• 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!

US Jobs Up 290,000, but Jobless Rate Rises to 9.9 %

Goldenboy219 said:
Can you do me the favor of explaining why the headline unemployment definition is U-3 and not U-6?
Click to expand...

I know it's U-3 because that number always paints the prettier picture. Even the U-6 does tell all the ugliness.

Contrary to what you may think, I don't take glee in any of this. People are hurting, retirements are being put off, values are down.....that hurts everybody.

And raising taxes and taking over business and healthcare won't fix it...it will prolong it.
 
Erod said:
I know it's U-3 because that number always paints the prettier picture. Even the U-6 does tell all the ugliness.
Click to expand...

No, i am asking you why (not why you believe) they use u-3 instead of u-6.

Contrary to what you may think, I don't take glee in any of this. People are hurting, retirements are being put off, values are down.....that hurts everybody.
Click to expand...

So if we begin taking a dent out of the unemployment rate, it will not have negative political ramifications for Republicans in November?

And raising taxes and taking over business and healthcare won't fix it...it will prolong it.
Click to expand...

Not only is this an inaccurate picture of the current environment, it shows you have little faith in markets.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
No, i am asking you why (not why you believe) they use u-3 instead of u-6.



So if we begin taking a dent out of the unemployment rate, it will not have negative political ramifications for Republicans in November?



Not only is this an inaccurate picture of the current environment, it shows you have little faith in markets.
Click to expand...

I have zero faith in this Administration as they do not understand how wealth is created as evidenced by their lack of focus on the private sector and actually growing meaningful jobs.

What this month's BLS survey shows is that we now have over 15.2 million unemployed people and another 1.2 million discouraged workers both increases over previous months and nothing to take victory laps over.

The disappointing total performance shows that never in the history of this country have we spent so much, stimulus, to get so little in results yet Obama supporters still don't get it.
 
Conservative said:
I have zero faith in this Administration as they do not understand how wealth is created as evidenced by their lack of focus on the private sector and actually growing meaningful jobs.
Click to expand...

Do you have a bls or bea link that states public sector job growth has exceeded private sector job growth within the past year? If not, you might have to rescind that statement if you have any desire to achieve accuracy.

What this month's BLS survey shows is that we now have over 15.2 million unemployed people and another 1.2 million discouraged workers both increases over previous months and nothing to take victory laps over.
Click to expand...

Given that employment is quite lagging (and rightfully so), i suspect the recent creation in "jobs" is an after-flow from the 8% 4th quarter nominal GDP increase. Hopefully, this same pattern will continue, and i believe it will given the sudden decline in productivity numbers (which is a labor demand determinant).

The disappointing total performance shows that never in the history of this country have we spent so much, stimulus, to get so little in results yet Obama supporters still don't get it.
Click to expand...

Nobody with any real credibility believed this stimulus had the means necessary to achieve its aims. Being that hindsight is 20/20, a stimulus package in the tune of $1.5 trillion would have been ample enough to "patch" the GDP gap.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Do you have a bls or bea link that states public sector job growth has exceeded private sector job growth within the past year? If not, you might have to rescind that statement if you have any desire to achieve accuracy.



Given that employment is quite lagging (and rightfully so), i suspect the recent creation in "jobs" is an after-flow from the 8% 4th quarter nominal GDP increase. Hopefully, this same pattern will continue, and i believe it will given the sudden decline in productivity numbers (which is a labor demand determinant).



Nobody with any real credibility believed this stimulus had the means necessary to achieve its aims. Being that hindsight is 20/20, a stimulus package in the tune of $1.5 trillion would have been ample enough to "patch" the GDP gap.
Click to expand...

I suggest you go to bls.gov and research the site, there is a lot of good information there including answers to your questions. Let me know if you need help.
 
Conservative said:
I suggest you go to bls.gov and research the site, there is a lot of good information there including answers to your questions. Let me know if you need help.
Click to expand...

It is not my responsibility to research or prove your accusations. If you have enough time to make multiple responses along with suspect claims, you surely have the time to accurately support them.
 
Erod said:
Back out the fabricated government jobs. And the Dow has lost 900 points in four days and dropping.

If this is a recovery, we're @#$%ed.
Click to expand...

With liquidity problems in Europe and japan, the dollar was able to rise significantly in value. And what do you know, equities have lost some value in the US. The census hiring was 66,000 so quite a few of those jobs were private sector.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
It is not my responsibility to research or prove your accusations. If you have enough time to make multiple responses along with suspect claims, you surely have the time to accurately support them.
Click to expand...

Apparently you have time to spout rhetoric, to research socialists like Krugman but no time to research BLS that captures employment data or BEA to get actual economic data. Apparently you don't understand how foolish that makes you look and sound.
 
Conservative said:
Apparently you have time to spout rhetoric, to research socialists like Krugman but no time to research BLS that captures employment data or BEA to get actual economic data. Apparently you don't understand how foolish that makes you look and sound.
Click to expand...

That is your second personal attack in as many threads. Please attempt to debate the topic at hand, and address my statements with the respect they deserve. :2wave:
 
Crunch said:
This is the page you are not looking for. :mrgreen:

Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detail
Click to expand...

Thanks, Crunch, I believe you are going to find like I have found that it is a waste of time giving him data from this non partisan site as he prefers analysis and predictions from economists who he for some reason respects. Never have I seen him trust but verify and yet he calls himself a Libertarian.

Golden Boy, there is no personal attack here, just confusing you with actual facts from verifiable non partisan sources.
 
Crunch said:
This is the page you are not looking for. :mrgreen:

Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detail
Click to expand...

I created this thread: given the history of my posts in this particular thread, where does it "come off" as if i have not reviewed the particular employment data this month? Is there anything regarding my posts which would aid in the notion that i am ill-informed? If so, please post it. If not, you should probably move along.
 
Conservative said:
Thanks, Crunch, I believe you are going to find like I have found that it is a waste of time giving him data from this non partisan site as he prefers analysis and predictions from economists who he for some reason respects. Never have I seen him trust but verify and yet he calls himself a Libertarian.

Golden Boy, there is no personal attack here, just confusing you with actual facts from verifiable non partisan sources.
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

It is kind of like arguing with some here about the Arizona illegal alien law. They won't read the law, or if they read the law they will place strange interpretations on the law, or they go off on unfounded hypothetical strawman arguments.

Some you just can't help.
 
Conservative said:
Golden Boy, there is no personal attack here, just confusing you with actual facts from verifiable non partisan sources.
Click to expand...

Being as i had to basically pull teeth to get you to post any sort of "data" you claim supports your specific ties to your ideology, this is not one of your more memorable posts.

By all means, do attempt to post objective facts and analysis in a sound non-bias manner. You have yet to accomplish this "feat" so far.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Being as i had to basically pull teeth to get you to post any sort of "data" you claim supports your specific ties to your ideology, this is not one of your more memorable posts.

By all means, do attempt to post objective facts and analysis in a sound non-bias manner. You have yet to accomplish this "feat" so far.
Click to expand...

GB...... it took me all of 2 minutes to pull up real data from a real source.

Google is your friend, try using it.
 
Crunch said:
GB...... it took me all of 2 minutes to pull up real data from a real source.

Google is your friend, try using it.
Click to expand...

I agree. Yet i was not making blanket statements pertaining to data while my post had a "zero data" level of contribution. If you want to claim the data supports some wicked claim, you must present the data.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
I agree. Yet i was not making blanket statements pertaining to data while my post had a "zero data" level of contribution. If you want to claim the data supports some wicked claim, you must present the data.
Click to expand...


True, but just think of how satisfying it would have been if you had gone ahead and pulled up data that supports your position over the oppositions.... of course in this case, that would not have been the case, would it.
 
Crunch said:
True, but just think of how satisfying it would have been
Click to expand...

That's not my game... not why i am here. If i was moved by such silliness, i would have been an educator.

of course in this case, that would not have been the case, would it.
Click to expand...

Nope, it is not my job. When i make a statement and do not post ample sources, if called, i will provide them. You will not find a conversation where someone called me out on lack of support, and me not obliging or admitting a fallacious argument.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Nobody with any real credibility believed this stimulus had the means necessary to achieve its aims. Being that hindsight is 20/20, a stimulus package in the tune of $1.5 trillion would have been ample enough to "patch" the GDP gap.
Click to expand...

Where do you think this money comes from?

Yeah, lift it to $1.5 trillion and drive our debt to 90 percent of GDP instead of 70, and we'll be Greece even sooner.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
That's not my game... not why i am here. If i was moved by such silliness, i would have been an educator.



Nope, it is not my job. When i make a statement and do not post ample sources, if called, i will provide them. You will not find a conversation where someone called me out on lack of support, and me not obliging or admitting a fallacious argument.
Click to expand...

Whatever........ did you look at the data? Did it prove what was stated?
 
The data surely did not show that the labor force increased due to benefits expiring.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
The data surely did not show that the labor force increased due to benefits expiring.
Click to expand...

LOL, now that is funny and typical. Can you tell me how many people lost their unemployment benefits?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom