US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

[Chuz Life]

I'll just leave this here for now.

PS. The latest figures are that - under O'bummer- Disposable Household Income rates have dipped (again) below the GDP.

But hey. . . as long as the jobless rate is down, it's all good.

Right?

The latest figures are not current, though. Your chart goes to 2013, so is hardly indicative of current conditions.

When current information is not available, you can't use older information and pretend it is still relevant.

I'm not going to cut and paste the entire content.

But here's a link to some of the more Recent Trends.

Median household income is not the same as disposable household income. And 2014 is not much more relevant to 2016 than 2013 is.

We just don't know for sure what household income is doing right now. But as a rough comparison....here's median personal income (latest data 2014), and median real weekly earnings, which is current in 2016, both indexed to the official end of the recession:

Which affords you a better perspective on your financial health and prospects for your future? Is it your financial relationship to the current Median income figure for the nation? Or, is it the amount of disposable income you have left after all of your bills are paid?

You're the one that switched from disposable. But lacking current disposable, current median earnings are the best we can do.

I am the one who introduced "disposable income" into this discussion and now you are dodging my question. "Which affords you a better perspective on your financial health and prospects for your future? Is it your financial relationship to the current Median income figure for the nation? Or, is it the amount of disposable income you have left after all of your bills are paid?"

 

[Rshermr]

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

In the immortal words of Cankles..."What difference does it really make?" You declared that I was pulling the idea of a jobless recovery out of my ass and I provided several examples of pundits discussing why we were in fact HAVING a jobless recovery...one of which is Paul Krugman. So is Krugman "insane" when he speaks of a jobless recovery? Duh?

You provided no evidence the recovery was a "jobless" recovery.

The video with Krugman came just a few months into the recovery. It provides no evidence when looking back over the last 73 months to total.

Then you posted a video from 2009, 5 months before the job recovery even began.



You're fucking insane.

What's "insane" is for someone to look at 2009 and 2010 and maintain that there WASN'T a jobless recovery!

There was no job recovery in 2009. No one is claiming there was. The Great Recession had just ended only a few months before that Fox video aired. The recovery began in March, 2010. But three months later in June, the overall numbers dropped due to the government laying ¼ million temp census workers. Meanwhile, the private sector continued growing.

Over the last 73 months, there hasn't been one single month the private sector (14.4 million jobs added) lost jobs and the only months we lost jobs overall (14.0 million jobs added) was due to collecting census data.

That's what you moronically call a "jobless" recovery.

You're every bit the con tool Rshermr figured out you are.

Just because we added a small number of jobs each month instead of losing them doesn't mean that it wasn't a jobless recovery, Faun! It was. The Private Sector has indeed grown but it has done so not because of the economic policies of Barack Obama but DESPITE the economic policies of a President who struggles mightily when it comes to economics in general.

And Rshermr hasn't figured out anything in so long it's laughable! He's the guy who uses the internet to pretend he's something he isn't...educated! He's the George Costanza of the US Message Board!

george costanza architect - - Yahoo Search Results

And there he goes, lapsing into personal attacks. Normal for the poor ignorant boy.
And, me boy, it has ot been a small number of jobs. Try dividing 14 million by 72. Oh, I forgot. You never got to division.

 

[pinqy]

The latest figures are not current, though. Your chart goes to 2013, so is hardly indicative of current conditions.

When current information is not available, you can't use older information and pretend it is still relevant.

I'm not going to cut and paste the entire content.

But here's a link to some of the more Recent Trends.

Median household income is not the same as disposable household income. And 2014 is not much more relevant to 2016 than 2013 is.

We just don't know for sure what household income is doing right now. But as a rough comparison....here's median personal income (latest data 2014), and median real weekly earnings, which is current in 2016, both indexed to the official end of the recession:

Which affords you a better perspective on your financial health and prospects for your future? Is it your financial relationship to the current Median income figure for the nation? Or, is it the amount of disposable income you have left after all of your bills are paid?

You're the one that switched from disposable. But lacking current disposable, current median earnings are the best we can do.

I am the one who introduced "disposable income" into this discussion and now you are dodging my question. "Which affords you a better perspective on your financial health and prospects for your future? Is it your financial relationship to the current Median income figure for the nation? Or, is it the amount of disposable income you have left after all of your bills are paid?"

You're asking which is more relevant to me and my personal future...my relationship to current Median income or my personal disposable income. Obviously disposable, but you showed Median disposable. Which is not MY personal disposable income and is no more relevant to my personal future than median total income.

Which is more relevant to understanding the income situation in 2016: Disposable income in 2013 or median weekly earnings in 2016?

 

[edthecynic]

We need somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 jobs to be added each month to keep up with population growth.

Actually to keep up with population growth at 5% UE you need only 116,779 new jobs per month.

Jobs Calculator

 

[Rshermr]

Thanks, but I disagree with you about Oldstyle being a paid con tool.

There's no way anybody is paying that moron to post the stupid ass shit he's posting here. He's such an idiot, all he accomplishes is making conservatives look retarded. And while they don't need his help in that department, they're certainly not going to pay an imbecile like him to reinforce that stereotype.

Video: Roundtable: Jobless Recovery?

Well, oldstyle, me poor ignorant con tool, you say you believe the obama recovery has been jobless. Lets take a look at that statement. Cause it is a simple thing. It is either true, or a lie:

The unemployment rate at it's highest during the great republican recession:
October 2009 - 10%
Unemployment Rate this year:
The unemployment rate in January of 2016 was 4.9%
Unemployment Rates in the United States Since 1948

So, It is not true, it is a lie. Because, you see, 4.9 is less than half of 10.

Really, if you would stop lying, you would save us trouble proving you are a lying con tool,

Perhaps you'd like to tell that to the millions of Americans in the Private Sector who couldn't find a job for YEARS because you progressives were more interested in getting ObamaCare passed and protecting your supporters in the Public Sector unions? How many Americans watched helplessly as their life's savings melted away because Barry, Harry and Nancy didn't give a shit about them?

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

In the immortal words of Cankles..."What difference does it really make?" You declared that I was pulling the idea of a jobless recovery out of my ass and I provided several examples of pundits discussing why we were in fact HAVING a jobless recovery...one of which is Paul Krugman. So is Krugman "insane" when he speaks of a jobless recovery? Duh?

You provided no evidence the recovery was a "jobless" recovery.

The video with Krugman came just a few months into the recovery. It provides no evidence when looking back over the last 73 months to total.

Then you posted a video from 2009, 5 months before the job recovery even began.



You're fucking insane.

What's "insane" is for someone to look at 2009 and 2010 and maintain that there WASN'T a jobless recovery!

Really, me boy. So the great republican recession of 2008, which by late (October) of 2009, had reached its worst, should have, in your opinion, been fixed by the obama team in a month or two???? Are you really that stupid? Oops, of course you are. Have an impartial source who agrees with you? Of course you do not. Because your accusations are totally stupid.
The fact is, me boy, that when W left office in January of 2009, we were hemoraging jobs at over 600,000 per month.
Now, do us all a favor and show how the recession should have been turned around to the point that the unemployment rate was what it was before the start of the great republican recession of 1997. No economist in the known world would agree with you.
Then, explain why all republicans voted against every recovery bill brought forward by the obama team.

Let's examine the priorities of the Obama "team" when they took office...shall we? The things that Americans were most concerned about were jobs...jobs...jobs...and then the deficit. So what was the Obama team's priority? Healthcare reform that most economists said would have an adverse effect on job creation. What were they proposing before losing the Congress in 2010? Cap & Trade legislation that would have had an even greater adverse effect on job creation. Yet you stand here now and ask what they should have done back then?

Oh, that's right...I keep forgetting that you're George Costanza...economist! You've got no more of a clue about what Obama's "team" should have been doing back then to create jobs then THEY did!

Ah, but I do. And so do you, though you choose to lie about it. And really, me boy, the costanza thing is stupid. You have been trying it for years. But at any rate, having a dish washer saying he is examining anything is a joke.

 

[Rshermr]

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

oldstyle is a paid con troll. He gets his points from his bat shit crazy con web sites, and nutcase con bosses, and posts the "information" as though it is true. He knows many will want to believe him because they too are cons. And that is what cons get their beliefs from. They believe what they are told as long as they WANT to believe it. The rest, he assumes, will not bother disputing his dogma. But when challenged over and over, he will revert to personal attacks. Just the wy it is.

So I use the numbers that Faun provided as the basis of my rebuttal...yet you accuse me of getting my points from "bat shit crazy con web sites"? You're amusing, Georgie...

Sorry, me poor ignorant con tool. You do not use anyone's numbers except those you choose to use. Because, truth is of no interest to you.

 

[Chuz Life]

I'm not going to cut and paste the entire content.

But here's a link to some of the more Recent Trends.

Median household income is not the same as disposable household income. And 2014 is not much more relevant to 2016 than 2013 is.

We just don't know for sure what household income is doing right now. But as a rough comparison....here's median personal income (latest data 2014), and median real weekly earnings, which is current in 2016, both indexed to the official end of the recession:

Which affords you a better perspective on your financial health and prospects for your future? Is it your financial relationship to the current Median income figure for the nation? Or, is it the amount of disposable income you have left after all of your bills are paid?

You're the one that switched from disposable. But lacking current disposable, current median earnings are the best we can do.

I am the one who introduced "disposable income" into this discussion and now you are dodging my question. "Which affords you a better perspective on your financial health and prospects for your future? Is it your financial relationship to the current Median income figure for the nation? Or, is it the amount of disposable income you have left after all of your bills are paid?"

You're asking which is more relevant to me and my personal future...my relationship to current Median income or my personal disposable income. Obviously disposable, but you showed Median disposable. Which is not MY personal disposable income and is no more relevant to my personal future than median total income.

I provided links to BOTH

Which is more relevant to understanding the income situation in 2016: Disposable income in 2013 or median weekly earnings in 2016?

It depends on what specifically you are looking for.

For example, if the tax rates and the cost of living climbs as fast or faster than the Median income rate does. . . what difference will that climbing number (Median income rate) make to someone who is trying to make ends meet? Put a kid through school or buy a home?

NADA.

 

[Faun]

You provided no evidence the recovery was a "jobless" recovery.

The video with Krugman came just a few months into the recovery. It provides no evidence when looking back over the last 73 months to total.

Then you posted a video from 2009, 5 months before the job recovery even began.



You're fucking insane.

What's "insane" is for someone to look at 2009 and 2010 and maintain that there WASN'T a jobless recovery!

There was no job recovery in 2009. No one is claiming there was. The Great Recession had just ended only a few months before that Fox video aired. The recovery began in March, 2010. But three months later in June, the overall numbers dropped due to the government laying ¼ million temp census workers. Meanwhile, the private sector continued growing.

Over the last 73 months, there hasn't been one single month the private sector (14.4 million jobs added) lost jobs and the only months we lost jobs overall (14.0 million jobs added) was due to collecting census data.

That's what you moronically call a "jobless" recovery.

You're every bit the con tool Rshermr figured out you are.

Just because we added a small number of jobs each month instead of losing them doesn't mean that it wasn't a jobless recovery, Faun! It was. The Private Sector has indeed grown but it has done so not because of the economic policies of Barack Obama but DESPITE the economic policies of a President who struggles mightily when it comes to economics in general.

And Rshermr hasn't figured out anything in so long it's laughable! He's the guy who uses the internet to pretend he's something he isn't...educated! He's the George Costanza of the US Message Board!

george costanza architect - - Yahoo Search Results

Your insanity worsens.

We need somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 jobs to be added each month to keep up with population growth.

Since March, 2010, when the job markets began recovering, we've added 14 million jobs ... or 192,000 jobs per month on average.

You know, what you idiotically call a "small number" of jobs in a "jobless" recovery.

So we've had an average net gain of a little over 40,000 jobs per month in a country the size of America with millions out of work and you label that as a recovery full of jobs? Really, Faun?

A little over 40,000 jobs a month?? Really.

Show your [fuzzy] math that resulted in 40,000 jobs gained per month...

 

[pinqy]

Median household income is not the same as disposable household income. And 2014 is not much more relevant to 2016 than 2013 is.

We just don't know for sure what household income is doing right now. But as a rough comparison....here's median personal income (latest data 2014), and median real weekly earnings, which is current in 2016, both indexed to the official end of the recession:

Which affords you a better perspective on your financial health and prospects for your future? Is it your financial relationship to the current Median income figure for the nation? Or, is it the amount of disposable income you have left after all of your bills are paid?

You're the one that switched from disposable. But lacking current disposable, current median earnings are the best we can do.

I am the one who introduced "disposable income" into this discussion and now you are dodging my question. "Which affords you a better perspective on your financial health and prospects for your future? Is it your financial relationship to the current Median income figure for the nation? Or, is it the amount of disposable income you have left after all of your bills are paid?"

You're asking which is more relevant to me and my personal future...my relationship to current Median income or my personal disposable income. Obviously disposable, but you showed Median disposable. Which is not MY personal disposable income and is no more relevant to my personal future than median total income.

I provided links to BOTH

Which is more relevant to understanding the income situation in 2016: Disposable income in 2013 or median weekly earnings in 2016?

It depends on what specifically you are looking for.

For example, if the tax rates and the cost of living climbs as fast or faster than the Median income rate does. . . what difference will that climbing number (Median income rate) make to someone who is trying to make ends meet? Put a kid through school or buy a home?

NADA.

And what difference would knowing that 3 years ago median disposable income was dropping or rising? None

No median or average number makes any difference to in individual.

But when judging the health of the economy in 2016, which is the better indicator: data from 2013 or from 2016?

 

[Faun]

It didn't matter if all the Republicans voted against Obama's original stimulus because he had the Democratic votes to push it through regardless...just as he did with ObamaCare!

The second stimulus that Barry asked for...he couldn't even sell to his fellow Democrats! That's how bad the first stimulus was at creating jobs.

What a fucking rightard you are. You have no shame at all, do ya?

It's a flat out lie to state Republicans could not have blocked passage of the ARRA just as it's a lie to pretend they were helpless to stop it just like they couldn't stop ObamaCare, which was passed with a filibuster-proof Senate.

 

[Faun]

There was no job recovery in 2009. No one is claiming there was. The Great Recession had just ended only a few months before that Fox video aired. The recovery began in March, 2010. But three months later in June, the overall numbers dropped due to the government laying ¼ million temp census workers. Meanwhile, the private sector continued growing.

Over the last 73 months, there hasn't been one single month the private sector (14.4 million jobs added) lost jobs and the only months we lost jobs overall (14.0 million jobs added) was due to collecting census data.

That's what you moronically call a "jobless" recovery.

You're every bit the con tool Rshermr figured out you are.

Just because we added a small number of jobs each month instead of losing them doesn't mean that it wasn't a jobless recovery, Faun! It was. The Private Sector has indeed grown but it has done so not because of the economic policies of Barack Obama but DESPITE the economic policies of a President who struggles mightily when it comes to economics in general.

And Rshermr hasn't figured out anything in so long it's laughable! He's the guy who uses the internet to pretend he's something he isn't...educated! He's the George Costanza of the US Message Board!

george costanza architect - - Yahoo Search Results

Your insanity worsens.

We need somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 jobs to be added each month to keep up with population growth.

Since March, 2010, when the job markets began recovering, we've added 14 million jobs ... or 192,000 jobs per month on average.

You know, what you idiotically call a "small number" of jobs in a "jobless" recovery.

So we've had an average net gain of a little over 40,000 jobs per month in a country the size of America with millions out of work and you label that as a recovery full of jobs? Really, Faun?

So, oldstyle, did you stop studying math in 1st grade? Because there have been 80 months since the stimulus began. That would mean that only 3.2 million jobs have been added. That would be, me boy, under 25% of the actual number of jobs that have been added. Really, Oldstyle?
Do you EVER stop lying. You have NO integrity.

If you don't like the math...talk to Faun...those are the numbers that he quoted. I simply pointed out that they weren't indicative of an economic recovery rife with jobs!

To put it in terms that even George Costanza might understand...if there are 30,000 cities and towns in the US and you're only creating 40,000 jobs over what you need to keep up with population growth that means you're creating 1.25 jobs per town across the nation. If you're a tiny town in Iowa that might be HUGE...if you're New York City, Chicago or LA...it's a joke!

I never posted job creation averaged about 40,000 per month.

You just can't stop lying, can ya?

If the truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like you do.

 

[Faun]

Well, oldstyle, me poor ignorant con tool, you say you believe the obama recovery has been jobless. Lets take a look at that statement. Cause it is a simple thing. It is either true, or a lie:

The unemployment rate at it's highest during the great republican recession:
October 2009 - 10%
Unemployment Rate this year:
The unemployment rate in January of 2016 was 4.9%
Unemployment Rates in the United States Since 1948

So, It is not true, it is a lie. Because, you see, 4.9 is less than half of 10.

Really, if you would stop lying, you would save us trouble proving you are a lying con tool,

Perhaps you'd like to tell that to the millions of Americans in the Private Sector who couldn't find a job for YEARS because you progressives were more interested in getting ObamaCare passed and protecting your supporters in the Public Sector unions? How many Americans watched helplessly as their life's savings melted away because Barry, Harry and Nancy didn't give a shit about them?

You provided no evidence the recovery was a "jobless" recovery.

The video with Krugman came just a few months into the recovery. It provides no evidence when looking back over the last 73 months to total.

Then you posted a video from 2009, 5 months before the job recovery even began.



You're fucking insane.

What's "insane" is for someone to look at 2009 and 2010 and maintain that there WASN'T a jobless recovery!

Really, me boy. So the great republican recession of 2008, which by late (October) of 2009, had reached its worst, should have, in your opinion, been fixed by the obama team in a month or two???? Are you really that stupid? Oops, of course you are. Have an impartial source who agrees with you? Of course you do not. Because your accusations are totally stupid.
The fact is, me boy, that when W left office in January of 2009, we were hemoraging jobs at over 600,000 per month.
Now, do us all a favor and show how the recession should have been turned around to the point that the unemployment rate was what it was before the start of the great republican recession of 1997. No economist in the known world would agree with you.
Then, explain why all republicans voted against every recovery bill brought forward by the obama team.

Let's examine the priorities of the Obama "team" when they took office...shall we? The things that Americans were most concerned about were jobs...jobs...jobs...and then the deficit. So what was the Obama team's priority? Healthcare reform that most economists said would have an adverse effect on job creation. What were they proposing before losing the Congress in 2010? Cap & Trade legislation that would have had an even greater adverse effect on job creation. Yet you stand here now and ask what they should have done back then?

Oh, that's right...I keep forgetting that you're George Costanza...economist! You've got no more of a clue about what Obama's "team" should have been doing back then to create jobs then THEY did!

Stop lying. One of the first things Obama did was to pass a stimulus bill for the economy. Healthcare came after that. Cap & Trade, which never went anywhere anyway, also would have come after that.

If truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie all the time like you do.

So you admit that Obama went after two pieces of legislation that were job killers when jobs were the number one priority of Americans? Why would anyone do that?

You're insane, remember? No character either. You don't even feel any need to apologize after getting caught in yet another lie.

You claimed ObamaCare and Cap & Trade were his top priorities. Point out to you that you're full of shit, and you just drudge along like your lying is no big deal.

 

[pinqy]

What's "insane" is for someone to look at 2009 and 2010 and maintain that there WASN'T a jobless recovery!

There was no job recovery in 2009. No one is claiming there was. The Great Recession had just ended only a few months before that Fox video aired. The recovery began in March, 2010. But three months later in June, the overall numbers dropped due to the government laying ¼ million temp census workers. Meanwhile, the private sector continued growing.

Over the last 73 months, there hasn't been one single month the private sector (14.4 million jobs added) lost jobs and the only months we lost jobs overall (14.0 million jobs added) was due to collecting census data.

That's what you moronically call a "jobless" recovery.

You're every bit the con tool Rshermr figured out you are.

Just because we added a small number of jobs each month instead of losing them doesn't mean that it wasn't a jobless recovery, Faun! It was. The Private Sector has indeed grown but it has done so not because of the economic policies of Barack Obama but DESPITE the economic policies of a President who struggles mightily when it comes to economics in general.

And Rshermr hasn't figured out anything in so long it's laughable! He's the guy who uses the internet to pretend he's something he isn't...educated! He's the George Costanza of the US Message Board!

george costanza architect - - Yahoo Search Results

Your insanity worsens.

We need somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 jobs to be added each month to keep up with population growth.

Since March, 2010, when the job markets began recovering, we've added 14 million jobs ... or 192,000 jobs per month on average.

You know, what you idiotically call a "small number" of jobs in a "jobless" recovery.

So we've had an average net gain of a little over 40,000 jobs per month in a country the size of America with millions out of work and you label that as a recovery full of jobs? Really, Faun?

A little over 40,000 jobs a month?? Really.

Show your [fuzzy] math that resulted in 40,000 jobs gained per month...

What he's doing is saying that if the number of jobs gained is enough to keep up with population growth, then that's a net gain of zero.

No I don't understand how he thinks that works

 

[Faun]

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

oldstyle is a paid con troll. He gets his points from his bat shit crazy con web sites, and nutcase con bosses, and posts the "information" as though it is true. He knows many will want to believe him because they too are cons. And that is what cons get their beliefs from. They believe what they are told as long as they WANT to believe it. The rest, he assumes, will not bother disputing his dogma. But when challenged over and over, he will revert to personal attacks. Just the wy it is.

So I use the numbers that Faun provided as the basis of my rebuttal...yet you accuse me of getting my points from "bat shit crazy con web sites"? You're amusing, Georgie...

Quote where your defective brain thinks said we've gained about 40,000 jobs per month on average...?

Consider what I actually said...

Since March, 2010, when the job markets began recovering, we've added 14 million jobs ... or 192,000 jobs per month on average.

But in all fairness, you did say, "a little over 40,000 jobs per month," were created. So if you wanna plead insanity and claim that in your warped mind, 192,000 a month is a "little over 40,000," I can accept that.

 

[Faun]

There was no job recovery in 2009. No one is claiming there was. The Great Recession had just ended only a few months before that Fox video aired. The recovery began in March, 2010. But three months later in June, the overall numbers dropped due to the government laying ¼ million temp census workers. Meanwhile, the private sector continued growing.

Over the last 73 months, there hasn't been one single month the private sector (14.4 million jobs added) lost jobs and the only months we lost jobs overall (14.0 million jobs added) was due to collecting census data.

That's what you moronically call a "jobless" recovery.

You're every bit the con tool Rshermr figured out you are.

Just because we added a small number of jobs each month instead of losing them doesn't mean that it wasn't a jobless recovery, Faun! It was. The Private Sector has indeed grown but it has done so not because of the economic policies of Barack Obama but DESPITE the economic policies of a President who struggles mightily when it comes to economics in general.

And Rshermr hasn't figured out anything in so long it's laughable! He's the guy who uses the internet to pretend he's something he isn't...educated! He's the George Costanza of the US Message Board!

george costanza architect - - Yahoo Search Results

Your insanity worsens.

We need somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 jobs to be added each month to keep up with population growth.

Since March, 2010, when the job markets began recovering, we've added 14 million jobs ... or 192,000 jobs per month on average.

You know, what you idiotically call a "small number" of jobs in a "jobless" recovery.

So we've had an average net gain of a little over 40,000 jobs per month in a country the size of America with millions out of work and you label that as a recovery full of jobs? Really, Faun?

A little over 40,000 jobs a month?? Really.

Show your [fuzzy] math that resulted in 40,000 jobs gained per month...

What he's doing is saying that if the number of jobs gained is enough to keep up with population growth, then that's a net gain of zero.

No I don't understand how he thinks that works

That's also not what he said. He said, and I quote.....

So we've had an average net gain of a little over 40,000 jobs per month in a country the size of America with millions out of work and you label that as a recovery full of jobs? Really, Faun?

(emphasis added)

 

[pinqy]

Just because we added a small number of jobs each month instead of losing them doesn't mean that it wasn't a jobless recovery, Faun! It was. The Private Sector has indeed grown but it has done so not because of the economic policies of Barack Obama but DESPITE the economic policies of a President who struggles mightily when it comes to economics in general.

And Rshermr hasn't figured out anything in so long it's laughable! He's the guy who uses the internet to pretend he's something he isn't...educated! He's the George Costanza of the US Message Board!

george costanza architect - - Yahoo Search Results

Your insanity worsens.

We need somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 jobs to be added each month to keep up with population growth.

Since March, 2010, when the job markets began recovering, we've added 14 million jobs ... or 192,000 jobs per month on average.

You know, what you idiotically call a "small number" of jobs in a "jobless" recovery.

So we've had an average net gain of a little over 40,000 jobs per month in a country the size of America with millions out of work and you label that as a recovery full of jobs? Really, Faun?

A little over 40,000 jobs a month?? Really.

Show your [fuzzy] math that resulted in 40,000 jobs gained per month...

What he's doing is saying that if the number of jobs gained is enough to keep up with population growth, then that's a net gain of zero.

No I don't understand how he thinks that works

That's also not what he said. He said, and I quote.....

So we've had an average net gain of a little over 40,000 jobs per month in a country the size of America with millions out of work and you label that as a recovery full of jobs? Really, Faun?

(emphasis added)

Right, and he got that by taking the 192,000 actual gain and subtracting the 150,000 needed to keep up with the population. And then calls that 42,000 the net gain.

Again, it doesn't make sense

 

[edthecynic]

Right, and he got that by taking the 192,000 actual gain and subtracting the 150,000 needed to keep up with the population. And then calls that 42,000 the net gain.

Again, it doesn't make sense

But it only takes 116,779 jobs to keep up with population growth at a 5% U-3 rate, so there is actually 75,221 "net" jobs each month to further reduce the U-3 rate.

 

[Rshermr]

There was no job recovery in 2009. No one is claiming there was. The Great Recession had just ended only a few months before that Fox video aired. The recovery began in March, 2010. But three months later in June, the overall numbers dropped due to the government laying ¼ million temp census workers. Meanwhile, the private sector continued growing.

Over the last 73 months, there hasn't been one single month the private sector (14.4 million jobs added) lost jobs and the only months we lost jobs overall (14.0 million jobs added) was due to collecting census data.

That's what you moronically call a "jobless" recovery.

You're every bit the con tool Rshermr figured out you are.

Just because we added a small number of jobs each month instead of losing them doesn't mean that it wasn't a jobless recovery, Faun! It was. The Private Sector has indeed grown but it has done so not because of the economic policies of Barack Obama but DESPITE the economic policies of a President who struggles mightily when it comes to economics in general.

And Rshermr hasn't figured out anything in so long it's laughable! He's the guy who uses the internet to pretend he's something he isn't...educated! He's the George Costanza of the US Message Board!

george costanza architect - - Yahoo Search Results

Your insanity worsens.

We need somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 jobs to be added each month to keep up with population growth.

Since March, 2010, when the job markets began recovering, we've added 14 million jobs ... or 192,000 jobs per month on average.

You know, what you idiotically call a "small number" of jobs in a "jobless" recovery.

So we've had an average net gain of a little over 40,000 jobs per month in a country the size of America with millions out of work and you label that as a recovery full of jobs? Really, Faun?

So, oldstyle, did you stop studying math in 1st grade? Because there have been 80 months since the stimulus began. That would mean that only 3.2 million jobs have been added. That would be, me boy, under 25% of the actual number of jobs that have been added. Really, Oldstyle?
Do you EVER stop lying. You have NO integrity.

If you don't like the math...talk to Faun...those are the numbers that he quoted. I simply pointed out that they weren't indicative of an economic recovery rife with jobs!

To put it in terms that even George Costanza might understand...if there are 30,000 cities and towns in the US and you're only creating 40,000 jobs over what you need to keep up with population growth that means you're creating 1.25 jobs per town across the nation. If you're a tiny town in Iowa that might be HUGE...if you're New York City, Chicago or LA...it's a joke!

So, you should be embarased by now. Pinqy, in his calm way, has made you look like what you are. You are really getting obnoxious. Try as you will, you are a lying con tool, and everyone is seeing what your game is. Dipshit.

 

[Rshermr]

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

oldstyle is a paid con troll. He gets his points from his bat shit crazy con web sites, and nutcase con bosses, and posts the "information" as though it is true. He knows many will want to believe him because they too are cons. And that is what cons get their beliefs from. They believe what they are told as long as they WANT to believe it. The rest, he assumes, will not bother disputing his dogma. But when challenged over and over, he will revert to personal attacks. Just the wy it is.

So I use the numbers that Faun provided as the basis of my rebuttal...yet you accuse me of getting my points from "bat shit crazy con web sites"? You're amusing, Georgie...

You got your numbers based on a different metric. And you liked it because you could use the number as the TOTAL of new jobs. Which, me boy, is fooling no one. Just you being dishonest again. Which is what you always do.
Funny thing is, you are easy, me boy. If you post something, you are lying. It is that simple.

 

[Rshermr]

It didn't matter if all the Republicans voted against Obama's original stimulus because he had the Democratic votes to push it through regardless...just as he did with ObamaCare!

The second stimulus that Barry asked for...he couldn't even sell to his fellow Democrats! That's how bad the first stimulus was at creating jobs.

What a fucking rightard you are. You have no shame at all, do ya?

It's a flat out lie to state Republicans could not have blocked passage of the ARRA just as it's a lie to pretend they were helpless to stop it just like they couldn't stop ObamaCare, which was passed with a filibuster-proof Senate.

I think poor little oldstyle is incapable of telling the truth. Probably a congenital idiot. And he loves lying. Typical of Sociopaths. So, that is the question. Is he a sociopath, or just a congenital idiot. Both, of course, are not his fault. Just plain bad luck.