• 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. economy adds just 74,000 jobs in December

The current employment market shows a disturbing trend in the character of both individuals and government. There are clearly a large number of people who feel they are too good for a low paying job. But government actions are contradictory and counter productive. On one hand the new health care law encourages employers to reduce working hours, while at the same time attempts to buy votes by pushing higher minimum wages and extending unemployment. And then there is the push for amnesty to get people to fill those jobs that are available. When you put these factors together it becomes clear that the goal of the federal government is not to decrease unemployment at all, but to create a dependent underclass while dividing the population and pitting groups against each other. I'm not buying that our federal government is collectively too stupid to see it. I think they know exactly what they are doing, which is disturbing because it is very clear that their intent is to better their own positions rather than those of the citizens.



It's like the old joke about the guy who took a job that paid straight commission so he could finally earn what he was worth.

After a few months on the job, he discovered he couldn't live on that so he found a hourly paid job.
 
That's your problem then, but even the right as a whole doesn't dispute the BLS numbers. If you choose to ignore reality, that's on you not me.



I do dispute them and wonder why the same system used in 1950 is still used today.

Only the government prefers the methods that have already been shown to be inaccurate.
 
Ladies & gentlemen ... an example of purposefully misleading ... which in a way is better than not knowing it's misleading.
And what in my post was misleading?
 
Even if the job growth is outstripped by those giving up by 3 to 1?
Except it hasn't been :shrug: The number of jobs created since the end of 2009 has dwarfed discouraged workers.
 
However you slice it, the U3 figure is the official measure of unemployment, and the effective unemployment rate is nowhere near 20%.



So you're good with the situation as it is and looking forward to more of the same?
 
So you're good with the situation as it is and looking forward to more of the same?
strawman1.jpg
 
However you slice it, the U3 figure is the official measure of unemployment, and the effective unemployment rate is nowhere near 20%.
Yes ... like you could keep your doctor and your plan ... whether they exist or not is just trivial semantic wordplay.
 
Bottom line is jobs growth is not keeping up with population growth. The numbers are dwindling because because less people are reporting that they are looking for work, as they are not required to when unemployment compensations are terminated.
 
Yes ... like you could keep your doctor and your plan

Irrelevant to the topic.

whether they exist or not is just trivial semantic wordplay.

We know the U3 exists, and we know that it's the official measure of unemployment. We also know that no measure of un- or underemployment puts the number anywhere close to 20%.
 
Except it hasn't been :shrug: The number of jobs created since the end of 2009 has dwarfed discouraged workers.
Nope ... the U4 has consistently been higher for the last 3 years or so ... couldn't happen unless there were more of them than jobs created.
 
Irrelevant to the topic.



We know the U3 exists, and we know that it's the official measure of unemployment. We also know that no measure of un- or underemployment puts the number anywhere close to 20%.


As you know, the point was the facility with which politicians and their supporters play with numbers and words.
 
Nope ... the U4 has consistently been higher for the last 3 years or so ... couldn't happen unless there were more of them than jobs created.
Umm.. No. The U4 is calculated by adding together those that are categorically unemployed and those who have dropped out of the labor market due to discouraging job prospects. It has also declined from a high of 10.5 percent in late 2009 to its current level of 7.2 percent.

Meanwhile the number of discouraged workers has declined by over 300 thousand since the end of 2009, while jobs have increased by 6.5 million, blowing a nice size hole in your previous claim.
 
Umm..
No. The U4 is calculated by adding together those that are categorically unemployed and those who have dropped out of the labor market due to discouraging job prospects.
It has also declined from a high of 10.5 percent in late 2009 to its current level of 7.2 percent.

Meanwhile the number of discouraged workers has declined by over 300 thousand since the end of 2009, while jobs have increased by 6.5 million, blowing a nice size hole in your previous claim.
That makes what I said true ... thank you.
 
you guys know the drill. the economy is (awesome!) (horrible!), and it is the (accomplishment) (failure) of (___________.)

The economy is ****....

Furthermore I don't understand what "adds jobs" means... Are those created jobs, filled jobs, potential jobs???

I can tell you right now that 3/4ths of the retail spaces at my local strip mall are vacant.

I can tell you right now that the majority of "businesses" that made it thus far are the corporations such as McDonalds, Walmart, Sears etc.... Hardly any small businesses exist anymore.

Of course Obama and the rest of the progressives expect everyone to just ignore that and believe what the paper tells us...

This economy is down right horrible..... As far as I'm concerned Obama and his administration are economic terrorists and narcissistic assholes.
 
That makes what I said true ... thank you.
Erm.. LOL? Your claim that those who have become discouraged outnumber those who have found employment by a 3 to 1 margin is plainly wrong. You also seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of exactly what these figures represent.
 
The reasoning would lie in the fact that the U-6 figures include roughly 10 million individuals who are employed, hence its obvious limitations as an unemployment rate.

Yeah, OK. I can see that.

I suppose you could use the U6 number if you wanted to measure those who 'wanted' a job or better job, but haven't found one.
 
Erm.. LOL? Your claim that those who have become discouraged outnumber those who have found employment by a 3 to 1 margin is plainly wrong. You also seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of exactly what these figures represent.
Review the posts ... the 3 to 1 comment was relevant to the U6 vs U3 topic ... U4 is higher than U3 which means job creation ain't keeping up.
If you insist the job creation number is doing well then there is nothing else to say.
 
Review the posts ... the 3 to 1 comment was relevant to the U6 vs U3 topic ... U4 is higher than U3 which means job creation ain't keeping up
It means nothing of the sort! The U4 is a combination of all unemployed and all discouraged. Quite literally the only way the U4 could be lower is if the number of discouraged workers dipped into the negative.
 
It means nothing of the sort! The U4 is a combination of all unemployed and all discouraged. Quite literally the only way the U4 could be lower is if the number of discouraged workers dipped into the negative.

Ahh, wouldn't it be nice if the number of discouraged workers were actually zero? *sigh* That's be very nice. Totally unrealistic, but it'd still be nice.
 
It means nothing of the sort! The U4 is a combination of all unemployed and all discouraged. Quite literally the only way the U4 could be lower is if the number of discouraged workers dipped into the negative.
•U4 : U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.
 
The problem is that progressives only understand "safety net" and "collectivism" - not individualism or personal financial responsibility.

In progressiveland the government exists to financially support you - and that breeds a **** ton of lazy clowns that don't know how to do a damn thing other than suck off the governments teat. This is why it's more logical to continue to accept unemployment and welfare rather than get a part time job - because the benefits exceed what a part time job can provide.. The problem is that the majority of available jobs are PART TIME - sadly but true (thanks Obamacare).
 
•U4 : U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.
Yes and? Still trying to wrap your head around the fact that the U4 quite literally cannot be lower than the U3? The U4 has steadily declined since the end of the recession, while employment has increased by over 6 million. Your claim was unfortunately centered around a fundamental error in your understanding of the data.
 
Yes and? Still trying to wrap your head around the fact that the U4 quite literally cannot be lower than the U3? The U4 has steadily declined since the end of the recession, while employment has increased by over 6 million. Your claim was unfortunately centered around a fundamental error in your understanding of the data.

You think the recession is over?

Everything you say is absolute bull****...

If everything you said was true than there would be JOBS and FULL MALLS and FULL MINI MALLS and a THRIVING ECONOMY where businesses are in business to hire and expand...

Your sunshine and rainbows bull**** is annoying...

Reality check - go outside!
 
Yes and? Still trying to wrap your head around the fact that the U4 quite literally cannot be lower than the U3? The U4 has steadily declined since the end of the recession, while employment has increased by over 6 million.
Your claim was unfortunately centered around a fundamental error in your understanding of the data
.

Nope ... the definition tells the story.
Your conclusion is simplistic ... faulty.
Your conclusion seems to be that as long as there are some jobs being created all is well since every other jobs classification measurement is holding steady ... they ain't, my brother.
Did you know that currently the Government considers you to be in the U3 group only if you've been looking for work in the last 4 weeks?
That should help disguise how crappy the unemployment really is and enable Administration supporters to keep the scam going.
 
Review the posts ... the 3 to 1 comment was relevant to the U6 vs U3 topic ... U4 is higher than U3 which means job creation ain't keeping up.
If you insist the job creation number is doing well then there is nothing else to say.

Businesses usually hire additional seasonal employees in December for the holidays. That 47,000 new hire number seems very low to me for a national count. It will be interesting to see the January figure.

Greetings, Bubba. :2wave:
 
Back
Top Bottom