Remember when Trump said 5% UE number was a hoax?

[pinqy]

Doesn't change that more people than under any other President were on food stamps under Obama.

I didn't say it did. But it does make a difference to your comparison of unemployment and SNAP participation.

As for the children on them, isn't it about time their freeloading POS parents do for them instead of expecting the rest of us do it on their behalf?

Sure. And if the parents don't, or can't, you'd let the children starve?

When someone doesn't want to work, I have no problem letting them starve. You, on the other hand, want to hand them money from someone that is willing to work.

There are plenty of current and historical examples of societies with no social safety net. How well off do you think those countries are or were?

As far as people working AND using food stamps. Cut that shit off now. If the skills you have aren't enough for you to provide for yourself, the problem is with the low skilled person and not the responsibility of the rest of us to offset.

And that can be fixed immediately? I've known several people in the military who were on food stamps: a sergeant's salary isn't enough to support a wife and 5 kids. What do you suggest they do?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sure. And if the parents don't, or can't, you'd let the children starve?

Nope, you have the state take them out of the household and placed in an orphanage or with family relatives that can support them.

There are plenty of current and historical examples of societies with no social safety net. How well off do you think those countries are or were?

Our country is different because there are plenty of jobs out there and industry can't find Americans to do them.

And that can be fixed immediately? I've known several people in the military who were on food stamps: a sergeant's salary isn't enough to support a wife and 5 kids. What do you suggest they do?

Not many people do have a job where they can support five children. You need to be making a six figure salary to do that comfortably. If you don't make enough money to support five children, then you don't have five children.

 

[pinqy]

Sure. And if the parents don't, or can't, you'd let the children starve?

Nope, you have the state take them out of the household and placed in an orphanage or with family relatives that can support them.

Which is way more expensive and taxpayer burden than food stamps.

There are plenty of current and historical examples of societies with no social safety net. How well off do you think those countries are or were?

Our country is different because there are plenty of jobs out there and industry can't find Americans to do them.

Interesting dodge.

And that can be fixed immediately? I've known several people in the military who were on food stamps: a sergeant's salary isn't enough to support a wife and 5 kids. What do you suggest they do?

Not many people do have a job where they can support five children. You need to be making a six figure salary to do that comfortably. If you don't make enough money to support five children, then you don't have five children.

So a person has 5 kids and loses his job and can't find one that pays enough. Is he to murder one of his children? Send to foster care? Go back in time and not have so many kids? Saying what someone should have done does not in anyway affect the current situation.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

At the same time Obama was claiming unemployment was down, food stamp users were going up. There's only two things that could be the truth in a situation like that. Either unemployment wasn't going down and it was a lie or the jobs for which Obama was claiming he created were such worthless jobs he only claimed them to take credit for lowering unemployment while adding people to the food stamp dole. .

Or, there's the truth:

• Food stamp numbers include children. The unemployment rate only includes people 16 and older.
• Food stamps include people who do not want or cannot work. The unemployment rate is the number of people trying to find work divided by the number of people working plus the number of people trying.
• Food stamp users include people in the military, who are excluded from the labor force numbers.
• Many food stamp users have jobs, and so are not unemployed.

Doesn't change that more people than under any other President were on food stamps under Obama.

As for the children on them, isn't it about time their freeloading POS parents do for them instead of expecting the rest of us do it on their behalf?

When someone doesn't want to work, I have no problem letting them starve. You, on the other hand, want to hand them money from someone that is willing to work.

As far as people working AND using food stamps. Cut that shit off now. If the skills you have aren't enough for you to provide for yourself, the problem is with the low skilled person and not the responsibility of the rest of us to offset.

Then stop giving ANYONE tax credits for having children.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I expected more Trump supporters to address Trump's flagrant flip flop.

(lol, just kidding)

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Which is way more expensive and taxpayer burden than food stamps.

Yes, it would be at first. But when you stop rewarding people for having kids they can't support, they will quit having them or at the very least, not as many. Then the cost will actually go down.

So a person has 5 kids and loses his job and can't find one that pays enough. Is he to murder one of his children? Send to foster care? Go back in time and not have so many kids? Saying what someone should have done does not in anyway affect the current situation.

Like I said, you need to be making a pretty good buck to have five kids, and the only way to make that kind of money is if you have a profession where you're always in demand. No blue-collar worker could ever afford five kids.

The people that do have that large of a family are on some sort of welfare program from the beginning. They keep having more kids because the more kids they have, the more government goodies they get. Check out my topic on the subject.

Over 50% of US babies were born on Medicaid

 

[Crixus]

Here's what Fortune magazine has to say about Trump's job creation, and to say that Trump is a bit misleading is being kind.

President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts

Black Jesus did it all yeah yeah.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Here's what Fortune magazine has to say about Trump's job creation, and to say that Trump is a bit misleading is being kind.

President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts

Soo Trump is pushing for higher paying full time employment for American workers and the Democratic Party along with their propaganda sites are doing their best to undermine the effort..

Let's celebrate

Didn't read the link, did you?

 

[flacaltenn]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

question really is here -- DO YOU understand the UE numbers and how the ONE of MANY that gets used is perhaps the LEAST USEFUL of all of them? If you DID -- you wouldn't be making this into a Felony speech.

You need to look at SEVERAL numbers to even have a CLUE what it means.
BUT --- you tribal warriors keep chucking them spears. Sooner or later, you MIGHT hit something.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

question really is here -- DO YOU understand the UE numbers and how the ONE of MANY that gets used is perhaps the LEAST USEFUL of all of them? If you DID -- you wouldn't be making this into a Felony speech.

You need to look at SEVERAL numbers to even have a CLUE what it means.
BUT --- you tribal warriors keep chucking them spears. Sooner or later, you MIGHT hit something.

Is Trump now touting the UE numbers he was using before he was elected?

YES OR NO??

 

[Conservative65]

Why doesn't he say that anymore? ...about the 4.3% UE for example?

I remember when Obama said unemployment wouldn't go above 8% if a $787 billion stimulus was passed in 2009. It went above 10%. Where were you chastising him? That's rights, it's hard for you to do that when you kissing his ass.

GASP! Obama did not call the depth of Great Recession before all the economists?

What an asshole! He is just like Trump who runs around talking about how unemployment is 40%+, until he is in office, then it is suddenly record low 4%


You conservatives are a joke.

When it comes to the LIAR-In-Chief, you can be assured anything said by him will come back to haunt him and his sycophants! Going on the 17 day "working vacation" is a joke, esp. since Trump b!tched on Obama about him playing golf so much! "I will never take any vacations if elected President! There' too much work to do!" Nuff said! Trump keeps going back to Hillary as his "whipping girl," but if she's taken down, tried, and jailed, THEN WHAT? Does that diminish the WW drama that's going on now? I don't think so! Deflecting really s/b the last thing these idiots should be doing in DC!

Just another Obama ass licker. You're in Chicago. You're close to him and have a better place in line to do that. Pucker up.

Such idiots commenting around here! Obama's still in DC moron! Wants his kid to finish school there!

I see the emoji that say "STFU". Do you have the ability to do that? Since the answer is no, your demand has been dismissed, NL.

 

[Conservative65]

Doesn't change that more people than under any other President were on food stamps under Obama.

I didn't say it did. But it does make a difference to your comparison of unemployment and SNAP participation.

Obama claims to have created millions of jobs. At the same time that claim was being made, millions MORE, a record number, were on the food stamp dole. It either means A) the jobs he created were such shitty jobs the freeloaders still got help and he only used to jobs to make it appear as if he actually did something OR B) he didn't create as many jobs as he claimed he created. If more are working, less are on food stamps. Those two things have an inverse relationship.

As for the children on them, isn't it about time their freeloading POS parents do for them instead of expecting the rest of us do it on their behalf?

Sure. And if the parents don't, or can't, you'd let the children starve?

Send the bill to YOU. Since you seem to believe you have a responsibility to them, it's on you to provide for them if their parents won't. Since the only ones to which I have such a responsibility are mine, I'm not accountable is something for which I'm not responsible doesn't get done. In other words, unless I got the pussy the child came out of or I choose to take on the responsibility, it isn't mine.

When someone doesn't want to work, I have no problem letting them starve. You, on the other hand, want to hand them money from someone that is willing to work.

There are plenty of current and historical examples of societies with no social safety net. How well off do you think those countries are or were?

It's not a safety net. It's a way of life for people who can get more doing nothing than they could earn with the skills they offer. When that happens, there is no incentive for them to work.

As far as people working AND using food stamps. Cut that shit off now. If the skills you have aren't enough for you to provide for yourself, the problem is with the low skilled person and not the responsibility of the rest of us to offset.

And that can be fixed immediately? I've known several people in the military who were on food stamps: a sergeant's salary isn't enough to support a wife and 5 kids. What do you suggest they do?

So people with low skills have just appeared? It can't be fixed if too many that believe like you continue to hand to those that won't provide for themselves something for doing nothing. As for the military, that should be fixed. It's a disgrace that someone serving their country has to use social welfare. It's also a disgrace that someone unwilling to strike a lick at a snake can get the same type of help someone serving this country is getting.

 

[Conservative65]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

At the same time Obama was claiming unemployment was down, food stamp users were going up. There's only two things that could be the truth in a situation like that. Either unemployment wasn't going down and it was a lie or the jobs for which Obama was claiming he created were such worthless jobs he only claimed them to take credit for lowering unemployment while adding people to the food stamp dole. .

Or, there's the truth:

• Food stamp numbers include children. The unemployment rate only includes people 16 and older.
• Food stamps include people who do not want or cannot work. The unemployment rate is the number of people trying to find work divided by the number of people working plus the number of people trying.
• Food stamp users include people in the military, who are excluded from the labor force numbers.
• Many food stamp users have jobs, and so are not unemployed.

Doesn't change that more people than under any other President were on food stamps under Obama.

As for the children on them, isn't it about time their freeloading POS parents do for them instead of expecting the rest of us do it on their behalf?

When someone doesn't want to work, I have no problem letting them starve. You, on the other hand, want to hand them money from someone that is willing to work.

As far as people working AND using food stamps. Cut that shit off now. If the skills you have aren't enough for you to provide for yourself, the problem is with the low skilled person and not the responsibility of the rest of us to offset.

Then stop giving ANYONE tax credits for having children.

I have no problem with that as long as it's coupled with not giving anything to the parent(s) relying on the taxpayers to support the kids they already have when they have more. If someone has, let's say, 3 kids for which the taxpayers get the bill to support them, why is your answer to continue to give them more when they have number 4, or number 5, and so on? Why do you think enabling them to do that will cause them to realize they shouldn't have more if they can't support the ones they already have?

 

[flacaltenn]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

question really is here -- DO YOU understand the UE numbers and how the ONE of MANY that gets used is perhaps the LEAST USEFUL of all of them? If you DID -- you wouldn't be making this into a Felony speech.

You need to look at SEVERAL numbers to even have a CLUE what it means.
BUT --- you tribal warriors keep chucking them spears. Sooner or later, you MIGHT hit something.

Is Trump now touting the UE numbers he was using before he was elected?

YES OR NO??

Trump is smart enough to read ALL the UE numbers. The numbers that COUNT -- show the improvement.

There's not a single number that comes out of Wash DC nowadays that doesn't come with all that legal mumbo that you see at the bottom small print in commercials. Must of them are outright fabricated. Out of torturous definitions of stuff that SOUNDS important.

 

[pinqy]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

question really is here -- DO YOU understand the UE numbers and how the ONE of MANY that gets used is perhaps the LEAST USEFUL of all of them?

Useful fo whom and for what purpose? Since they all have different uses, you can't really rank them. Which rate to look at depends on what you want to know.

You need to look at SEVERAL numbers to even have a CLUE what it means..

I promise you that having spent over a decade studying the methodology and working with economists from dozens of countries on the issues I know far more about what the numbers mean and how to look at them than you do.

And if you're seriously claiming that the U-3 is the least useful? Then you don't know much. But please, explain. I just really hope you're not going to say anything stupid, like claim only people receiving UI benefits are counted.

 

[flacaltenn]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

question really is here -- DO YOU understand the UE numbers and how the ONE of MANY that gets used is perhaps the LEAST USEFUL of all of them?

Useful fo whom and for what purpose? Since they all have different uses, you can't really rank them. Which rate to look at depends on what you want to know.

You need to look at SEVERAL numbers to even have a CLUE what it means..

I promise you that having spent over a decade studying the methodology and working with economists from dozens of countries on the issues I know far more about what the numbers mean and how to look at them than you do.

And if you're seriously claiming that the U-3 is the least useful? Then you don't know much. But please, explain. I just really hope you're not going to say anything stupid, like claim only people receiving UI benefits are counted.

Since we BOTH know what the numbers mean and how they are different, then you should KNOW that the UE that is quoted 95% of the time doesn't include those who have "given up". It also makes allowances for counting MULTIPLE part time jobs.. Which is not something one wants to brag about when their Health Insurance legislation forced folks to work more than one part time job. It also says NOTHING about the 10,000 Baby Boomers a DAY --- that are leaving the workforce permanently. Something which I would PRESUME -- any ADMIN would like to defend itself against because that has NOTHING to do with Federal policy..

If 10K / day are leaving -- you would ASSUME there'd be trainloads of GREAT JOBS just waiting to be filled..

 

[pinqy]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

question really is here -- DO YOU understand the UE numbers and how the ONE of MANY that gets used is perhaps the LEAST USEFUL of all of them?

Useful fo whom and for what purpose? Since they all have different uses, you can't really rank them. Which rate to look at depends on what you want to know.

You need to look at SEVERAL numbers to even have a CLUE what it means..

I promise you that having spent over a decade studying the methodology and working with economists from dozens of countries on the issues I know far more about what the numbers mean and how to look at them than you do.

And if you're seriously claiming that the U-3 is the least useful? Then you don't know much. But please, explain. I just really hope you're not going to say anything stupid, like claim only people receiving UI benefits are counted.

Since we BOTH know what the numbers mean and how they are different, then you should KNOW that the UE that is quoted 95% of the time doesn't include those who have "given up".

If you're trying to measure competition for jobs and how easy or difficult it is to find work, then why would you want to include people who aren't trying? If you're looking at potential future job seekers, though, then it is useful.

It also makes allowances for counting MULTIPLE part time jobs..

You are mistaken. While the non-farm payroll survey is a count of jobs so that someone with multiple jobs will be counted for each job, the household survey, which is where the unemployment rate comes from, counts people only once, no matter how many jobs s/he has.

Which is not something one wants to brag about when their Health Insurance legislation forced folks to work more than one part time job.

I'm not seeming any significant increase in either multiple job holders or part time for economic reasons.

It also says NOTHING about the 10,000 Baby Boomers a DAY --- that are leaving the workforce permanently. Something which I would PRESUME -- any ADMIN would like to defend itself against because that has NOTHING to do with Federal policy..

If 10K / day are leaving -- you would ASSUME there'd be trainloads of GREAT JOBS just waiting to be filled..

I wouldn't. People don't retire from entry level position. And I'm not sure what you think an unemployment rate should have anything to say about people retiring

 

[NYcarbineer]

The U-3 unemployment number was the standard for years until Obama got elected, then suddenly the RW propaganda machine started pushing the "real" unemployment number,

for one reason and one reason only...they thought they could make Obama look bad with it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

question really is here -- DO YOU understand the UE numbers and how the ONE of MANY that gets used is perhaps the LEAST USEFUL of all of them? If you DID -- you wouldn't be making this into a Felony speech.

You need to look at SEVERAL numbers to even have a CLUE what it means.
BUT --- you tribal warriors keep chucking them spears. Sooner or later, you MIGHT hit something.

Is Trump now touting the UE numbers he was using before he was elected?

YES OR NO??

Trump is smart enough to read ALL the UE numbers. The numbers that COUNT -- show the improvement.

There's not a single number that comes out of Wash DC nowadays that doesn't come with all that legal mumbo that you see at the bottom small print in commercials. Must of them are outright fabricated. Out of torturous definitions of stuff that SOUNDS important.

Was that a YES or a NO?

 

[AntonToo]

Here's a delightful retrospective on Trump's 'old' view of the unemployment numbers:

Sep. 7, 2012

“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”

Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”

Aug. 11, 2013
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”

May 31, 2014
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”

June 16, 2015
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”

Aug. 11, 2015
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”

Aug. 30, 2015
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”

Sept. 28, 2015
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”

Sept. 29, 2015
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”

Oct. 9, 2015
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”

Oct. 11, 2015
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”

Jan. 17, 2016
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”

Feb. 9, 2016
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”

March 12, 2016
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”

May 24, 2016
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”

July 7, 2016
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”

Aug. 8, 2016
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”

Nov. 4, 2016
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”

Dec. 8, 2016
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Analysis | 19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’ before they made him look good

question really is here -- DO YOU understand the UE numbers and how the ONE of MANY that gets used is perhaps the LEAST USEFUL of all of them? If you DID -- you wouldn't be making this into a Felony speech.

You need to look at SEVERAL numbers to even have a CLUE what it means.
BUT --- you tribal warriors keep chucking them spears. Sooner or later, you MIGHT hit something.

Is Trump now touting the UE numbers he was using before he was elected?

YES OR NO??

Trump is smart enough to read ALL the UE numbers. The numbers that COUNT -- show the improvement.

There's not a single number that comes out of Wash DC nowadays that doesn't come with all that legal mumbo that you see at the bottom small print in commercials. Must of them are outright fabricated. Out of torturous definitions of stuff that SOUNDS important.

Unbelievable.

Which numbers? List them.

And then tell us how they changed in 6 months from "DISASTER! We have 20-40% unemployment!" to "Great job numbers and great economy, unemployment lowest in 17 years!"

The lengths you fools go to rationalize this ridiculous, shameless, opportunistic buffoon is amazing to witness.