• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey, look at that, everybody -- Conservative just switched data charts again. Every reference he made to employment/unemployment numbers he's been posting until now came from houshold survey data. I point out that private sector jobs are down just 600K under Obama according to household survey data and what does con do? He does what he always does -- he cherry picks data, this time, by abandoning the household survey data he swears by in favor of payroll data because payroll data reflects a bigger loss of jobs in the private sector.

Most people, not liberals understand that unemployment uses the labor force, total whereas the actual employment numbers breaks the numbers down into the various categories. I don't expect you to understand that as you will need the MSM to spin it for you into a more liberal message

Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
 
No one is looking at your numbers. Post a link, because it's well established that you post fake data.

The economy lost two million jobs in Bush's last four months. That's what Obama had to deal with.
4 million jobs were lost in 2008 ... another 3.6 million jobs were lost between January of 2009 and the end of Bush's Great Recession in June of that year. Conservatives whine that Obama can't fix that.
 
Let's take a look at private sector employment which shows Obama to still have quite a problem. January 2009 there were 110.9 million employed and in August that was 109.2 Million or a 1.7 million difference. Doubt that he can generate 1.7 million in a couple months and probably won't do it by the end of his term so that job chart you love to post will soon have a new leader at the bottom on job creation chart.

2009 110981 110260 109473 108700 108374 107936 107649 107434 107221 106971 106937 106835
2010 106793 106772 106916 107145 107193 107258 107351 107461 107570 107713 107841 108008
2011 108102 108363 108582 108823 108922 108997 109153 109170

Using your numbers:

2009110981110260109473108700108374107936107649107434107221106971106937106835
gain/loss-721-787-773-326-438-287-215-213-250-34-102
2010106793106772106916107145107193107258107351107461107570107713107841108008
gain/loss-42-21144229486593110109143128167
2011108102108363108582108823108922108997109153109170
gain/loss94261219241997515617
 
4 million jobs were lost in 2008 ... another 3.6 million jobs were lost between January of 2009 and the end of Bush's Great Recession in June of that year. Conservatives whine that Obama can't fix that.

Looks like the public agrees with me as the Obama JAR continues to be under 40%. Seems only the brainwashed continue to support this incompetent, empty suit
 
Looks like the public agrees with me as the Obama JAR continues to be under 40%. Seems only the brainwashed continue to support this incompetent, empty suit

His approval rating today is 42%. You continually lie about the data.
 
Using your numbers:

2009110981110260109473108700108374107936107649107434107221106971106937106835
gain/loss-721-787-773-326-438-287-215-213-250-34-102
2010106793106772106916107145107193107258107351107461107570107713107841108008
gain/loss-42-21144229486593110109143128167
2011108102108363108582108823108922108997109153109170
gain/loss94261219241997515617

Those aren't my numbers, those are bls numbers and show the net private sector job losses since Obama took office in January 2009. If you spend a trillion dollars shouldn't you generate better results? Let me know when he gets back to the same number he inherited
 
Those aren't my numbers, those are bls numbers and show the net private sector job losses since Obama took office in January 2009. If you spend a trillion dollars shouldn't you generate better results? Let me know when he gets back to the same number he inherited

You don't spend a trillion dollars and you get much worse results. As always, the problem isn't that Obama did too much -- it's that he did too little, thanks to conservative resistance.
 
Using your numbers:

2009110981110260109473108700108374107936107649107434107221106971106937106835
gain/loss-721-787-773-326-438-287-215-213-250-34-102
2010106793106772106916107145107193107258107351107461107570107713107841108008
gain/loss-42-21144229486593110109143128167
2011108102108363108582108823108922108997109153109170
gain/loss94261219241997515617
I hope no one missed that last month's numbers make 18 months in a row that the private sector has gained payroll jobs to the tune of 2.4 million jobs.
 
What did Obama say or promise regarding jobs that went overseas? The facts are that he's not a king, only a lowly POTUS. The Democrats tried to get money for the 911 first responders by eliminating tax incentives companies get for moving jobs oversea, but the Republicans resisted.

Let me address this first. The Republicans DID NOT have the numbers to resist.

Obama promised to end tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas. Not only did he not pursue that, he hired one of the biggest abusers as his jobs czar.
 
Looks like the public agrees with me as the Obama JAR continues to be under 40%. Seems only the brainwashed continue to support this incompetent, empty suit
Liar... Gallup = 42%
 
You don't spend a trillion dollars and you get much worse results. As always, the problem isn't that Obama did too much -- it's that he did too little, thanks to conservative resistance.

The Republicans could not have stopped him from spending more. The public changed that in 2010 though.
 
I hope no one missed that last month's numbers make 18 months in a row that the private sector has gained payroll jobs to the tune of 2.4 million jobs.
Yup, and Obama first year necessary credit was locked tighter than a drum from the Great Bush Recession.
 
Those aren't my numbers, those are bls numbers and show the net private sector job losses since Obama took office in January 2009. If you spend a trillion dollars shouldn't you generate better results? Let me know when he gets back to the same number he inherited
That money targeted 3 million jobs and had better results by saving and creating 3.5 million jobs.
 
That money targeted 3 million jobs and had better results by saving and creating 3.5 million jobs.

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38-42% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.
 
Yup, and Obama first year necessary credit was locked tighter than a drum from the Great Bush Recession.

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.
 
Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38-42% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.
You've already proven you don't believe those results, why should anyone else?
 
Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.

And what Obama inherited: economy shedding 700,000+ jobs per month, GDP shrinking at 6+% per year, financial institutions teetering on the edge of collapse, trillion+ deficit.... Nice improvement.
 
Right, and why was it such a bad month? Could it be in large part because the stock markets took a dive as a result of the Republicans' idiotic debt ceiling stunt? Does it surprise you that companies were more hesitant to hire after seeing $4 trillion erased from their books in a single week? You mean dumbass Republican games DO have real world consequences? Shocked!!

You clearly have no concept of how the economy works or what drives the Stock Market.

The market is a reflection of what is believed the future holds.

I believe that the market being down and the lack of new jobs is the fear that Obama will once again come up with a lame idea for the creation of jobs that includes more taxes, more wasteful spending, and fewer spending cuts than are needed to create a positive attitude about the future.
 
Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings.

128857657902431543.jpg
 
You clearly have no concept of how the economy works or what drives the Stock Market.

The market is a reflection of what is believed the future holds.

I believe that the market being down and the lack of new jobs is the fear that Obama will once again come up with a lame idea for the creation of jobs that includes more taxes, more wasteful spending, and fewer spending cuts than are needed to create a positive attitude about the future.
Given that, how do you explain the market being up under Obama?

DJIA: +36%
NASDAQ: +63%
S&P500: +38%

Seems to me the market had a lot of confidence in Obama's policies until the GOP proved they were serious about preventing Obama from doing anything to improve the economy.
 
To sum up, my point is that job creation started falling at the same time republicans started pushing for spending cuts. Do you disagree?

Look at the revised numbers that came out today. Employment growth has been very weak for several months, before the debt ceiling debate got ugly.

The problem that most either don't understand or don't like because it does not fit a neat political narrative is that there is a structural problem in our economy that has been glossed over for more than a decade. There seems to be no real talk about how to stem the loss of manufacturing jobs in an era of Free Trade.

Short term fixes like the make work jobs coming out of the stimulus package can help in the short term. But as we are seeing now what happens when that spigot dries up. Not only do we lose those jobs but we have not created anything that has sustaining value.

Why do we insist on short term answers for long term problems?
 
And what Obama inherited: economy shedding 700,000+ jobs per month, GDP shrinking at 6+% per year, financial institutions teetering on the edge of collapse, trillion+ deficit.... Nice improvement.
n

According to an old study done by Alexander Tytler, an 18th century Scottish thinker, the average age of the world’s great civilizations is about 200 years. They go, he said, “from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, and from dependence back into bondage.”

And John Glubb, a British historian and soldier, published "The Fate of Nations," his own analysis of the decline syndrome. He gave a slightly longer lifespan – 250 years – but laid out a life cycle similar to the one portrayed by Tytler, ending with an age of decadence brought on by “selfishness, love of money, and the loss of a sense of duty,” and marked by “defensiveness, pessimism, materialism, frivolity, an influx of foreigners, the welfare state, and the weakening of religion.”

More at America Is Not The Titantic | FoxNews.com
 
Given that, how do you explain the market being up under Obama?

DJIA: +36%
NASDAQ: +63%
S&P500: +38%

Seems to me the market had a lot of confidence in Obama's policies until the GOP proved they were serious about preventing Obama from doing anything to improve the economy.

The stock market increase, and it is volatile, has nothing to do with the policies of BHO.

Gold has become too expensive, silver as well, housing is a bust, the rates of return are too low in banks and the red tape to start a new business, as well as to carry on an old business, is becoming far too difficult and ridiculous. There really are few places left to park money except the stock market, until a serious and experienced person is elected President.. People are gambling on the marketplace, not Barrack Obama's seriously inept policies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom