have to prove it, then I'm calling you a liar, you do know that.

He hasn't done anything to the 'system'. The BLS operates on its own.

And you must believe in Unicorns as well.

No one outside the specific program office at BLS has any kind of access to the raw or pre-release data of that program. There are strict rules and laws governing the handling of statistical data.

Ah see, classic derangement.

Give you a good number, it can't have anything to do with Obama.

Give you a bad number, and it's all Obama.

No, both sides skated, but Obozo is abusing the letter of the law by monkeying with the system.

What "monkeying" are you claiming and what is your evidence?

Relaxing standards for disability for one.

I do wish you would pay attention.

you're claiming thAt the reason disability claims were made easier was to make the unemployment rate lower? Really?

Reagan made the disability claims easier. I already posted that.

Sure he did. Then advertised them on the internet from the grave.

 

[mudwhistle]

It's still a better employment scene than 2008-09

That's the silver-lining in this......



I know, if we wanted to say the Great Recession wasn't as bad as The Dark Ages, think people will call it a real blessing?

 

[EconChick]

Unless Americans feel the positive impact of these stats, they really don't matter. If the labor participation rate wasn't so low and the food stamp participation weren't so high, I would say Americans would feel optimistic and good about jobs.

In any case, stats don't matter. How the American voter feels does matter.

Consumer confidence hits 94.5 in October versus 87 estimate

Oh yeahhhhhhhh, the country's real confident. LMAO.

Obviously you're ignoring poll after poll after poll that says just how angry Americans are with your hero.

 

[EconChick]

As has been explained on this board dozens of times....and as everyone knows..... the reason the Unemployment Rate has been dropping is for the WRONG REASON.

It's not dropping because Obama's policies have generated so many jobs....it has dropped because so many people have dropped out of the pool of people COUNTED.

In other words, Obama has used slight of hand. It can be a little complicated to follow but he's basically dropped the number UNEMPLOYED by making the pool of those counted smaller.

The Labor Participation Rate has dropped to its lowest level in over 30 years.

Here is a visual:


View attachment 33535

Can you say "Baby Boomers?"

Good Lord. Really? (roll eyes)

 

[LoneLaugher]

Unless Americans feel the positive impact of these stats, they really don't matter. If the labor participation rate wasn't so low and the food stamp participation weren't so high, I would say Americans would feel optimistic and good about jobs.

In any case, stats don't matter. How the American voter feels does matter.

Consumer confidence hits 94.5 in October versus 87 estimate

Oh yeahhhhhhhh, the country's real confident. LMAO.

Obviously you're ignoring poll after poll after poll that says just how angry Americans are with your hero.

Huh? I thought I was clear. YOU are my hero.