US adds massive 287,000 jobs in June.....Quite A Change From Bush's Fiasco

[Tom Horn]

You should challenge him to provide citations.......

I know, right?

Rat numbers are a joke on us, them, the American people....and we've had enough of it.

 

[kaz]

"Full time" is 40 hours a week.

According to WHO?

I work 37.5 hours a week. I THOUGHT I was a full time employee, my employer thinks I am a full time employee...what do you say mr.Empty-encyclopedia? Are we all wrong or you are just full of shit political hack making up numbers out of convenience?

Ouch. Full time is 37.5, not 40! Bam, kaz, nailed you!

OK, it's 37.2. Happy?

To BLS it's 35 hrs.

That was sarcasm at his hair splitting. I never said it has to be 40 hours a week! Not an hour less! The standard is an 8 hour day. If you work 7.5 and get paid full time, so what? I'm fine with 35. My point was that under 30 is underemployed.

Lots of feathers in this, no eggs

 

[kaz]

And starting from the bottom of a deep recession? Yeah, that's OK then ...



You sheeple will believe anything Democrats tell you. And I'll buy State and local are negative. But the Feds? I call BS to that, they are growing like crazy

Net REDUCTION in the federal workforce since Feb 2009 - 13,000...

It is as if he is posting to convince everyone that conservatives are ignorant, hypocritical liars.

Seriously, how tough is it to fact check yourself before looking like an idiot?

Ouch, the hypocrisy reeks. Why don't you warn people before you fire something like that off? Better yet, go outside first

 

[Faun]

Long, yes, but incredibly weak.

Incredibly Weak? 17 million jobs gained streak is incredibly weak?

Time to put down that bong.

I like how you deleted the rest of my post. And yes, 17 million from the bottom of a recession over 7 1/2 years doesn't cut it.

Maybe if Obama weren't more focused with running the economy than helping it.

Most of the unemployment reduction was Obama convincing people to give up looking for a job.

There's also mostly shit paying and part time jobs

I like that cutting too, since it was irrelevant to job counts. And lets not bullshit, no number would CUT IT for you when it comes to economy during Obama's stay in office. You should be honest on that point with yourself and others.

Mostly part time jobs you say? I say more bs. Same for "shit paying".

Strawman, I didn't say "mostly part-time jobs."

And 10 million people over 7 1/2 years in a country of 350 million starting at the bottom of a recession. Oooohhhhhh, I'm impressed. What they were mostly were government jobs. Leaches on the economy, not creators of the economy.

Calling Obama a jobs President is like calling W the Middle East peace President. You're a sycophant for the Democrats. If they farted, you'd as who brought the lilacs

Do you ever stop kazzing?

Burdening Obama's jobs numbers with Bush's Great Recession doesn't impress anyone. Since he's not responsible for job losses due the recession, his numbers are quite impressive.

 

[kaz]

And starting from the bottom of a deep recession? Yeah, that's OK then ...



You sheeple will believe anything Democrats tell you. And I'll buy State and local are negative. But the Feds? I call BS to that, they are growing like crazy

Net REDUCTION in the federal workforce since Feb 2009 - 13,000...

It is as if he is posting to convince everyone that conservatives are ignorant, hypocritical liars.

Seriously, how tough is it to fact check yourself before looking like an idiot?

Proceed from uninformed bias

Cruise innertubes for sources making a good living confirming uninformed bias

Declare as "fact"

Mince

Rebleat


The Circle of Reactionary Ignorance..

So seriously, that is a skewed number, you know that, right? Government is going to more and more contractors, even in the military. And it was such a tiny drop and irrelevant to the point being debated. Yet you're beating your chest like you slew Goliath. Yeah

 

[Faun]

No, but you sharing your homo-erotic fantasies on a public forum reveals more about you than I think you realize.

Your aura is feminine....with a dash of butch and a spoonful of stupid so I was just guessing.

Now see, I couldn't see who you were addressing, but I guessed it was Faun from your description. And when I clicked reply to see who it is ... there you go. Gay boy himself ...

Yeah, he's an Obama ho. Amazing these dweebs, 7 1/2 years and one good month is all it takes for them to swoon over Obama

Aww, Kaz is kazzing again. Out of all the posters here, you guessed me. While that fails the smile test, I can't help but find the humor in that coming from the poster who admitted he could be the "wife" of the house, depending on circumstances.

Showing my point on your obsession, thanks Faun. You created your special word for me, "kazzing," which you use in your unrestrained adulation for everything I post. Sorry, guy, I'm not gay. You're going to have to find someone who is and is into creepy.

Also, take a remedial English course to learn how to use quote marks

Poor kaz.

"Kazzing" means "lying." And it applies perfectly to you since you lie so much.

And my quotes were perfectly placed as I was quoting the word you used to describe yourself under certain conditions.

 

[kaz]

Amazing these dweebs, 7 1/2 years and one good month is all it takes for them to swoon over Obama

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PgKZ-prq...yFHUusZ_qoTTDQMgCLcB/s1600/PrivateMay2016.PNG


Clinton's two terms were the best for both private and total non-farm job creation, followed by Reagan's 2nd term.

Currently Obama's 2nd term is on pace to be the 3rd best ever for private job creation. However, with very few public sector jobs added, Obama's 2nd term is only on pace to be the fourth best for total job creation.

Note: Only 205 thousand public sector jobs have been added during the first forty months of Obama's 2nd term (following a record loss of 708 thousand public sector jobs during Obama's 1st term). This is about 15% of the public sector jobs added during Reagan's 2nd term!

Yet well over 40 million are still freeloading on food stamps. I thought job creation for which Obama takes credit would bring that number way down. It hasn't. Explain, or should I say make some excuse.

It has...at least according to the people who administer the program....

the S in SNAP stands for SUPPLEMENTAL........do you have any idea what that means?

I compared unemployment rates and rates of food stamp use. What I found was that when unemployment was the same under Bush as it is under Obama, food stamp use is still much higher at the same unemployment rate with Obama.

If all these good jobs are being created under Obama, why is the need to supplement so much higher than it was at the same level of unemployment under Bush?

He wasn't even being that deep. He was ignoring 7 years of food stamp increases under Obama and just saying it went down the last few months as if that's an argument

You are wrong......and wrong....

There is no fixed correlation between employment trends and SNAP participation.

SNAP participation increased in 7 of 8 years under Scrub, even as employment increased
in 4.5 of 8....

I made no connection between SNAP and unemployment at all. Can I have a hit of that? Looks like good shit

 

[kaz]

Most of the no longer unemployed quit looking for a job. Congrats on that, making people give up entirely on finding a job is quite the achievement

You gotta just love the Right, after getting nailed in a lie, the Right just make up another lie.

You don't know that people have dropped out of the labor market? Seriously?

But you claim that "MOST" who have dropped out did so out of discouragement, which IS a lie, and you know it.
Discouraged workers have declined from 1,318,000 at the peak of the Great Bush Recession to 502,000 now.

Well, whether it's "most" or not is debatable based on how you're counting them, and I agree I wasn't specific in that. But where do you get that there are 502K discouraged workers? That's hard to swallow

You can go to BLS...

Already did and showed the lie in the statistic. It doesn't count people who gave up and went away, the main group of "discouraged" workers. LOL, you people are priceless.

I said when I was wrong, are you going to do the same?

 

[kaz]

The only problem being it was a lie. I said it was mostly shit jobs and part time. Sputnik changed that to "mostly part time." Just a flat out lie, totally different thing.

I love how you lie as you accuse people of lying. Hilarious stuff.

You said most jobs created were part time and just because that is not ALL you said doesn't mean you didn't say it. I've proven that to be fabricated BS and now you post more BS trying to skirt around the facts.

You don't have to accept simple facts, you just have to accept them to not look like a fact denying idiot without any credibility.

Now as to your other claim of "shit jobs", I have no idea what you base it on, but going by your record it is based on NOTHING substantive.

Here's the other problem with the chart. I count part time as anything less than full time. This chart is counting underemployed as full time. Meaning you took a big step down and/or they offer you the 25-30 hour a week range. Explain how a low end worker lives on that.

In fact many companies are specifically limiting employees to under 30 hours because that's when government fucks them with Obamacare. This counts them as full time. They aren't.

Same goes to the rest of your naked assertions - SOURCE IT because there is not a single reason for anyone to trust anything you type.

Lies wrapped in lies wrapped in lies, that's what you people have.

That and after 7 1/2 years, Obama had a good month for one stat! Hail Obama!

More blatant lying.

You seriously see only "one good month"?

If you count underemployed as part time and claim that part time workers are not going up, yeah, that's a lie

You want the category

Employed Part Time for Economic Reasons...

Thank me later.

Thank you for what? Again, you're spinning, spinning, spinning.

I think part time workers are people who work but don't work full time. You think it's a contrived category that doesn't include people who work less than 30 hours a week because their employers don't want to get fucked by government with Obamacare.

You think you're winning that point?

 

[edthecynic]

LIAR!

Underemployed has gone down from 8,046,000 as Bush crawled out of office to 5,843,000 now, a DECREASE of over 2 million in what you call "a fast growing segment of job workers."

Most of the no longer unemployed quit looking for a job. Congrats on that, making people give up entirely on finding a job is quite the achievement

You gotta just love the Right, after getting nailed in a lie, the Right just make up another lie.

You don't know that people have dropped out of the labor market? Seriously?

But you claim that "MOST" who have dropped out did so out of discouragement, which IS a lie, and you know it.
Discouraged workers have declined from 1,318,000 at the peak of the Great Bush Recession to 502,000 now.

Well, whether it's "most" or not is debatable based on how you're counting them, and I agree I wasn't specific in that. But where do you get that there are 502K discouraged workers? That's hard to swallow.

Edit: I Googled it, you are only counting "marginally attached" workers. That's like when you called the 45 million food stamp receivers 1.9 million. Where are you getting your data? Crooks and Liars or the Democratic Underground?

If you don't know where I get my data, how can you google it and find it is "marginally attached" workers???

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force: Discouragement over job prospects (Persons who believe no job is available.)

 

[kaz]

Most of the no longer unemployed quit looking for a job. Congrats on that, making people give up entirely on finding a job is quite the achievement

You gotta just love the Right, after getting nailed in a lie, the Right just make up another lie.

You don't know that people have dropped out of the labor market? Seriously?

But you claim that "MOST" who have dropped out did so out of discouragement, which IS a lie, and you know it.
Discouraged workers have declined from 1,318,000 at the peak of the Great Bush Recession to 502,000 now.

Well, whether it's "most" or not is debatable based on how you're counting them, and I agree I wasn't specific in that. But where do you get that there are 502K discouraged workers? That's hard to swallow.

Edit: I Googled it, you are only counting "marginally attached" workers. That's like when you called the 45 million food stamp receivers 1.9 million. Where are you getting your data? Crooks and Liars or the Democratic Underground?

If you don't know where I get my data, how can you google it and find it is "marginally attached" workers???

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force: Discouragement over job prospects (Persons who believe no job is available.)

I already addressed this. You got it by ignoring most discouraged workers and only counting one segment of them

 

[edthecynic]

Already did and showed the lie in the statistic. It doesn't count people who gave up and went away, the main group of "discouraged" workers. LOL, you people are priceless.

LIAR!

 

[edthecynic]

You gotta just love the Right, after getting nailed in a lie, the Right just make up another lie.

You don't know that people have dropped out of the labor market? Seriously?

But you claim that "MOST" who have dropped out did so out of discouragement, which IS a lie, and you know it.
Discouraged workers have declined from 1,318,000 at the peak of the Great Bush Recession to 502,000 now.

Well, whether it's "most" or not is debatable based on how you're counting them, and I agree I wasn't specific in that. But where do you get that there are 502K discouraged workers? That's hard to swallow.

Edit: I Googled it, you are only counting "marginally attached" workers. That's like when you called the 45 million food stamp receivers 1.9 million. Where are you getting your data? Crooks and Liars or the Democratic Underground?

If you don't know where I get my data, how can you google it and find it is "marginally attached" workers???

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force: Discouragement over job prospects (Persons who believe no job is available.)

I already addressed this. You got it by ignoring most discouraged workers and only counting one segment of them

LIAR!

There is only one group of discouraged workers.

 

[Faun]

Amazing these dweebs, 7 1/2 years and one good month is all it takes for them to swoon over Obama

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PgKZ-prq...yFHUusZ_qoTTDQMgCLcB/s1600/PrivateMay2016.PNG


Clinton's two terms were the best for both private and total non-farm job creation, followed by Reagan's 2nd term.

Currently Obama's 2nd term is on pace to be the 3rd best ever for private job creation. However, with very few public sector jobs added, Obama's 2nd term is only on pace to be the fourth best for total job creation.

Note: Only 205 thousand public sector jobs have been added during the first forty months of Obama's 2nd term (following a record loss of 708 thousand public sector jobs during Obama's 1st term). This is about 15% of the public sector jobs added during Reagan's 2nd term!

Yet well over 40 million are still freeloading on food stamps. I thought job creation for which Obama takes credit would bring that number way down. It hasn't. Explain, or should I say make some excuse.

It has...at least according to the people who administer the program....

the S in SNAP stands for SUPPLEMENTAL........do you have any idea what that means?

I compared unemployment rates and rates of food stamp use. What I found was that when unemployment was the same under Bush as it is under Obama, food stamp use is still much higher at the same unemployment rate with Obama.

If all these good jobs are being created under Obama, why is the need to supplement so much higher than it was at the same level of unemployment under Bush?

He wasn't even being that deep. He was ignoring 7 years of food stamp increases under Obama and just saying it went down the last few months as if that's an argument

If his argument held any water, he'd have to admit Obama couldn't do what Bush did at the same unemployment rate.

What Bush did to lower unemployment was to give us the housing bubble, which fueled the economy.

How'd that turn out?

 

[Faun]

Underemployed are a fast growing segment of job workers.

LIAR!

Underemployed has gone down from 8,046,000 as Bush crawled out of office to 5,843,000 now, a DECREASE of over 2 million in what you call "a fast growing segment of job workers."

Most of the no longer unemployed quit looking for a job. Congrats on that, making people give up entirely on finding a job is quite the achievement

Stop kazzing. You can't prove a word of that and BLS figures don't support that kaz.

 

[Faun]

The only problem being it was a lie. I said it was mostly shit jobs and part time. Sputnik changed that to "mostly part time." Just a flat out lie, totally different thing.

I love how you lie as you accuse people of lying. Hilarious stuff.

You said most jobs created were part time and just because that is not ALL you said doesn't mean you didn't say it. I've proven that to be fabricated BS and now you post more BS trying to skirt around the facts.

You don't have to accept simple facts, you just have to accept them to not look like a fact denying idiot without any credibility.

Now as to your other claim of "shit jobs", I have no idea what you base it on, but going by your record it is based on NOTHING substantive.

Here's the other problem with the chart. I count part time as anything less than full time. This chart is counting underemployed as full time. Meaning you took a big step down and/or they offer you the 25-30 hour a week range. Explain how a low end worker lives on that.

In fact many companies are specifically limiting employees to under 30 hours because that's when government fucks them with Obamacare. This counts them as full time. They aren't.

Same goes to the rest of your naked assertions - SOURCE IT because there is not a single reason for anyone to trust anything you type.

Lies wrapped in lies wrapped in lies, that's what you people have.

That and after 7 1/2 years, Obama had a good month for one stat! Hail Obama!

More blatant lying.

You seriously see only "one good month"?

If you count underemployed as part time and claim that part time workers are not going up, yeah, that's a lie

The underemployed have been declined over 2 million since Obama took office.

Based on the U-6, there were 22 million people who were under/unemployed when Obama became president. There were 10½ million when Bush became president and there are 15½ million now.

The brain-dead right gave us Bush.

 

[pinqy]

Here's the other problem with the chart. I count part time as anything less than full time. This chart is counting underemployed as full time.

What are you defining as "underemployed" in this context?

I'm confused. The next quote answers that. It even says I was answering it. I started with "meaning ..."

But it didn't do a good job...it was too vague. What constitutes "a big step down?" For example if you lose your job and the only way to make the same pay is to work more hours, so that your hourly pay is less, but your weekly pay the same because you work more hours....is that a step down?

And why is 25-30 hours underemployed?

"Full time" is 40 hours a week. 25-30 is "underemployed." Yet Sparky is counting them as full time.

He's not counting 25-30 hours as full time. No one is. All the charts that show full time and part time use 35 hours as the line.

In fact many companies are specifically limiting employees to under 30 hours because that's when government fucks them with Obamacare. This counts them as full time.

No it doesn't. For these statistics, 40 hours is considered the standard for full time, so 35 plus hours is classified as full time (you have to go a little under to fully capture the real number).

If that's the case, than the whole chart is a lie because it shows part time workers as not going up.

But the number of part time workers is not growing significantly.

Underemployed are a fast growing segment of job workers. That part time is not going up is only possible if you don't include underemployed. Obamacare specifically is driving up underemployed because of the 30 hour threshhold

What is your source for all that? The number of people working part time for economic reasons has been going down:

 

[kaz]

Already did and showed the lie in the statistic. It doesn't count people who gave up and went away, the main group of "discouraged" workers. LOL, you people are priceless.

LIAR!

Read your own stat, it said it only counted people who were marginally attached. That means people who worked not too long ago and sorta are working but not in the last 4 weeks.

Workers who gave up and went away are not "marginally attached" workers

 

[Faun]

You gotta just love the Right, after getting nailed in a lie, the Right just make up another lie.

You don't know that people have dropped out of the labor market? Seriously?

But you claim that "MOST" who have dropped out did so out of discouragement, which IS a lie, and you know it.
Discouraged workers have declined from 1,318,000 at the peak of the Great Bush Recession to 502,000 now.

Well, whether it's "most" or not is debatable based on how you're counting them, and I agree I wasn't specific in that. But where do you get that there are 502K discouraged workers? That's hard to swallow

You can go to BLS...

Already did and showed the lie in the statistic. It doesn't count people who gave up and went away, the main group of "discouraged" workers. LOL, you people are priceless.

I said when I was wrong, are you going to do the same?

Here's the number you're looking for... 5,692,000

 

[kaz]

You don't know that people have dropped out of the labor market? Seriously?

But you claim that "MOST" who have dropped out did so out of discouragement, which IS a lie, and you know it.
Discouraged workers have declined from 1,318,000 at the peak of the Great Bush Recession to 502,000 now.

Well, whether it's "most" or not is debatable based on how you're counting them, and I agree I wasn't specific in that. But where do you get that there are 502K discouraged workers? That's hard to swallow.

Edit: I Googled it, you are only counting "marginally attached" workers. That's like when you called the 45 million food stamp receivers 1.9 million. Where are you getting your data? Crooks and Liars or the Democratic Underground?

If you don't know where I get my data, how can you google it and find it is "marginally attached" workers???

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force: Discouragement over job prospects (Persons who believe no job is available.)

I already addressed this. You got it by ignoring most discouraged workers and only counting one segment of them

LIAR!

There is only one group of discouraged workers.

Google "BLS Marginally Attached Workers"