• 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!

U.S. Jobless Rate Unexpectedly Declines to 8.6%

Conservative said:
Here is the MSNBC headlines and story. Show me the 315,000 people dropping out of the labor force

Unemployment rate drops to lowest since 2009 - Business - Stocks & economy - msnbc.com
Click to expand...

MSNBC is as biased on the Left side as Fox is no the Right. Never claimed they weren't.

But even they mentioned that 300K+ dropped out of the work force. Did you read your own link? :lol:

Still, more than 300,000 people stopped their job searches last month, so they were no longer officially counted as unemployed. That accounts for some of the drop in the unemployment rate.

Advertise | AdChoicesThe so-called underemployment rate, which counts people who have given up looking and people who are working part-time but want full-time jobs, did fall — to 15.6 percent from 16.2 percent.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
Fox News gets smashed by all three of the network news broadcasts.
Click to expand...

Um, I don't think so.

Cable News Ratings: Top 30 Programs For November 2011 (PHOTOS, POLL)

[url]http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/12/02/cable-news-ratings-for-thursday-december-1-2011/112499/
[/URL]

So to correct your statement, Fox News SMASHES all three network news broadcasts. Or more accurately, smashes everybody in every time slot from the morning broadcasts 6-9am, and 5pm, 6pm, 7pm, 8pm, 9pm, 10pm and 11pm.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
And if you watched Fox News you got the full story too yet for some reason you have a problem with Fox News. There is a reason Fox News beats everyone in the ratings, wonder if you can figure out why?
Click to expand...

Because there are a lot of partisan hacks in this country? And dumbasses?
 
whysoserious said:
Because there are a lot of partisan hacks in this country? And dumbasses?
Click to expand...

The height of denial. "Everyone prefers the opinions I disagree with?" "Well, they are all dumbasses anyway"
 
dontworrybehappy said:
Um, I don't think so.

Cable News Ratings: Top 30 Programs For November 2011 (PHOTOS, POLL)

[url]http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/12/02/cable-news-ratings-for-thursday-december-1-2011/112499/
[/URL]

So to correct your statement, Fox News SMASHES all three network news broadcasts. Or more accurately, smashes everybody in every time slot from the morning broadcasts 6-9am, and 5pm, 6pm, 7pm, 8pm, 9pm, 10pm and 11pm.
Click to expand...

You missed the point. Fox News gets obliterated by the NETWORK news broadcasts, i.e., ABC, NBC, and CBS -- not the cable news shows. The primetime network news broadcasts each pull in two to three times as many viewers as Fox's primetime news broadcast.

Network Evening News Ratings Up Across The Board
 
VanceMack said:
Great News America!!!! 375000 American workers gave up on seeking employment and we added a few hundred thousand seasonal retail jobs! Friggin AWESOME!!!
Click to expand...

So lets get this straight once and for all.

When the unemployment numbers rise - that is an important barometer of the political winds and it is BAD NEWS for President Obama and is a sign he will surely lose in 2012.
But when those numbers go down - it don't mean a damn thing.

Got it. ;):roll::lamo
 
when it goes down because large numbers of people who were not employed previously now have real jobs, then that is indeed a good thing. when it goes down because people decide en masse that they have no more hope, that is a bad thing.
 
haymarket said:
So lets get this straight once and for all.

When the unemployment numbers rise - that is an important barometer of the political winds and it is BAD NEWS for President Obama and is a sign he will surely lose in 2012.
But when those numbers go down - it don't mean a damn thing.

Got it. ;):roll::lamo
Click to expand...

i think when you have a bad economy for this long of a period the UI numbers dont mean much with a small drop unless there is other evidence to show people actually getting back to work, and there is not.

we have been in a slump longer then the length UI can last for anyone. so many people exhausted their benefits and the UI number only counts new claims.

dont get me wrong its a move in the right direction and if the people that exhausted their ui benefits can start to find some work also it would be a big plus for the president, but as of now, its not!
 
haymarket said:
So lets get this straight once and for all.

When the unemployment numbers rise - that is an important barometer of the political winds and it is BAD NEWS for President Obama and is a sign he will surely lose in 2012.
But when those numbers go down - it don't mean a damn thing.

Got it. ;):roll::lamo
Click to expand...
Look at yourself all cute, tripping over yourself claiming this massive victory over a statistic that you and everyone else knows is a lie.

When the actual unemployment rate drops...when people are actually working again and we dont just have a cosmetic bounce because 350k have bailed on the workforce. When states like Nevada and Michigan arent running double digit unemployment rates. When ACTUAL unemployment (you know...the figure that shows what the actual unemployment rates are including those that are no longer eligible for benefits and not just the first time claimers) figures improve, I will toast the success of the great leader. Until then...I will continue to laugh at morons who desperately cling to seasonal retail employment figures and people that are so disgusted and disenchanted that they just quit as if they are a 'good' thing.
 
cpwill said:
when it goes down because large numbers of people who were not employed previously now have real jobs, then that is indeed a good thing. when it goes down because people decide en masse that they have no more hope, that is a bad thing.
Click to expand...

When it goes down because, as here, more people were employed and more people left the work force, it's better than it not going down with more people leaving the work force. If the labor force participation rate had remained steady, unemployment still would have fallen to 8.8%.

IOW, it's moderately good news, but still the first good news we've had in a while. Pretending that it isn't is just that -- pretending.
 
AdamT said:
When it goes down because, as here, more people were employed and more people left the work force, it's better than it not going down with more people leaving the work force. If the labor force participation rate had remained steady, unemployment still would have fallen to 8.8%.

IOW, it's moderately good news, but still the first good news we've had in a while. Pretending that it isn't is just that -- pretending.
Click to expand...

It beats the hell out of the 9.8 it was at this time last year.:2wave:
 
treedancer said:
It beats the hell out of the 9.8 it was at this time last year.:2wave:
Click to expand...

Really?

employed

Nov 2010 - 138,909,000
Nov 2011 - 140,580,000

Yr/Yr Change - 1,671,000

Not in labor force

Nov 2010 - 84,765,000
Nov 2011 - 86,558,000

Yr/Yr Change - (1,793,000)

Labor force participation rate

Nov 2010 - 64.5%
Nov 2011 - 64.0%

-----------------------------

Candidly, I don't think those numbers support the notion we are far better off now than a year ago. If you adjust the unemployment number for all the people that have simply given up looking for a job over the last 12 months (these folks are removed from the denominator), the unemployment rate would 9.7%. Wow, the true unemployment rate has dropped a whopping .1% over the last year. We have a growing population and a declining work force participation rate ........ tell me how that is good news?
 
conservativeguy said:
Really?

employed

Nov 2010 - 138,909,000
Nov 2011 - 140,580,000

Yr/Yr Change - 1,671,000

Not in labor force

Nov 2010 - 84,765,000
Nov 2011 - 86,558,000

Yr/Yr Change - (1,793,000)

Labor force participation rate

Nov 2010 - 64.5%
Nov 2011 - 64.0%

-----------------------------

Candidly, I don't think those numbers support the notion we are far better off now than a year ago. If you adjust the unemployment number for all the people that have simply given up looking for a job over the last 12 months (these folks are removed from the denominator), the unemployment rate would 9.7%. Wow, the true unemployment rate has dropped a whopping .1% over the last year. We have a growing population and a declining work force participation rate ........ tell me how that is good news?
Click to expand...

Now there you go confusing a liberal with data. You know you shouldn't do that. As has been posted here no thinking person believes the unemployment rated dropped .4% with only 120,000 new hires last month.
 
haymarket said:
So lets get this straight once and for all.

When the unemployment numbers rise - that is an important barometer of the political winds and it is BAD NEWS for President Obama and is a sign he will surely lose in 2012.
But when those numbers go down - it don't mean a damn thing.

Got it. ;):roll::lamo
Click to expand...

No, you don't get it at all.

Until the number jumps to about 11%, we aren't in recovery mode.

We will be in recovery mode when have 6-8 weeks of weekly unemployment claims around the 300k range, and 3-4 months of monthly job numbers show 300k+ in net job gains.
 
Conservative said:
Now there you go confusing a liberal with data. You know you shouldn't do that. As has been posted here no thinking person believes the unemployment rated dropped .4% with only 120,000 new hires last month.
Click to expand...

They can have their own opinions but they can't have their own facts. They rely on the econtards at MSNBC, the DailyKOSNuts and the mainstream media to spoon feed them their disingenuous talking points.
 
conservativeguy said:
Really?

employed

Nov 2010 - 138,909,000
Nov 2011 - 140,580,000

Yr/Yr Change - 1,671,000

Not in labor force

Nov 2010 - 84,765,000
Nov 2011 - 86,558,000

Yr/Yr Change - (1,793,000)

Labor force participation rate

Nov 2010 - 64.5%
Nov 2011 - 64.0%

-----------------------------

Candidly, I don't think those numbers support the notion we are far better off now than a year ago. If you adjust the unemployment number for all the people that have simply given up looking for a job over the last 12 months (these folks are removed from the denominator), the unemployment rate would 9.7%. Wow, the true unemployment rate has dropped a whopping .1% over the last year. We have a growing population and a declining work force participation rate ........ tell me how that is good news?
Click to expand...

Spin it however you like -- it's obviously an improvement. Over all it's not great that the work force is shrinking, but people aren't uniformly leaving because they simply can't find work. Baby boomers are moving into retirement which accounts for part of it. Part of it is that people are going back to school because the skills they have don't meet the needs of the current market.

Some numbers you somehow failed to report were:

Discouraged workers:

Nov 2010 - 1,282
Nov 2011 - 1,096

Job losers and persons who completed temporary assignments:

Nov 2010 - 9,471
Nov 2011 - 7,574

Job leavers

Nov 2010 - 867
Nov 2011 - 1,007

So manufacturing is up, consumer confidence is up, consumer spending is up, retail sales are up, service industry employment is up, and unemployment is down. Clearly the sky IS falling!
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
Because there are a lot of partisan hacks in this country? And dumbasses?
Click to expand...
I suppose that would be just about all of us who are in the 53% who pay the federal income tax. Or put another way, the achievers watch Fox News. The rest of you are split between the state run media outlets. Got it.
 
AdamT said:
You missed the point. Fox News gets obliterated by the NETWORK news broadcasts, i.e., ABC, NBC, and CBS -- not the cable news shows. The primetime network news broadcasts each pull in two to three times as many viewers as Fox's primetime news broadcast.

Network Evening News Ratings Up Across The Board
Click to expand...

Well, you do have to take into consideration that FNC is a CABLE channel. I can get ABC, NBC and CBS at my house for free. I hate their news, but its all I have as I don't subscribe to any providers for TV. So if someone were to ask me what I watch, I'd have to answer one of those or nothing at all. You're comparing network vs cable, and really nobody does that. FNC vs CNN would be fair. CBS vs ABC would be fair. I mean, how many millions of people out there only get one of the networks and can't watch FNC if they wanted to? See what I mean?

That's why the links I showed were more accurate, comparing apples to apples. I sure thought that FNC had more viewers anyway, even though they were cable only. Oh well, such is life in the valley.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom