Unemployment Rate Really 10% ... says Sanders!

[007]

so now sanders has credibility with RW's ...

and the wind blows RW opinions ...

same shit different day .... yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawnnnnnnnnn

Anybody gains credibility when they tell the truth, even asshole socialists, but that's doesn't mean we agree with their agenda.

Get a clue.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Actually, if you look at the number of unemployed against the actual number of able bodied people of working age in the U.S., it's around 42%. This is the worst economy of my lifetime.

 

[NightFox]

this HTML class. Value is http://dailycaller.c

Liberals finally can't declare Conervatives & GOP are making up or manipulating the unemployment numbers! Bernie Sanders, one of the 2 DNC nominees/candidates for President, is tired of the Obama administration lies and Obama Spin machine, and he presents Americans with the current FACTS:

94,610,000 Americans are out of work.

10 % Unemployment

Black teen unemployment rate 30%, 6 times higher than Obama's false claim of 5.1%

Illegal job employment rate higher than rate for Americans...

Job creation rate in SEPT lowest since 1977, only 44% when 50% neeed to sustain level of critically needed yet dwindling Middle Class

There are different rates for different things. The unemployment rate is generally those able to claim benefits. We all know this, and it's important. However there's the rate of people out of work who should be working, ie, not rich retired people etc.

Uh-huh... and please ask Bernie where the 94 million "out of work" number comes into play?

Why, does it actually matter?

I don't think it does matter when discussing the real unemployment rate, which is why I'm wondering why Bernie brought it up in the first place, either he's completely math challenged (not surprising given the fact that he appears to think resources are infinite) or he put it out there as a deception device to exaggerate the real unemployment situation, in either case his other claims regarding the labor market are suspect.

The 10% figure is the U6 unemployment figure. It includes people who are underemployed too.

Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons

"
Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons"

Question: what does any of that have to do with the 94 MILLION "out of work" claim?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually, if you look at the number of unemployed against the actual number of able bodied people of working age in the U.S., it's around 42%. This is the worst economy of my lifetime.

That's not unemployed, that's not working, completely and totally different.

 

[frigidweirdo]

There are different rates for different things. The unemployment rate is generally those able to claim benefits. We all know this, and it's important. However there's the rate of people out of work who should be working, ie, not rich retired people etc.

Uh-huh... and please ask Bernie where the 94 million "out of work" number comes into play?

Why, does it actually matter?

I don't think it does matter when discussing the real unemployment rate, which is why I'm wondering why Bernie brought it up in the first place, either he's completely math challenged (not surprising given the fact that he appears to think resources are infinite) or he put it out there as a deception device to exaggerate the real unemployment situation, in either case his other claims regarding the labor market are suspect.

The 10% figure is the U6 unemployment figure. It includes people who are underemployed too.

Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons

"
Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons"

Question: what does any of that have to do with the 94 MILLION "out of work" claim?

I don't know what he's referring to. Out of work and unemployed are two different things.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Actually, if you look at the number of unemployed against the actual number of able bodied people of working age in the U.S., it's around 42%. This is the worst economy of my lifetime.

That's not unemployed, that's not working, completely and totally different.

Uhm, whatever... how can we sustain a society where 42% don't work? Tomato tomato....

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually, if you look at the number of unemployed against the actual number of able bodied people of working age in the U.S., it's around 42%. This is the worst economy of my lifetime.

That's not unemployed, that's not working, completely and totally different.

Uhm, whatever... how can we sustain a society where 42% don't work? Tomato tomato....

Children don't work.
Also some people are rich and don't need to work. Some people take holidays. I took a holiday last year, was going to be for a year, then it ended up being about 6 months long. Some people don't have jobs. Some people are retired. Lots of reasons.

It's not that difficult to see how 42% of people wouldn't be working.

 

[NightFox]

I don't know what he's referring to. Out of work and unemployed are two different things.

Join the club, out of work MAY mean unemployed from an unemployment rate perspective or it may not which is why it's either an attempt to redefine the labor force calculation or it's intentionally deceptive politician speak, either way Bernie's claims regarding labor markets cannot be trusted until he clarifies what he means by 94 million "out of work" and why he included it in a discussion of unemployment statistics.

 

[paulitician]

He's wrong. It's higher.

 

[Indeependent]

I believe the capital gains distinction should end for capitalists whenever wages don't outpace inflation for labor.

Then you have less people investing. How does that help anything?

Investing in Asian companies does little for US employment.

 

[NightFox]

He's wrong. It's higher.

Higher, lower... what's the difference? as long as the way it's calculated remains constant you have a gauge for the relative health of the labor markets.

 

[g5000]

I believe the capital gains distinction should end for capitalists whenever wages don't outpace inflation for labor.

Wages have been outpaced by inflation for at least the past 30 years.

Not even the top one percent have kept up.

If even the one percent hasn't kept up, as you say, why do you lefties constantly want to take more from them and claim they are getting richer? Are you saying the richest of the rich are having trouble affording things?

I am not a leftie, fool. I have consistently attacked the Left for thinking the solution to every problem is to "tax the rich more".

Our fiscal problems are due to an unleveling of the playing field through legislation, particularly through tax expenditures, but also through regulations which protect scelerotic special interests.

If you were being robbed on a daily basis, and the thieves had police protection, it would make no sense to "solve" the problem by increasing taxes on the guy who lives in a bigger house than you. But that is what the Left keeps saying we need to do.

And that is why we keep seeing the left complaining about how much money the top one percent make, and why I showed that even they are not keeping up with inflation.

Then you come along like a dipshit and say I am a leftie who wants to tax the rich more!

Jesus H. Christ.

 

[g5000]

this HTML class. Value is http://dailycaller.c

Liberals finally can't declare Conervatives & GOP are making up or manipulating the unemployment numbers! Bernie Sanders, one of the 2 DNC nominees/candidates for President, is tired of the Obama administration lies and Obama Spin machine, and he presents Americans with the current FACTS:

94,610,000 Americans are out of work.

10 % Unemployment

Black teen unemployment rate 30%, 6 times higher than Obama's false claim of 5.1%

Illegal job employment rate higher than rate for Americans...

Job creation rate in SEPT lowest since 1977, only 44% when 50% neeed to sustain level of critically needed yet dwindling Middle Class

There are different rates for different things. The unemployment rate is generally those able to claim benefits. We all know this, and it's important. However there's the rate of people out of work who should be working, ie, not rich retired people etc.

Uh-huh... and please ask Bernie where the 94 million "out of work" number comes into play?

Why, does it actually matter?

I don't think it does matter when discussing the real unemployment rate, which is why I'm wondering why Bernie brought it up in the first place, either he's completely math challenged (not surprising given the fact that he appears to think resources are infinite) or he put it out there as a deception device to exaggerate the real unemployment situation, in either case his other claims regarding the labor market are suspect.

The 10% figure is the U6 unemployment figure. It includes people who are underemployed too.

Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons

"
Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons"

Every metric of unemployment has been steadily falling for the past five years.

 

[NightFox]

I am not a leftie, fool.

Ummm..okay, begs the question what sort of fool are you?

Our fiscal problems are due to an unleveling of the playing field through legislation, particularly through tax expenditures, but also through regulations which protect scelerotic special interests.

If you were being robbed on a daily basis, and the thieves had police protection, it would make no sense to "solve" the problem by increasing taxes on the guy who lives in a bigger house than you. But that is what the Left keeps saying we need to do.

Well said... it's too bad more people can't seem to understand the effects of government intervention and central planning on the economy, if they did they wouldn't reflexively attempt to blame capitalism for our economic ills,

 

[g5000]

Our economy is not firing on all cylinders because of the collective private and public debt.

Until we stop shouting at each other, and blaming each other, until we stop hunting for scapegoats and finally admit to ourselves that EVERYONE is to blame, we will get nowhere.

Now, do you want to keep playing into the hands of those who want this country split into factions so they can keep their hands on the levers of power, do you want to keeping playing into the hands of hack media overlords who want this country at war with itself so they can keep reaping advertising dollars, or do you guys actually want things to get fixed?

 

[pinqy]

Actually, if you look at the number of unemployed against the actual number of able bodied people of working age in the U.S., it's around 42%. This is the worst economy of my lifetime.

That's not unemployed, that's not working, completely and totally different.

Uhm, whatever... how can we sustain a society where 42% don't work? Tomato tomato....

We did just fine in the 1940's, 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's. The current Employed to Population ratio (59.2%) is higher than anytime before 1978.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Probably closer to 15%

I will see your 15% and raise you to 200%.

The REAL unemployment is 200%.

Unemployment is so high that people are losing their jobs back in time.

I win.

Liberal hacks always think they win

 

[NightFox]

Actually, if you look at the number of unemployed against the actual number of able bodied people of working age in the U.S., it's around 42%. This is the worst economy of my lifetime.

That's not unemployed, that's not working, completely and totally different.

Uhm, whatever... how can we sustain a society where 42% don't work? Tomato tomato....

We did just fine in the 1940's, 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's. The current Employed to Population ratio (59.2%) is higher than anytime before 1978.

IMHO That's a meaningless statistic since all factors affecting the size of the population are not equal (retirement of the Baby Boomers, birthrates, immigration, etc..,), you need to look at labor force participation calculated using constant means if you want to make any meaningful comparison to past decades.

 

[A Perez]

this HTML class. Value is http://dailycaller.c

Liberals finally can't declare Conervatives & GOP are making up or manipulating the unemployment numbers! Bernie Sanders, one of the 2 DNC nominees/candidates for President, is tired of the Obama administration lies and Obama Spin machine, and he presents Americans with the current FACTS:

94,610,000 Americans are out of work.

10 % Unemployment

Black teen unemployment rate 30%, 6 times higher than Obama's false claim of 5.1%

Illegal job employment rate higher than rate for Americans...

Job creation rate in SEPT lowest since 1977, only 44% when 50% neeed to sustain level of critically needed yet dwindling Middle Class

Is that up or down from the numbers at the end of the Bush administration using the same methodology?

 

[pinqy]

Actually, if you look at the number of unemployed against the actual number of able bodied people of working age in the U.S., it's around 42%. This is the worst economy of my lifetime.

That's not unemployed, that's not working, completely and totally different.

Uhm, whatever... how can we sustain a society where 42% don't work? Tomato tomato....

We did just fine in the 1940's, 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's. The current Employed to Population ratio (59.2%) is higher than anytime before 1978.

IMHO That's a meaningless statistic since all factors affecting the size of the population are not equal (retirement of the Baby Boomers, birthrates, immigration, etc..,), you need to look at labor force participation calculated using constant means if you want to make any meaningful comparison to past decades.

Ummmm why do you think (Employed plus Unemployed)/population is more meaningful than employed/population? There are no differing factors.