Page 13 of 26 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 255

Thread: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

  1. #121
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    That's untrue. It's a lie John Williams of Shadowstats likes to tell. Let's look at the past definitions of Unemployment:
    Before 1967, it was Note that this definition does include some of what we would now call Discouraged, but it was limited to depressed regions and specifically excludes those who say they gave up due to perception of discrimination which is now part of the defintion of Discouraged.

    From 1967 to 1993 the definition was
    Note that nothing remotely resembling Discouraged is in the definition.

    And finally, the current definition since 1994 is
    Notice the only change between 1967 and current?

    What Williams is actually talking about, is that a definition of discouraged was developed in the 1970's and used in an alternate measure of underutilization. It had no time limit. In 1994 that changed so that to be marginally attached (including discouraged) you had to have looked for a job in the last 12 months. The reason that changed was that studies apparently showed that those who had stopped looking for work more than 6 months ago were no more likely to start again than those who said they didn't want a job.
    I know I said I wouldn't, but I just cannot resist...

    so John Williams lied about this?

    'lie
    noun
    1.
    a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood. Synonyms: prevarication, falsification. Antonyms: truth.'


    Lie | Define Lie at Dictionary.com


    A lie requires intent. And since you CANNOT know what John Williams intent was when he made said statements (unless he stated them each time), then you cannot know his intent.

    So where is your proof of his intent or do you just commit defamations of character as a hobby?


    Plus, you say he 'likes to tell' this supposed lie.

    Are you personally familiar with him? Has he told you that he derives pleasure from uttering said statement? Because unless he has - and you can prove it - then it appears that you are just going around putting words in his mouth.

    And if you cannot prove it and you admit that you made the statement knowing you could not prove it...then it appears that it is you that is guilty of telling a lie.
    Last edited by DA60; 07-04-14 at 12:44 PM.

  2. #122
    Sage


    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,375

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Amazing how you know what I would be saying or doing and exactly what Mitt Romney would have done yet have no clue as to what Obama has done and totally ignore his record. Absolutely unbelievable how so many liberals simply cannot accept that they were wrong and apparently it is liberal arrogance that creates people who believe they know what is best for everyone else. There is nothing that Conservatives have done that has made things worse and it is liberals like you who are in denial of your failed ideology. this country was built on individual responsibility, individual wealth creation, and individual freedoms none of which focuses on micromanaging by the liberal bureaucrats.

    2009 wasn't that long ago when we had a Democrat President and a Democrat Congress that said they had the answers but have failed. You don't seem to grasp the reality what the high number of unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers have on the economy and monetary policy. The federal govt. pumping billions into the market each month has been offset with 20 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged not spending on the things they want but rather focused on what they need. That is what has kept inflation down. Keep praying for more and more unemployment and discouraged workers.
    We know what Mitt Romney would have done because we listened to what he said we would do. His policies were the standard GOP lines: lower taxes on the rich; relax regulations; and slash spending on those undeserving poor people.

    The narrative that only the rich work hard is notoriously false. Those "lazy" 47% are typically hard working. They just earn little money. The country was not built by ignoring the common man. It was just the opposite. As Joseph Stiglitz wrote in the Times:
    C.E.O.s enjoy incomes that are on average 295 times that of the typical worker, a much higher ratio than in the past, without any evidence of a proportionate increase in productivity.

    If it is not the inexorable laws of economics that have led to America’s great divide, what is it? The straightforward answer: our policies and our politics.
    ...
    Mr. Piketty’s argument rests on the ability of wealth-holders to keep their after-tax rate of return high relative to economic growth. How do they do this? By designing the rules of the game to ensure this outcome; that is, through politics.
    While conservatives believe that liberals are head-over-heels in love with Obama, he was never our ideal. However, given the choice between Obama and the GOP alternative, liberals, and the rest of the country, rightly chose Obama.

    Regarding Obama's record, it is ironic that conservatives like you knock Obama's record while also supporting GOP obstruction, like shutting down the government and threatening default on U.S. bonds. It is undeniably that the GOP has been on a mission to stymie Obama's initiatives. Basically, they throw stumbling blocks in his way and then complain he can't make faster headway. However, in spite of GOP obstruction, the economic disaster that Obama inherited is undeniably reversed.

    Is the economy booming? No. But that is largely due to the political inability to do what needs to be done. Right now, the House is trying to disband the Export Import Bank, something that helps U.S. exports and jobs. They also now want to tie up federal highway funds at a time when U.S. public construction is taking a nose-dive. Try to get more public spending out of the House, forget it.

    "I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it." --J.S. Mill

  3. #123
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,297

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Quote Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
    We know what Mitt Romney would have done because we listened to what he said we would do. His policies were the standard GOP lines: lower taxes on the rich; relax regulations; and slash spending on those undeserving poor people.

    The narrative that only the rich work hard is notoriously false. Those "lazy" 47% are typically hard working. They just earn little money. The country was not built by ignoring the common man. It was just the opposite. As Joseph Stiglitz wrote in the Times:

    While conservatives believe that liberals are head-over-heels in love with Obama, he was never our ideal. However, given the choice between Obama and the GOP alternative, liberals, and the rest of the country, rightly chose Obama.

    Regarding Obama's record, it is ironic that conservatives like you knock Obama's record while also supporting GOP obstruction, like shutting down the government and threatening default on U.S. bonds. It is undeniably that the GOP has been on a mission to stymie Obama's initiatives. Basically, they throw stumbling blocks in his way and then complain he can't make faster headway. However, in spite of GOP obstruction, the economic disaster that Obama inherited is undeniably reversed.

    Is the economy booming? No. But that is largely due to the political inability to do what needs to be done. Right now, the House is trying to disband the Export Import Bank, something that helps U.S. exports and jobs. They also now want to tie up federal highway funds at a time when U.S. public construction is taking a nose-dive. Try to get more public spending out of the House, forget it.


    I am sorry but you seem to have no problem spending someone else's money and using the same liberal ploy of attacking wealth. Tell me since others won't answer what percentage of one's income should a person pay in Federal, State, and Local Taxes?

    it is always about jealousy and what someone else has or someone else' makes. You will never understand that those evil rich people who earned their money are going to get a bigger tax cut because they pay most of the taxes. In fact after the Bush tax cut their burden went up not down and govt. revenue has grown every year we had tax rate cuts.

    You like far too many don't seem to understand what drives economic activity and that there isn't enough you can take from the rich to support the liberal spending appetite. Never have I seen you attack the size of the federal govt. and the 3.9 trillion dollar budget Obama has proposed. Instead it is all about diversion. Tell me exactly what benefit you get out of the bigger U.S. Govt?

    We tried to tell you what we were getting with Obama in 2008 and you refused to listen, we tried again in 2012 and 4 million more got the message. Today Obama's JAR is more representative of reality but as with all liberal policies it really is too late to say "I told you so"

    You do seem to have a serious problem understanding basic economics, basic civics, as well as how a private sector economy works. One of these days you will actually realize what a fool liberalism has made out of you.

  4. #124
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Quote Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
    We know what Mitt Romney would have done because we listened to what he said we would do. His policies were the standard GOP lines: lower taxes on the rich; relax regulations; and slash spending on those undeserving poor people.

    The narrative that only the rich work hard is notoriously false. Those "lazy" 47% are typically hard working. They just earn little money. The country was not built by ignoring the common man. It was just the opposite. As Joseph Stiglitz wrote in the Times:

    While conservatives believe that liberals are head-over-heels in love with Obama, he was never our ideal. However, given the choice between Obama and the GOP alternative, liberals, and the rest of the country, rightly chose Obama.

    Regarding Obama's record, it is ironic that conservatives like you knock Obama's record while also supporting GOP obstruction, like shutting down the government and threatening default on U.S. bonds. It is undeniably that the GOP has been on a mission to stymie Obama's initiatives. Basically, they throw stumbling blocks in his way and then complain he can't make faster headway. However, in spite of GOP obstruction, the economic disaster that Obama inherited is undeniably reversed.

    Is the economy booming? No. But that is largely due to the political inability to do what needs to be done. Right now, the House is trying to disband the Export Import Bank, something that helps U.S. exports and jobs. They also now want to tie up federal highway funds at a time when U.S. public construction is taking a nose-dive. Try to get more public spending out of the House, forget it.

    lol...the Keynesian/big government excuses...more money, more regulations.

    Okay...prove it.

    You say the economy is not 'booming' because of 'political inability'.

    Prove using links to unbiased facts/data that this is so, please?

    That if these magical initiatives went through that they would not only stifle America further...but would actually help America 'boom'.

    Either prove it or admit you cannot.


    Oh, and by the way; not 'booming'?

    JP Morgan just recast their GDP expectations for 2014 down to 1.4%.

    The labor market lost over 1/2 a million full time jobs last month.

    The economy is not just 'not booming'...the economy sucks.


    JPM Cuts Its Original 2014 GDP Forecast In Half, Sees Slowest Full Year Growth Since 2009 | Zero Hedge

    Table A-9. Selected employment indicators

  5. #125
    Sage


    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,375

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I am sorry but you seem to have no problem spending someone else's money and using the same liberal ploy of attacking wealth. Tell me since others won't answer what percentage of one's income should a person pay in Federal, State, and Local Taxes?

    it is always about jealousy and what someone else has or someone else' makes. You will never understand that those evil rich people who earned their money are going to get a bigger tax cut because they pay most of the taxes. In fact after the Bush tax cut their burden went up not down and govt. revenue has grown every year we had tax rate cuts.

    You like far too many don't seem to understand what drives economic activity and that there isn't enough you can take from the rich to support the liberal spending appetite. Never have I seen you attack the size of the federal govt. and the 3.9 trillion dollar budget Obama has proposed. Instead it is all about diversion. Tell me exactly what benefit you get out of the bigger U.S. Govt?

    We tried to tell you what we were getting with Obama in 2008 and you refused to listen, we tried again in 2012 and 4 million more got the message. Today Obama's JAR is more representative of reality but as with all liberal policies it really is too late to say "I told you so"

    You do seem to have a serious problem understanding basic economics, basic civics, as well as how a private sector economy works. One of these days you will actually realize what a fool liberalism has made out of you.
    While you smugly assert you understand economics better than me, saying so doesn't mean it is so, Nothing in your narrative is supported by history or economics. There is no evidence whatsoever to show that low taxes have resulted in greater economic activity or more job growth -- none. Your argument then collapses into, 'it's just not fair to tax rich people more.' Well, with all the moral battles to fight in this world, the right of rich people to hold onto more of their money isn't on my top ten.

    What is clear and apparent is that the period of time following the New Deal until the Reagan Revolution, a period of high taxation on wealth, strong unions and a wide safety net, produced unprecedented economic gains for the middle-class. These gains further resulted in a better educated middle-class that spurred productivity further, with more economic gains. Those gains were all but erased with movement conservatism that lowered upper-income taxes, reduced the safety net and was hostile to unions.

    As far as your question, "what percentage of one's income should a person pay in Federal, State, and Local Taxes," is concerned, I could live with the tax-rates under Reagan, 50% top income rate with a 60/40% tax on short/long term capital gains.
    "I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it." --J.S. Mill

  6. #126
    Sage
    Anthony60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,573

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Labor force shrinks again, dropping the unemployment rate. The economy is creating mostly part time jobs, not that helpful. They ought to count a full time job as 1 job and a part time job as half a job at most. It's misleading to claim all these jobs were created when they are mostly part time.
    "We have met the enemy and they are ours..." -- Oliver Hazard Perry
    "I don't want a piece of you... I want the whole thing!" -- Bob Barker

  7. #127
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,297

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    MTAtech;1063487623]While you smugly assert you understand economics better than me, saying so doesn't mean it is so, Nothing in your narrative is supported by history or economics. There is no evidence whatsoever to show that low taxes have resulted in greater economic activity or more job growth -- none. Your argument then collapses into, 'it's just not fair to tax rich people more.' Well, with all the moral battles to fight in this world, the right of rich people to hold onto more of their money isn't on my top ten.
    That is your opinion and that opinion isn't supported by history at all. Tax rates have only been cut three times in modern history, JFK, Reagan, and GW Bush and each time economic growth spiraled upwards and apparently you cannot explain it because as I stated your understanding of economics and the four components of GDP is limited at best. i really am getting tired of fighting for you to keep more of what you earn while you don't even appreciate it.

    I suggest you review economic activity and job creation AFTER the JFK Tax cuts, After the Reagan Tax cuts, and After the GW Bush tax cuts. I defy you to prove those results would have happened without the tax cuts. Reagan created 17 million jobs, Bush 9 million until 2008 and both inherited recessions.

    Liberal economics just don't work and yet you continue to promote them. Guess some people never learn.

    What is clear and apparent is that the period of time following the New Deal until the Reagan Revolution, a period of high taxation on wealth, strong unions and a wide safety net, produced unprecedented economic gains for the middle-class. These gains further resulted in a better educated middle-class that spurred productivity further, with more economic gains. Those gains were all but erased with movement conservatism that lowered upper-income taxes, reduced the safety net and was hostile to unions.
    Your opinion noted. Why in the world would you promote high taxation on individual wealth which you created and take away the individual freedom to spend that wealth the way they see fit. Do you really believe a Govt. bureaucrat can spend it more efficiently and effectively? Is that why we have a 17 plus trillion dollar debt? Strong unions? LOL, yep 11% agree with you and the majority have chosen not to belong getting sick and tired of union management that produces nothing getting six digit yearly salaries. This country was built on individual responsibility and individual freedom, you promote nothing of the sort.

    As far as your question, "what percentage of one's income should a person pay in Federal, State, and Local Taxes," is concerned, I could live with the tax-rates under Reagan, 50% top income rate with a 60/40% tax on short/long term capital gains.
    '
    Didn't say tax rates, said what percentage of one's personal income should people actually pay, in other words the effective rate? If you think people paid 50% under Reagan you are naive and very gullible. Further you ignore state and local taxes. Wonder why?

    I see you nothing more than a big govt. liberal out of touch with reality and the foundation upon which this country was built. Maybe another country offers you the Utopia you seek.

  8. #128
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Yes, I can read, can you? Show the chart of discouraged workers prior to 1993. Discouraged workers were included in the U4 report not the U-3 which are now the official numbers released to the public. The official numbers are the U-3 and do not include discouraged workers.
    ummm you seem to be having trouble understanding the charts, too. The current U-4 is unemployed plus discouraged as a percent of the labor force plus discouraged. This is the new definition as of 1994. The official rate previously was the U-5 which is the same as the current U-3 with one small change (the change has nothing do do with discouraged).

    But you were talking about the OFFICIAL definition:
    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    That was true until Clinton in 1993 changed the formula for calculating the OFFICIAL unemployment rate by removing Discouraged workers from the number. They are now still counted but not in the official reported rate. Prior to 1993 discouraged workers were included in the official reported rate.
    And the OFFICIAL definition, from 1967 to 1993 was
    Unemployed persons comprise all persons who did not work during the survey week, who made specific efforts to find a job within the past 4 weeks, and who were available for work during the survey week (except for temporary illness). Also included as unemployed are those who did not work at all, were available for work, 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.
    Answer yes or no...in that OFFICIAL definition, would those who have not looked for work in the last 4 weeks because they believed they wouldn't find work be included or not?

    And further, your own link proves you wrong. In discussing the old alternative measures, they write "The last of Shiskin's measures, U-7, built on U-6 by adding the number of discouraged workers to both the numerator and denominator. Shiskin assumed that people classified as discouraged workers-those who wanted work, but who were not currently looking because they believed that their search would be futile-very much resemble the unempled and therefore should be counted as such. (Because these persons were not looking for work at the time of the survey they were officially classified as not in the labor force.)"

    So, one more time...I gave you the pre-1994 and current definitions. There was a change in definition, yes. Can you even tell?

    1967-1993 Definition: Unemployed persons comprise all persons who did not work during the survey week, who made specific efforts to find a job within the past 4 weeks, and who were available for work during the survey week (except for temporary illness). Also included as unemployed are those who did not work at all, were available for work, 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.

    1994 to current DefinitionL Unemployed persons. All persons who had no employment during the reference week, were available for work, except for temporary illness, and had made specific efforts to find employment some time during the 4-week period ending with the reference week. Persons who were waiting to be recalled to a job from which they had been laid off need not have been looking for work to be classified as unemployed.
    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.

  9. #129
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony60 View Post
    Labor force shrinks again, dropping the unemployment rate. The economy is creating mostly part time jobs, not that helpful. They ought to count a full time job as 1 job and a part time job as half a job at most. It's misleading to claim all these jobs were created when they are mostly part time.
    The labor force went up. And the jobs report (the plus 288,000) doesn't and can't distinguish between full and part time. It just asks about people on the payroll.
    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. #130
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Jersey
    Last Seen
    11-15-16 @ 01:29 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,532

    Re: US economy adds 288,000 jobs in June

    Why would Anyone still be stupid enough to believe that tax cuts lead to Economic growth? Even that useless retard reagan, who instigated the trickle-down drivel, didn't believe that.

    ""Rather than proposing unpopular spending cuts, Republicans would push through popular tax cuts, with the deliberate intention of worsening the government’s fiscal position. Spending cuts could then be sold as a necessity rather than a choice, the only way to eliminate an unsustainable budget deficit.""

Page 13 of 26 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... 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
  •