Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
That isn't what you said, you said you are being conned if you trust BLS data.If you only pay attention to the headline number you're being conned...You do realize that the labor force participation rate is calculated by..... The Bureau of Labor Statistics, right? Guess you're being conned.Labor force participation rate and hourly wages are what matter more...if you believe the the bureau of lies and statistics you're being conned.
Do you think the 5.6% is an accurate gauge of how well the real economy is doing?
That means nothing without knowing how many people outside of the labor force actually want a job.You do realize that the labor force participation rate is calculated by..... The Bureau of Labor Statistics, right? Guess you're being conned.Labor force participation rate and hourly wages are what matter more...if you believe the the bureau of lies and statistics you're being conned.
Unemployment rate's drop is not nearly so encouraging. It's obvious that unemployment is "improving" only if you pretend that millions of American workers no longer want jobs.
If the participation rate were 66.2% — where it was when the economy fell into recession in December 2007 — the jobless rate would be 10.7%. Again, when you exclude millions of people, the unemployment rate looks a whole lot better than it really is.
The number of people reported as not in the labor force rose to 89.304 million in February from 89.008 million in January, which is a new record. It means that 28 percent of the adult population is no longer contributing to the wealth of the nation through their labor.
The Independent Report Why the Official Unemployment Rate is so Deceiving
Actually, he didn'tObozo changed the way the unemployment rate is calculated-----------------they cooked the books and you libfools bought the lies. pathetic.
Actually, he didn'tObozo changed the way the unemployment rate is calculated-----------------they cooked the books and you libfools bought the lies. pathetic.
But good to see it gives conservatives some solace
Actually, he didn'tObozo changed the way the unemployment rate is calculated-----------------they cooked the books and you libfools bought the lies. pathetic.
But good to see it gives conservatives some solace
Yes, they did. people no longer looking for work are no longer counted as they were in the past. They are lying to you, if you choose to believe the lies it only makes you look more like a fool than you usually do.
Fine, I concede. The participation rate and average hourly wages could be worse that the BLS is claiming...you got me.That isn't what you said, you said you are being conned if you trust BLS data.If you only pay attention to the headline number you're being conned...You do realize that the labor force participation rate is calculated by..... The Bureau of Labor Statistics, right? Guess you're being conned.Labor force participation rate and hourly wages are what matter more...if you believe the the bureau of lies and statistics you're being conned.
Do you think the 5.6% is an accurate gauge of how well the real economy is doing?
people no longer looking for work are no longer counted as they were in the past.
Yup, the disabled and elderly should all get jobs. Lazy bums!To the far left it is ok that the unemployment number look good despite the fact that close to 40% of the labor force is not working..
Typical far left drones..
To the far left it is ok that the unemployment number look good despite the fact that close to 40% of the labor force is not working..
Now you're clutching at straws - don't be ridiculous. The exclusionary factors such as students - have always existed and the effect on the over-all numbers are minuscule
I love the liberal contradictions, so libs it seems the current lower taxes on the 'rich' is working is that what you are saying?
.
By Zachary A. Goldfarb January 2, 2013
With Tuesday’s House vote, the George W. Bush tax cuts, born in 2001, reach a new milestone. Originally scheduled to expire at the end of 2010, they are now permanent (or most of them, anyway). Congress voted to extend the income tax cuts for most families earning under $450,000 a year, while taxing capital gains, dividends and tax breaks at higher rates for upper-income earners.
So, to be clear, taxing the rich is driving the phantom economic recovery? Interesting...BL 10514358I love the liberal contradictions, so libs it seems the current lower taxes on the 'rich' is working is that what you are saying?
Another crash and burn by a Tea Party know-nothing:
.
By Zachary A. Goldfarb January 2, 2013
With Tuesday’s House vote, the George W. Bush tax cuts, born in 2001, reach a new milestone. Originally scheduled to expire at the end of 2010, they are now permanent (or most of them, anyway). Congress voted to extend the income tax cuts for most families earning under $450,000 a year, while taxing capital gains, dividends and tax breaks at higher rates for upper-income earners.
I don't need explain why BluesLegend has the blues. It is so obvious that Obama and Dems forced the end of Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire. The cuts for the rich expired on January 01 2013 producing the economic up turn that Romney knowingly now would have delayed.
You need to retire your silly little emoticon Mr. discombobulated Blues.
I really could give a rats ass what Romney said , the fact of the matter is - he lost the election , so any projections he made are purely academic at this point .GB 10513846Now you're clutching at straws - don't be ridiculous. The exclusionary factors such as students - have always existed and the effect on the over-all numbers are minuscule
Romney chose the Unemployment Rate in 2011 to measure his economic policies were he to be elected. Those exclusionary factors are all in there right now as they will be in there in 2016. It is not a government lie that produces the 5.6% UR today - two years into Romney's forecast.,we have two years to go. He.s already been beat by 0.4 points in two years. The economy has improved greatly when compared to Romney's forecast.
We are using the exact same calculations by the BLS when we check how Romney's forecast works out.
“For the past few weeks, President Bush and members of his administration have traveled the nation to celebrate recent improved economic statistics. Well, I’ve been traveling too, all over this large and diverse state. In cities and suburbs, downstate and upstate, I’ve heard from people who say it’s way too early to claim victory when it comes to our economy,”
Yet wage growth remains weak. Average hourly pay slipped 5 cents in December.
3. Benefited the wealthy: By any measure, the Bush tax cuts have benefited the wealthy more than the middle class. Here’s a chart, based on data from the Tax Policy Center, showing the distributional breakdown of the Bush tax cuts before they were amended on Tuesday. Going forward, the top 1 percent of earners will benefit much less -- though still quite a bit.
Actually, he didn'tObozo changed the way the unemployment rate is calculated-----------------they cooked the books and you libfools bought the lies. pathetic.
But good to see it gives conservatives some solace
Yes, they did. people no longer looking for work are no longer counted as they were in the past. They are lying to you, if you choose to believe the lies it only makes you look more like a fool than you usually do.
There has always been a U3 and a U6 employment number. People reporting they are out of the workforce have always counted the same under U3. U6 is down 5% under Obama. Want to discuss that?
Actually, he didn'tObozo changed the way the unemployment rate is calculated-----------------they cooked the books and you libfools bought the lies. pathetic.
But good to see it gives conservatives some solace
Yes, they did. people no longer looking for work are no longer counted as they were in the past. They are lying to you, if you choose to believe the lies it only makes you look more like a fool than you usually do.
There has always been a U3 and a U6 employment number. People reporting they are out of the workforce have always counted the same under U3. U6 is down 5% under Obama. Want to discuss that?