US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

AdamT · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
Wonder what liberals think the over 1 million discouraged workers that weren't counted last month did to the unemployment rate? Unemployment rate drops as more and more people drop out of the labor force. If Obama keeps this up it will be down to 7% and liberals will want Sainthood for Obama

Are you referring to the seasonal adjustment that they make EVERY year?

Blue_State · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
Wonder what liberals think the over 1 million discouraged workers that weren't counted last month did to the unemployment rate? Unemployment rate drops as more and more people drop out of the labor force. If Obama keeps this up it will be down to 7% and liberals will want Sainthood for Obama

I read it was 2.8 mil on the BLS site...

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

AdamT said:
Are you referring to the seasonal adjustment that they make EVERY year?

Let me know another President that had over 1 million discouraged workers and continued that for so many months?

AdamT · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
Let me know another President that had over 1 million discouraged workers and continued that for so many months?

You mean the seasonal adjustment that they make EVERY year?

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

AdamT said:
You mean the seasonal adjustment that they make EVERY year?

Right, the seasonal adjustment that never showed a million discouraged workers each month and double the Bush average

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNU05026645
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Searched For Work and Available, Discouraged Reasons For Not Currently Looking
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force: Discouragement over job prospects (Persons who believe no job is available.)
Years: 2001 to 2012

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 301 287 349 349 328 294 310 337 285 331 328 348 321
2002 328 375 330 320 414 342 405 378 392 359 385 403 369
2003 449 450 474 437 482 478 470 503 388 462 457 433 457
2004 432 484 514 492 476 478 504 534 412 429 392 442 466
2005 515 485 480 393 392 476 499 384 362 392 404 451 436
2006 396 386 451 381 323 481 428 448 325 331 349 274 381
2007 442 375 381 399 368 401 367 392 276 320 349 363 369
2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642 462
2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929 778
2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219 1282 1318 1173
2011 993 1020 921 989 822 982 1119 977 1037 967 1096 945 989
2012 1059

randel · Feb 16, 2012

Amigo said:
Say what you want, but the economy is not getting better, and if it does, then Obama is just doing it for re-election. Once he is re-elected, he will destroy our economy, and we'll be on our way to a one world government. Sound's crazy, but it will happen if you continue to buy what Obama says.

seriously? lol....the economy is improving because obama is doing it for his re-election....lol....good god almighty, you can't get this kind of entertainment just anywhere....and yes, as much as it kills the hard core koolaid drinking conservatives here, the economy is improving, and that bodes well for Obama.

AdamT · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
Right, the seasonal adjustment that never showed a million discouraged workers each month and double the Bush average

True, the number just DOUBLED under Bush's brilliant leadership.

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

AdamT said:
True, the number just DOUBLED under Bush's brilliant leadership.

Not surprising, another liberal who cannot read numbers, the number DOUBLED under Obama and has averaged about a million a month of discouraged workers. That coupled with a decline in GDP in 2011 vs 2010 says it all but you won't acknowledge it

AdamT · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
Not surprising, another liberal who cannot read numbers, the number DOUBLED under Obama and has averaged about a million a month of discouraged workers. That coupled with a decline in GDP in 2011 vs 2010 says it all but you won't acknowledge it

Wow, are you arithmetically challenged, or what? According the numbers YOU posted, there were 301,000 discouraged workers in Bush's first month, and 642,000 in his last month. He MORE than doubled the number of discouraged workers. In Obama's case, it went from 734,000 his first month to 1,059,000 in January -- a change of 44%.

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

AdamT said:
Wow, are you arithmetically challenged, or what? According the numbers YOU posted, there were 301,000 discouraged workers in Bush's first month, and 642,000 in his last month. He MORE than doubled the number of discouraged workers. In Obama's case, it went from 734,000 his first month to 1,059,000 in January -- a change of 44%.

And Three years after Obama took office and saved us from the second great recession that was 1,059,000. Is that higher or lower than 642,000? I posted the discouraged workers by month. How many months was it over a million?

Sheik Yerbuti · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
Right, the seasonal adjustment that never showed a million discouraged workers each month and double the Bush average

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNU05026645
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Searched For Work and Available, Discouraged Reasons For Not Currently Looking
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force: Discouragement over job prospects (Persons who believe no job is available.)
Years: 2001 to 2012

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 301 287 349 349 328 294 310 337 285 331 328 348 321
2002 328 375 330 320 414 342 405 378 392 359 385 403 369
2003 449 450 474 437 482 478 470 503 388 462 457 433 457
2004 432 484 514 492 476 478 504 534 412 429 392 442 466
2005 515 485 480 393 392 476 499 384 362 392 404 451 436
2006 396 386 451 381 323 481 428 448 325 331 349 274 381
2007 442 375 381 399 368 401 367 392 276 320 349 363 369
2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642 462
2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929 778
2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219 1282 1318 1173
2011 993 1020 921 989 822 982 1119 977 1037 967 1096 945 989
2012 1059

Click to expand...

Spot the disconnect ... :roll:

AdamT · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
And Three years after Obama took office and saved us from the second great recession that was 1,059,000. Is that higher or lower than 642,000? I posted the discouraged workers by month. How many months was it over a million?

It was an increase of 44%, as noted, as compared to an increase of 113% over Bush's term in office.

AdamT · Feb 16, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Spot the disconnect ... :roll:

Yep, I originally called him out over his use of unadjusted numbers, and his response was to post more unadjusted numbers. :lol:

randel · Feb 16, 2012

AdamT said:
Wow, are you arithmetically challenged, or what? According the numbers YOU posted, there were 301,000 discouraged workers in Bush's first month, and 642,000 in his last month. He MORE than doubled the number of discouraged workers. In Obama's case, it went from 734,000 his first month to 1,059,000 in January -- a change of 44%.

you have to ask? lol

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Spot the disconnect ... :roll:

Yep, the disconnect is that liberals ignore that the reason the unemployment rate is dropping is that more and more people are getting discouraged and dropping out of the labor force. That must be good news for compassionate liberals.

Sheik Yerbuti · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
Not surprising, another liberal who cannot read numbers, the number DOUBLED under Obama and has averaged about a million a month of discouraged workers. That coupled with a decline in GDP in 2011 vs 2010 says it all but you won't acknowledge it

Stop lying, Con.

Jan/2001: 301,000
Jan/2009: 734,000
Jan/2012: 1,059,000

That number did not double under Obama. A 44% increase is not "double." "Double" would be a 100% increase.

For example, take a look at Bush's number ... at a 144% increase, Bush more than "doubled" discouraged workers.

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

AdamT said:
Yep, I originally called him out over his use of unadjusted numbers, and his response was to post more unadjusted numbers. :lol:

You really don't know what a discouraged worker is, do you? There is nothing to seasonally adjust, it is a monthly figure and is what the unemployment number is reduced by.

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Stop lying, Con.

Jan/2001: 301,000
Jan/2009: 734,000
Jan/2012: 1,059,000

That number did not double under Obama. A 44% increase is not "double." "Double" would be a 100% increase.

For example, take a look at Bush's number ... at a 144% increase, Bush more than "doubled" discouraged workers.

Three years after Obama took office and "saved" us from the second great depression 1,059,000 dropped out of the labor force. Think those people aren't in a depression or the rest of the 24 million unemployed/under employed? Where is your liberal compassion or do you just give compassion lip service

Sheik Yerbuti · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
You really don't know what a discouraged worker is, do you? There is nothing to seasonally adjust, it is a monthly figure and is what the unemployment number is reduced by.

"red flag" challenge!!

"Right, the seasonal adjustment that never showed a million discouraged workers each month and double the Bush average" ~ Conservative.

Ruling on the field is ... you said "seasonal adjustment."

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
"red flag" challenge!!

"Right, the seasonal adjustment that never showed a million discouraged workers each month and double the Bush average" ~ Conservative.

Ruling on the field is ... you said "seasonal adjustment."

What is the Bush average for 8 years, Sheik? Stop with the bull**** personal attacks

randel · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
What is the Bush average for 8 years, Sheik? Stop with the bull**** personal attacks

where do you see a personal attack?

Sheik Yerbuti · Feb 16, 2012

Conservative said:
Three years after Obama took office and "saved" us from the second great depression 1,059,000 dropped out of the labor force. Think those people aren't in a depression or the rest of the 24 million unemployed/under employed? Where is your liberal compassion or do you just give compassion lip service

Please stop pretending like you give a **** about those folks. You certainly didn't care when Bush increased the number of discouraged workers from 301K to 734K. And you certainly wouldn't care if that number was 10,000,000 if the president was a Republican.

The only reason you even mention it 83 times a day is because those million people serve as fodder for your attacks on a Democrat president.

randel · Feb 16, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Please stop pretending like you give a **** about those folks. You certainly didn't care when Bush increased the number of discouraged workers from 301K to 734K. And you certainly wouldn't care if that number was 10,000,000 if the president was a Republican.

The only reason you even mention it 83 times a day is because those million people serve as fodder for your attacks on a Democrat president.

quoted for truth

Amigo · Feb 16, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Stop lying, Con.

Jan/2001: 301,000
Jan/2009: 734,000
Jan/2012: 1,059,000

That number did not double under Obama. A 44% increase is not "double." "Double" would be a 100% increase.

For example, take a look at Bush's number ... at a 144% increase, Bush more than "doubled" discouraged workers.

I'll give you some math kid!

Bush had 8 years.
Obama has had 3.

Looks like it's going worse with Obama....but if you want 8 to be the same as 3, then the wussification of america will accept it.

Conservative · Feb 16, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Please stop pretending like you give a **** about those folks. You certainly didn't care when Bush increased the number of discouraged workers from 301K to 734K. And you certainly wouldn't care if that number was 10,000,000 if the president was a Republican.

The only reason you even mention it 83 times a day is because those million people serve as fodder for your attacks on a Democrat president.

What was the Bush average, Sheik? Need someone to figure it out for you? Only a true liberal can say increasing that to 1.059,000 is an improvement over what Bush did. You certainly seem to economically and statistically challenged. Stop lying and stop defending the empty suit that you voted for