Page 38 of 45 FirstFirst ... 283637383940 ... LastLast
Results 371 to 380 of 442

Thread: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

  1. #371
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    You can claim Bush exaggerated but that would be a lie especially with all the documentation to the contrary from Democrats long before Bush took office as well as French, German, and British intelligence

    Obama didn't inherit the worst recession since the Great Depression, Reagan did but Obama did oversee the worst recovery since the Great Depression and we are living that misery today.
    Did the Reagan recession involve corrupt securities which were rated AAA circulated throughout the financial industry? because of this credit markets frozen?

  2. #372
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post

    Bush had 9,500,000 more jobs than Obama ...
    Who knows where your numbers come from??

    Jan/2009: 142,153,000
    Apr/2013: 143,579,000


    BLS: Employed

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post

    ... and 7 trillion dollars of less debt. Bush had 20 million less people on food stamps, he didn't preside over increasing poverty rates that rival the Great Depression, he had half as many people on disabillity.
    Mostly attributable to Bush's Great Recession.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post

    Bush didn't lie about a terrorist attack that killed 4 Americans and call it a "protest" because it was politically expedient.
    No, he just lied about a terrorist attack which killed 3,000.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post

    Bush didn't use grieving mothers and 20 dead Children just to build a wedge issue for the midterm elections knowing his legislation was going to be stalled in the House.
    Riiight, he just sent men and women to die in Iraq to hunt for WMD that weren't there so he could get re-elected.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post

    Bush didn't ship thousands of guns straight into the hands of the drug cartels so he use the risd in gun violence in Mexico to push gun legislation.
    Riiight, sure he didn't ...

    Bush Blamed for ‘Fast and Furious’

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post

    Bush fought for reforms on Fannie and Freddie when they were buying up trash loans with a corrupt Democrat CEO and ripping the American tax payer off. Obama is trying to repeat that policy by shoving in another corrupt racist Democrat to losen their new stricter standards for buying loans.
    True, Bush did want reforms on the GSEs ... after he dumped billions in loans on them. Unfortunately, the Republican-led Senate wouldn't pass reform.

  3. #373
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    You can claim Bush exaggerated but that would be a lie especially with all the documentation to the contrary from Democrats long before Bush took office as well as French, German, and British intelligence

    Obama didn't inherit the worst recession since the Great Depression, Reagan did but Obama did oversee the worst recovery since the Great Depression and we are living that misery today.
    Hhmm. you say that a recession that ran from July 1981 to November 1982 where GDP shrank 1.9 %.I believe it was almost 4% in 2008 alone, wasn’t it?

    Then you have the 5.3 percentage-point climb in unemployment under BO’s watch as compared to the grippers 3.6 points. Long-term unemployment is another story.

    During the great bush recession the average time of someone being unemployed reached 26.9 months is much worse than the gippers piddling five weeks, which hovered at around 3.7 million poor souls.

    About the only thing that the gippers recession had that exceeded the great bush recession that77y BO inherited was that unemployment crested at 10.8 percent at the end of the gipper recession, then for only the last two months of the gippers watch.

  4. #374
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Don't worry, if a republican was in office, they would be singing the praises of these numbers. And we'd all be just shocked. Shocked I tells ya!
    Don't be so sure Joe. Crappy economy, is crappy economy. I can't be positive that I wouldn't defend a republican more than I do this liar n chief, but in the overall analysis I'd like to think that the conclusion would be the same. But, that's just it, I don't believe that a republican like Romney would be putting in place policies that are actively pushed by this President that are tamping down productivity.

    But, you never know, for instance, if you remember, I was against TARP from Bush. In any case, I know that your usual meme during Obama is to say that no President has any effect on economic activity, if that is truly the case with you, or others, then you must in kind drop the meme that Obama inherited a mess from Bush.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  5. #375
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,369

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Wrong, the official rate during Reagan included discouraged workers, that was changed in 1994 by the Democrat controlled Congress. That is why you cannot find discouraged workers anywhere in BLS during the Reagan term
    Employment Situation July 1985You'll note that Discouraged is listed as a subset of "Not in the Labor Force," you'll note that the data was only collected quarterly, and you'll note that the definition is a little different in that there was no time limit and it included some that would now be considered Marginally Attached and not discouraged.

    And of course the definiton is stated as:
    People are classified as unemployed, regardless of their eligibility for unemployment benefits or public assistance, if they meet all of the following criteria: They had no employment during the survey week: they were available for work at that time; and they made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the prior 4 weeks. Also included among the unemployed are persons not looking for work because they were laid off and waiting to be recalled and those expecting to report to a job within 30 days.
    Since it has the work search requirement, discouraged are excluded.

    Before 1967, the definition was a little different Employment and Earnings, July 1966 states
    Unemployed Persons comprise all persons who did not work at all during the survey week and were looking for work, regardless of whether or not they were eligible for unemployment insurance. Also included as unemployed are those who did not work at all and (a) were waiting to be called back to a job from which they had been laid off; or (b) were waiting to report to a new wage or salary job within 30 days (and were not in school during the survey week); or (c) would have been looking for work except that they were temporarily ill or believed no work was available in their line of work or in the community. Persons in this latter category will usually be residents of a community in which there are only a few dominant industries which were shut down during the survey week. Not included in this category are persons who say they were not looking for work because they were too old, too young, or handicapped in any way.
    So (c) is similar to what we now call Discouraged, but note that discrimination was not included as it is now, and the qualification of "usually residents of a community etc" meant that the defintion was not uniformly applied.
    Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
    And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
    I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.

  6. #376
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    Employment Situation July 1985You'll note that Discouraged is listed as a subset of "Not in the Labor Force," you'll note that the data was only collected quarterly, and you'll note that the definition is a little different in that there was no time limit and it included some that would now be considered Marginally Attached and not discouraged.

    And of course the definiton is stated as:
    Since it has the work search requirement, discouraged are excluded.

    Before 1967, the definition was a little different Employment and Earnings, July 1966 states So (c) is similar to what we now call Discouraged, but note that discrimination was not included as it is now, and the qualification of "usually residents of a community etc" meant that the defintion was not uniformly applied.
    Nice find!

    Turns out, Reagan had as many as 1.9 million discouraged workers! Obama's worst was 1.3 million. Of course, the population was also about 1/3 smaller then, making Reagan's 1.9 million more like 2.5 million by today's population.

    Not only that, turns out Reagan had over a million discouraged workers for his first 7 years in office.

    Those were the results Con voted for.
    Last edited by Sheik Yerbuti; 05-06-13 at 11:05 AM.

  7. #377
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,369

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    [COLOR="#0000FF"]Nice find!

    Turns out, Reagan had as many as 1.9 million discouraged workers! Obama's worst was 1.3 million. Of course, the population was also about 1/3 smaller then, making Reagan's 1.9 million more like 2.5 million by today's population.
    You really can't compare the two...the definitions are too different. The current definition doesn't include anyone who stopped looking more than a year ago, while the definition under Reagan had no time limit. The old definition might have contained some that would be in the broader Marginally Attached, rather than Discouraged.
    Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
    And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
    I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.

  8. #378
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Don't be so sure Joe. Crappy economy, is crappy economy. I can't be positive that I wouldn't defend a republican more than I do this liar n chief, but in the overall analysis I'd like to think that the conclusion would be the same. But, that's just it, I don't believe that a republican like Romney would be putting in place policies that are actively pushed by this President that are tamping down productivity.

    But, you never know, for instance, if you remember, I was against TARP from Bush. In any case, I know that your usual meme during Obama is to say that no President has any effect on economic activity, if that is truly the case with you, or others, then you must in kind drop the meme that Obama inherited a mess from Bush.
    I could be wrong, but I think you have. I seem to remember when it was going bad under Bush hearing these very same arguments, only in reverse. I was consistent then, saying presidents don't control the economy.

    Being against TARP is one thing. Calling him a socialist communist Muslim for doing it is quite another.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #379
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,369

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    Based on staying informed.


    The government has admitted that it has changed the 'seasonal adjustments'...but they refuse to say exactly how they have changed them.
    You didn't look very hard: Intervention Analysis in Seasonal Adjustment

    And where were you - the government recently approved changing the CPI model to the C-CPI-U model...which they admit will make the CPI numbers lower then they are now. And they have changed the CPI models many times over the years. Especially since the mid-90's...al designed to lower the CPI numbers.
    No, the C-CPI has been published for many years. Obama has proposed changing the basis of Social Security COLA from teh CPI-W to the C-CPI-U.
    AND the GDP tabulation process was changed recently (to much media attention) - again, to make the numbers seem better (in this case higher - freely admitted by the government).
    Because it's well known that a Laspeyres type index will overstate the change in cost of living.
    Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
    And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
    I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.

  10. #380
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: U.S. unemployment falls to 7.5% in April [W: 348, 360]

    If you use ObamaCare to reduce employees hours by over 25% to avoid ObamaCare, then them additional part-time employees for those hours constitutes "new jobs."

    So let's cheer millions of Americans being made part=time employees and losing all benefits!!!! Yahoo!

Page 38 of 45 FirstFirst ... 283637383940 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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