• 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. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%[W: 831]

Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

pbrauer said:
Not all job opportunities are paid, many of those positions are volunteer jobs they do not add to the economy.

Approximately 700K public sector jobs have been lost due to shrinking income taxes.
Click to expand...

So what? You think that helps your case?:shock:
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth said:
You keep using this word, but you are ignoring the second most common understanding/use of the word.

Being the primary cause of something and so able to be blamed or credited for it.

Oh, confidence fairies, magic dust and all.

I wouldn't bring W into the mix, his record on job creation and crashing economies is well known.

If this is a recommendation for following Reaganite voodoo economics, then you have no standing on debt complaints.
Click to expand...

Unemployment 7.6%. Lowest workforce participation since 1979. Keep dodging & ducking.:cool:
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Jack Hays said:
The POTUS is responsible, regardless of the primary cause. What BHO did not do was engender confidence, which is what RWR did in spades, and even GWB did better than BHO.:cool:
Click to expand...
At least it's finally nice to see a right who believes Bush is responsible for not doing enough to prevent 9.11. :applaud
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Sheik Yerbuti said:
And both have done better than Bush. So excuse me if I care not what a Bush apologist has to complain about.
Click to expand...

If either had been able to match GWB's average unemployment rate of 5.3% both would have better reputations.:cool:
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Jack Hays said:
Unemployment 7.6%. Lowest workforce participation since 1979. Keep dodging & ducking.:cool:
Click to expand...
LOL....you just fell back two pages to repeat the same factoid being addressed, avoiding the previous points....and I am "ducking" the conversation?

This is pathetic.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Sheik Yerbuti said:
At least it's finally nice to see a right who believes Bush is responsible for not doing enough to prevent 9.11. :applaud
Click to expand...

You are correct. GWB and his people came into office convinced that Clinton had used terrorism to dodge more important and difficult questions. They were not to be persuaded that the threat was real and deadly. We knew the blow was coming, but we couldn't get the WH to buy in.:cool:
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Sheik Yerbuti said:
The main reason unemployment is as high as it is, is due to the drop in the state and local public sectors since the recession ended, which lost 700,000 jobs over that period, while the private sector has gained 5½ million jobs since then. One of the factors in the public sector drop is lost revenue. The drop in LFPR is due to multiple factors, which include but are not limited to retiring (and dying) baby boomers, sharp increase of those filing for disability, increase of people choosing school over work, fewer jobs available, discouraged workers. These are all factors for why the LFPR has been dropping ... since 2001, by the way, with the exception a brief period from about 2004/2005 until the housing bubble, which is what helped the LFPR during that period, collapsed entirely.
Click to expand...

You just posted a lot of words but said nothing of value. Let's consider your first sentence. Your contention is that an 8:1 increase in private sector employment has not been able offset the decrease in the public sector, and this is why unemployment remains high? That's a contortion not many can make with any credibility.

Next, let's assume all your reasons for the drop in the LPR are correct, with which I happen to agree, then we should be experiencing a labor shortage and a correspondingly low UE rate. Would you not agree?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Jack Hays said:
So what? You think that helps your case?:shock:
Click to expand...

I should have added that public sector job loss is due to decreasing tax revenue.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Gimmesometruth said:
LOL....you just fell back two pages to repeat the same factoid being addressed, avoiding the previous points....and I am "ducking" the conversation?

This is pathetic.
Click to expand...

Since you used those two pages to duck the central issue, I don't feel too bad.:cool:
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

pbrauer said:
I should have added that public sector job loss is due to decreasing tax revenue.
Click to expand...

Yes. Shrinking tax base resulting from poor economic management. BHO owns those losses too.:cool:
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Jack Hays said:
Since you used those two pages to duck the central issue, I don't feel too bad.:cool:
Click to expand...
How is rebutting your claim that Obama was the primary cause of low participation "ducking" that "central" issue?

Go ahead and repeat what you already said again and claim I am ducking it if you wish, but this consistently weird debate style is making you look really bad.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

AlabamaPaul said:
You just posted a lot of words but said nothing of value.
Click to expand...

You of all people are trying to go there?

If government jobs had increased in proportion with private sector jobs, at what level would unemployment be today? Yes, i am asking you a direct question. Do you have the ability to answer it?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

pinqy said:
I've studied the methodology for many years and have met with the CES analyst many times to discuss the issues. So no, it's not the same.
Click to expand...

Appeal to authority fallacy.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Kushinator said:
You of all people are trying to go there?

If government jobs had increased in proportion with private sector jobs, at what level would unemployment be today? Yes, i am asking you a direct question. Do you have the ability to answer it?
Click to expand...

Why should they have increased at all? Would you care to address the 8:1 stated ratio and explain why UE has not decreased more than it has?
 
Fenton said:
LOL !!

Some clown actually gave you a "like" for that empty nonsensical post.

Let me guess, your'e actually blaming the baby boomers on our economies death spiral ??

Explain then, .....this out to be good.
Click to expand...

You still don't understand.. He was simply saying that people retiring causes the LFPR to go up(DUH). Conservative has changed to using LFPR as a reliable metric to "combat" the fact that unemployment has been dropping...Hint--it's not a reliable metric for what you're trying to prove.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

AlabamaPaul said:
Why should they have increased at all? Would you care to address the 8:1 stated ratio and explain why UE has not decreased more than it has?
Click to expand...

I asked you a question. If you lack the ability to answer it, no point in questioning your way out of it. Just man up and admit your limitations.

Here is the data: The total private employment level from trough to peak increased by about 4.3%.

Let's try again! Had government employment increased in the same fashion, what would the current unemployment rate be today?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Jack Hays said:
If either had been able to match GWB's average unemployment rate of 5.3% both would have better reputations.:cool:
Click to expand...
The intent of that statistic is to hide the fact that Bush inherited a very low unemployment rate, benefited from the housing bubble, and ultimately trashed the economy as he doubled unemployment as he slithered out of DC after achieving the lowest JAR on record.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Kushinator said:
I asked you a question. If you lack the ability to answer it, no point in questioning your way out of it. Just man up and admit your limitations.

Here is the data: The total private employment level from trough to peak increased by about 4.3%.

Let's try again! Had government employment increased in the same fashion, what would the current unemployment rate be today?
Click to expand...

Keep beating your head against the keyboard if you wish, but I'll ask again, why should government employment have increased and not decreased?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

American said:
Appeal to authority fallacy.
Click to expand...

Given the fact that you are questioning the validity of these numbers on the basis of "common sense", you are in no position to call foul on anyone else. Common sense is just your way of admitting you don't know what you are talking about.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Jack Hays said:
You are correct. GWB and his people came into office convinced that Clinton had used terrorism to dodge more important and difficult questions. They were not to be persuaded that the threat was real and deadly. We knew the blow was coming, but we couldn't get the WH to buy in.:cool:
Click to expand...
I don't know why you even bother to mention Clinton's name since you admit it was Bush's fault that not enough was done to prevent it.?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

AlabamaPaul said:
Keep beating your head against the keyboard if you wish, but I'll ask again, why should government employment have increased and not decreased?
Click to expand...

I asked you a question. Can you answer it?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Kushinator said:
I asked you a question. Can you answer it?
Click to expand...

I believe I have already answered your question. Government employment should not be expected to expand at the same rate, if at all, during any recovery period from a recession. Why would you think it should?
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

Jack Hays said:
Yes. Shrinking tax base resulting from poor economic management. BHO owns those losses too.:cool:
Click to expand...

But your wrong, the public sector grew under President Bush. Decreasing income tax revenue resulting from the recession caused loss of public sector jobs. That's about 700K worth which is probably worth a decrease percentage point in the UE rate.
 
Re: U.S. Adds Only 88,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.6%

American said:
Appeal to authority fallacy.
Click to expand...
No, "appeal to authority" is only a fallacy when the subject is out of the scope of the authority, or the authority is not really an authority.

Now, of course, I could still be wrong in my area of expertise, but when I say how something is done, then that's how it's done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom