Page 53 of 199 FirstFirst ... 343515253545563103153 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 1989

Thread: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

  1. #521
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    Holy ****! Of course you made reference to it. You showed where Republican presidents typically inherit low unemployment rates while Democrat presidents typically inherit higher unemployment rates. Well? For that to be true implies that the unemployment rate typically falls while the president is a Democrat and that it typically rises while the president is a Republican.

    I certainly hope you don't need me to explain to you that a rising unemployment rate increases more than a falling unemployment rate.

    It looks to meike you don't even understand what you wrote.
    OH, yes I see your point. Now explain to me how since Republicans do so badly they continue to get elected.

  2. #522
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    Now explain to me how since Republicans do so badly they continue to get elected.
    Because the masses can be easily fooled. That isn't sarcasm either and it isn't just for Republicans,but for Dems as well.

  3. #523
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    OH, yes I see your point. Now explain to me how since Republicans do so badly they continue to get elected.
    Who ever said unemployment is the only issue which drives electors at the polls? Eisenhower was elected because Truman left office so unpopular. Nixon was elected because LBJ failures with Vietnam. Reagan was elected because of Carter's failure over the Iran hostage crisis. Bush Sr. Was the only Republican elected due the the success of a prior Republican. Bush Jr. was elected because Clinton was impeached.

  4. #524
    Educator Gary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    12-29-12 @ 12:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,106

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Originally Posted by Gary
    Full employment was generally considered 4%, not 5% and that wasn't the case back in Ike's day. That concept became popular when the Fed started using unemployment statistics to fight inflation, during the Carter administration. The Fed believes it can curb inflation by preventing a wage/price spiral and raising interest rates before the unemployment approaches 4%. That means the government has decided that 1 in 25 will not have a job. The policy also produces wages that get lower over time and reduces the whole economy.

    Which means a Democrat who follows a Republican is going to start off having a high unemployment rate, because the Republican is going to make it high and a Republican following a Democrat will have a low unemployment rate. Democrats make jobs and Republicans make poverty. The exceptions are Johnson followed Kennedy and the rate was lowered by Kennedy. Ford followed Nixon and the rate was higher by Nixon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    First, there appears to be NO consensus on the specific percentage that represents full employment so we debating said number will be futile.

    Secondly, your post is confusing. First you infer that the Fed manipulates the UE rate which means the government decides the percentage. Arenít Fed policies somewhat independent of government direction? Then you suggest one party following another party has a different effect but qualify it with two instances out of eight where the same party transfers with different results with no reference to the aforementioned Fed relationship. Seems like a generalized claim that branches in various directions, Fed-government-Democrat-Republican, etc.
    How does this:

    That concept became popular when the Fed started using unemployment statistics to fight inflation, during the Carter administration.
    Become this:

    First you infer that the Fed manipulates the UE rate which means the government decides the percentage.
    Go to the Fed website and read how they have a mandate from Congress to curb inflation and that mandate started in the Carter administration! That's when the talk about full employment became commonplace.

    When Johnson took office, Kennedy had lowered the unemployment rate and Johnson continued to lower it. When Ford took over, Nixon had raised the unemployment rate and Ford had a higher initial rate, because of that increase.

    You want to point out that the Democrats are benefiting from high unemployment rates when they take office and ignore who made it that way. You want to point out how unfair it is that unemployment rates are so low when Republicans take office and ignore that it was the Democrats who made the unemployment rate low. Good Presidents create jobs and lower the unemployment rate and bad Presidents don't.

    When Obama took office, this economy was in free fall and over half a million a month were becoming unemployed. That trend continued for a long time. Between 2008 and 2009, 5,341,000 more unemployed were added.

    http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.pdf

    Here's the data all the way back to 1940:

    http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat1.pdf

    No one was worrying about having an unemplyment rate less than the 4% full employment amount from 1966 through 1969 or back from 1951 through 1953.

  5. #525
    Debate MMA
    Prof. Peabody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    07-30-12 @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,361

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Jobless rate has fallen because of dropouts

    Obama benefits from uncounted

    By Patrice Hill - The Washington Times

    Thursday, February 2, 2012

    The big drop in the unemployment rate in recent months to 8.3 percent from double-digit rates during the recession came at a fortunate time for President Obama, but economists say it as much because of young people dropping out of the labor market as it is the result of businesses adding jobs.

    The steep drop in unemployment only months before the election is similar to a big drop from double-digit levels that boosted President Reagan when he sought re-election in 1984 after a deep, double-dip recession during his first term.

    Reagan campaigned amid a revival of economic growth to robust rates of more than 7 percent and the re-employment of thousands of laid-off factory workers. Mr. Obama is running on a far more subdued recovery with growth averaging about 2 percent and unexciting job gains of about 130,000 a month.

    When people stop looking for work, they are no longer counted as part of the labor force or “unemployed.” Evidence suggests that many of the young dropouts, who proved to be instrumental in Mr. Obama’s election in 2008, are continuing their schooling to avoid the tough job market and to increase their skills and chances of eventually securing employment.

    “People stop looking for work for various reasons, which might include taking an early retirement, going back to school, or deciding to be a full-time, stay-at-home parent,” Ms. Moore said.

    The president isn’t going to make “political hay” when that causes a decline in unemployment, she said, because “if they all decided to start looking for work tomorrow, the jobless rate would skyrocket again.”

    The percentage of workers ages 16 to 19 has dropped 4.3 percentage points to 34.2 percent since the end of the recession in 2010, while the share of people between 20 and 24 working has declined 1.6 percentage points to 71.7 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    Jobless rate has fallen because of dropouts - Washington Times
    Add that to the 10+% of the people who are employed wanting to work full time but only able to find part time work (me) and it's easy to see why the unemployment numbers are going down. It takes approx 125,000 new jobs per month to just break even with all the new people attempting to join the job market. People turn 18 every day and start looking for work. So to believe 130,000 new jobs a month would substancially bring down unemployment when we need 125,000 just to break even is simply ridiculous. Of course the Obama administration will attempt to spin anything into good economic news, even the slightest anomoly to sitting all but dead in the water. Look at the GDP growth for 2011, 1.6% for the year. At that rate, the economy will be back to normal just in time for Captain Kirk to open the first Star Base.
    "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

  6. #526
    Educator Gary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    12-29-12 @ 12:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,106

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post
    Add that to the 10+% of the people who are employed wanting to work full time but only able to find part time work (me) and it's easy to see why the unemployment numbers are going down. It takes approx 125,000 new jobs per month to just break even with all the new people attempting to join the job market. People turn 18 every day and start looking for work. So to believe 130,000 new jobs a month would substancially bring down unemployment when we need 125,000 just to break even is simply ridiculous. Of course the Obama administration will attempt to spin anything into good economic news, even the slightest anomoly to sitting all but dead in the water. Look at the GDP growth for 2011, 1.6% for the year. At that rate, the economy will be back to normal just in time for Captain Kirk to open the first Star Base.
    This is more partisan nonsense. The BLS stats showed an increase in the civilian noninstitutional population, 16 and over of 1,685,000 in the month from Dec to Jan. The BLS can get decent figures for the total of those employed or unemployed, but these other figures have a bad reputation. All you have to do is look how the whole population and the population of those Not in the work force varies with time to see these stats aren't good.

    http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.pdf

  7. #527
    Debate MMA
    Prof. Peabody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    07-30-12 @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,361

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Gary View Post
    This is more partisan nonsense. The BLS stats showed an increase in the civilian noninstitutional population, 16 and over of 1,685,000 in the month from Dec to Jan. The BLS can get decent figures for the total of those employed or unemployed, but these other figures have a bad reputation. All you have to do is look how the whole population and the population of those Not in the work force varies with time to see these stats aren't good.

    http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.pdf
    From you link!

    Employed

    2009 14,265,000
    2011 13,747,000

    518,000 more people employed.

    Unemployed

    2009 14,265,000
    2011 13,747,000

    518,000 less people unemployed.

    That's a far cry from Obama's claim.
    "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

  8. #528
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post
    From you link!

    Employed

    2009 14,265,000
    2011 13,747,000

    518,000 more people employed.

    Unemployed

    2009 14,265,000
    2011 13,747,000

    518,000 less people unemployed.

    That's a far cry from Obama's claim.
    Oh? And what claim would that be?

  9. #529
    Educator Gary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    12-29-12 @ 12:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,106

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post
    From you link!

    Employed

    2009 14,265,000
    2011 13,747,000

    518,000 more people employed.

    Unemployed

    2009 14,265,000
    2011 13,747,000

    518,000 less people unemployed.

    That's a far cry from Obama's claim.
    Can you read a link?

    http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.pdf

    Compare December to January! Notice the population increased 1,685,000 in a month. That's not reasonable to have such a large population increase in a month and the population data has been adjusted by census data. Now, if you have stats on people employed and unemployed, which column can you put those new found people in? The only column that doesn't have field data supporting it is the Not in labor force column, because the numbers have to add up. That's why 1,177,000 are added to the Not in labor force. The amount of people working actually increased 508,000 in that month. The BLS gets these figures by surveying businesses and even has data on what industry is doing the hiring. The unemployment numbers come from people collecting unemployment and aren't everyone who is unemployment. If you want those stats, you use U6 data and not U3. The BLS publishes both.

    When the BLS reports yearly data, it takes an average for that year. In the last months of the Bush administration, the economy was losing three quarters of a million jobs a month. Large monthly job loses continued in the early Obama administration, but the reason for these job loses was damage already done to the economy. Even today, the housing industry hasn't recovered to the point where new homes can be built, because there's an excess of foreclosure homes. With tighter controls on lending, it will take time for that inventory to be exhausted and home builders to become active again.

    The unemployment rate isn't the significant thing in a nonfarm payrolls report. The significant thing that economist look for are jobs and who is hiring those people getting jobs.

  10. #530
    Debate MMA
    Prof. Peabody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    07-30-12 @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,361

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    Oh? And what claim would that be?
    Kroft: Iím not saying this as fact, and hindsight is always 20-20. But thereís [a] general perception that the stimulus was not enough. That it really didnít work. ThatÖ


    Obama: Let me stop you there, Steve. First of all, thereís not general perception that the stimulus didnít work. Youíve got John McCainís former economist and a whole series of prominent economists, who say that it created or saved 3 millions jobs and prevented us from going into a great depression. That works.

    FactCheck.org : Suspect Claims from Obama’s ’60 Minutes’ Interview



    Looks like the stimulus "saved" many more public service union jobs than it did creating. Is that what the taxpayers spent $840 Billion dollars on? Saving public service Union workers jobs? Looks like it.

    "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •