Unemployment 5.1% Sept 2015

[rightwinger]

wait a minute. If pay is rising why are the snake Democrats still calling to raise the minimum wage? , they say that unemployment is down to 5.1%. what they don't tell you is the majority of the jobs are now PART-time hours because OF ObamaCare for one and two: fast jobs is most of the jobs that has been "created" under this regime

Stephanie

Stop displaying your ignorance and go play with your toys

 

[Mac1958]

Just 173,000 new jobs, not good.

 

[rightwinger]

Unemployment rate under Bush doubled
Unemployment rate under Obama has dropped 5%

Why would we want to elect Republicans again?

 

[pinqy]

5.1% ?
sure...sure...whatever they say...the government wouldn't lie.

Did they lie when it was 5.1% under Bush?

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

 

[Luddly Neddite]

5.1% ?
sure...sure...whatever they say...the government wouldn't lie.

Did they lie when it was 5.1% under Bush?

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He had record numbers of 700,000 people a month losing their jobs

President Obama turned that around and made the US the strongest economy in the world.

 

[Mad Scientist]

So if yer getting raped by a Republican for many years and then suddenly the attacker changes to a Democrat you cant complain?

"Well you were ok with a Republican violating you. You just have to take it."

More Liberal Logic.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Unemployment rate under Bush doubled
Unemployment rate under Obama has dropped 5%

Why would we want to elect Republicans again?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

5.1% ?
sure...sure...whatever they say...the government wouldn't lie.

Did they lie when it was 5.1% under Bush?

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

 

[pinqy]

5.1% ?
sure...sure...whatever they say...the government wouldn't lie.

Did they lie when it was 5.1% under Bush?

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

where's the "oops?" The number of people not in the labor force has been going up for ever. It's because the population is growing.

 

[KissMy]

Russia's Deputy PM says they will not cut oil production.

Deflation Risk Is High. The Fed Rate Hike Should Be Pushed Off. Employment & Wage Rise Should Continue.

 

[AquaAthena]

Hey, that Dear Leader might have that number reading 0% unemployed before he leaves us to go save the world.

and if you believe anything that comes from this administration. you deserve to be led over the cliff which is were they are taking us

whatever. all heil Obama

Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

 

[rightwinger]

5.1% ?
sure...sure...whatever they say...the government wouldn't lie.

Did they lie when it was 5.1% under Bush?

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

Who cares about Labor Participation Rate?

Why should I care if kids and grandpas are in the workforce?



.

 

[Iceweasel]

Liberals will believe anything.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

5.1% ?
sure...sure...whatever they say...the government wouldn't lie.

Did they lie when it was 5.1% under Bush?

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

where's the "oops?" The number of people not in the labor force has been going up for ever. It's because the population is growing.

It's at a 38 year high.

 

[rightwinger]

Did they lie when it was 5.1% under Bush?

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

where's the "oops?" The number of people not in the labor force has been going up for ever. It's because the population is growing.

It's at a 38 year low.

Is that bad? Why?

 

[pinqy]

Did they lie when it was 5.1% under Bush?

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

where's the "oops?" The number of people not in the labor force has been going up for ever. It's because the population is growing.

It's at a 38 year low.

The rate is yes. But it's higher than any time before 1978, and the rate's been going down since 2000. About a third of the drop has been from people age 55+ and about a third from students age 16-24.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Obviously not. He didnt have record numbers on some form of government assistance or record numbers out of the work force.

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

where's the "oops?" The number of people not in the labor force has been going up for ever. It's because the population is growing.

It's at a 38 year low.

Is that bad? Why?

Whoops....high.

 

[KissMy]

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

where's the "oops?" The number of people not in the labor force has been going up for ever. It's because the population is growing.

It's at a 38 year low.

Is that bad? Why?

Whoops....high.

So - Being high high is your excuse for being clueless? That's all you have is excuses for Republican Economic & Jobs Failures!

 

[rightwinger]

He certainly did have record numbers not in the labor force:

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

where's the "oops?" The number of people not in the labor force has been going up for ever. It's because the population is growing.

It's at a 38 year low.

Is that bad? Why?

Whoops....high.

How is more old people retiring and more teenagers not working a bad thing?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Oops...
Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month

where's the "oops?" The number of people not in the labor force has been going up for ever. It's because the population is growing.

It's at a 38 year low.

Is that bad? Why?

Whoops....high.

So - Being high high is your excuse for being clueless? That's all you have is excuses for Republican Economic & Jobs Failures!

Who said anything about being high?
I'd have to say that someone who repeats himself is the high one.
And you can stop with the bullshit blaming republicans,your boy has been at the reins for almost seven years.