• 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!

Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

:doh

Although I am happy for you that your circumstance is relatively well off, that doesn't comport with reality that most of the country is experiencing.
But it does actually. Only 6.7% of the people currently looking for work cannot find it. Are you telling me today is worse than in 2008 or 2009?
4 million registered Republicans stayed home and didn't vote.
I've looked and cannot find a source on this and have even seen several sources which say Democrats have more registered voters than Republicans. Please source it and don't use the George W. Bush argument. Thanks.
Regained every job? What planet do you live on?
This one:

The U.S. economy has reached a milestone: It has finally regained all the private-sector jobs it lost during the Great Recession.
US Finally Regains The Jobs Lost In The Recession : NPR

Are you going to deny facts now too?
Again, a perfect example of the distortions from the media and the left. When the recession began in December 2007
But the beginning of a recession is not the height of it. Your argument is utterly absurd.
 
I am curious why the article does not state how many jobless claims there were or new jobless claims.
That was all the rate 9 years ago:
U.S. unemployment rate rises to 5.8% in February - Mar. 7, 2003
Largely because the two figures are entirely disconnected from one another. The Bureau doesn't take into account the number of UI recipients when calculating the unemployment rate. The number of claims can be found here: http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm
 
How's the old saying go?....."Figures lie, and liars figure" or something like that....You want to buy blindly what is fed you go right ahead.
It's the most reliable measure of labor market health we have to rely on. That you wish to cast it as propaganda is simply a product of your partisanship. The integrity of the BLS hasn't been compromised, but rather called into question out of sheer desperation.
 
Again, a perfect example of the distortions from the media and the left. When the recession began in December 2007 there were 146 million working Americans. Are there more or less working today? How about it, Slyfox? You can get the answer at BLS.gov, not the DNC website

The Libbos will literally say anything to cover for Obama. Hell, they'd **** a snake, if they had to!
 
It's the most reliable measure of labor market health we have to rely on. That you wish to cast it as propaganda is simply a product of your partisanship. The integrity of the BLS hasn't been compromised, but rather called into question out of sheer desperation.
I always find it amusing those who simply disbelieve based on absolutely no evidence claim others are being blind.

"I don't like how the facts don't conform to what I want to believe, so the facts are obviously made up. Why can't you see that!?"
 
But it does actually. Only 6.7% of the people currently looking for work cannot find it. Are you telling me today is worse than in 2008 or 2009?

Yep. I don't think we are being told the truth.

a351 said:
It's the most reliable measure of labor market health we have to rely on. That you wish to cast it as propaganda is simply a product of your partisanship. The integrity of the BLS hasn't been compromised, but rather called into question out of sheer desperation.

Call it what you wish. I don't trust the numbers being spun to us on a daily basis...That you believe the meme without question is also a measure of willing partisan blindness.
 
I always find it amusing those who simply disbelieve based on absolutely no evidence claim others are being blind.

"I don't like how the facts don't conform to what I want to believe, so the facts are obviously made up. Why can't you see that!?"

No "evidence" would change the mind of a true believer.
 
But it does actually. Only 6.7% of the people currently looking for work cannot find it. Are you telling me today is worse than in 2008 or 2009?
I've looked and cannot find a source on this and have even seen several sources which say Democrats have more registered voters than Republicans. Please source it and don't use the George W. Bush argument. Thanks.
This one:


US Finally Regains The Jobs Lost In The Recession : NPR

Are you going to deny facts now too?
But the beginning of a recession is not the height of it. Your argument is utterly absurd.

Maybe you should learn how to use the internet.

Republican Turnout in 2012 Less than 2008 and 2004 | The Gateway Pundit
 
Yep. I don't think we are being told the truth.
We lost 7.9 million jobs in the Great Recession. Are you telling me you think non-partisan CBO is pretending 8 million jobs exist?

That you believe the meme without question is also a measure of willing partisan blindness.
It appears you're trying to tell us 8 million jobs being reported don't exist and you're talking about willing partisan blindness?
No "evidence" would change the mind of a true believer.
Which explains your position perfectly.
You say 4 million REGISTERED voters didn't vote. I saw that site, but it doesn't anything about REGISTERED voters, only that 3 million (not 4 million, your source incorrectly states Romney earned 57 million when he really earned 59 million votes) fewer people voted for Romney. It says nothing about registered voters, unless you're trying to tell me the Republican party didn't earn a single independent vote.

You're wrong. You're wrong about this and you were wrong about private sector jobs. Just admit it.

I know how to use the Internet just fine. I also know how to comprehend the data I read. Maybe you should learn both.
 
Last edited:
We lost 7.9 million jobs in the Great Recession. Are you telling me you think non-partisan CBO is pretending 8 million jobs exist?

It appears you're trying to tell us 8 million jobs being reported don't exist and you're talking about willing partisan blindness?
Which explains your position perfectly.

Uh huh....

"John Crudele at the New York Post has a report titled "Census ‘faked’ 2012 election jobs report."

The allegation is interesting. It claims that surveyors conducting the Household Survey — which is what establishes the unemployment rate — were pressured to fake surveys in order to fill in data gaps, when it was difficult to get adequate response rates on its surveys.

It also claims that instances of bad data being filled in is something that was going on back in 2010 — in other words, this is not a story about the infamous September 2012 jobs report. There's also no allegation here that there was pressure to manipulate the number up. The only claim is that there was pressure to fill in gaps where there was a shortfall in the number of survey respondents.

snip

The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.

Ironically, it was Labor’s demanding standards that left the door open to manipulation.

Labor requires Census to achieve a 90 percent success rate on its interviews — meaning it needed to reach 9 out of 10 households targeted and report back on their jobs status.

...

By making up survey results — and, essentially, creating people out of thin air and giving them jobs — Buckmon’s actions could have lowered the jobless rate.

Buckmon said he filled out surveys for people he couldn’t reach by phone or who didn’t answer their doors.

But, Buckmon says, he was never told how to answer the questions about whether these nonexistent people were employed or not, looking for work, or have given up."



Read more: New York Post Report On Household Survey - Business Insider
 
The economy has regained every private
sector job it lost in the recession of 2008 and the aftereffects of the recession. The deficit now is roughly half what it was projected to be before Obama stepped into office.

I'm not defending anything, I'm simply stating facts. Take them as you wish.

So you can't answer the question? Is it because you were wrong?


There's nothing more amusing to me than a team cheerleader who has to create their own reality.
Now you're just lying, because I know I've addressed that multiple times myself with you, as have others.

Wow !! I wish Obama would have told us that he planned on blowing through 6 Trillion in 5 years JUST to break even.

No net new jobs and a doubling of people on SNAP and disability with a 16 Percent increase in the poverty rate is whats actually factual.

People clearing out if Blue States by the Millions and heading to w

On top of that now people are having to contend with huge health insurance rate increases when they're already struggling to make ends meet.

I thought you people " cared " for the average working man.

No ?? Of-course you dont.

What you care about is defending, at all cost a corrupt political ideology.
 
Uh huh....

"John Crudele at the New York Post has a report titled "Census ‘faked’ 2012 election jobs report."

The allegation is interesting. It claims that surveyors conducting the Household Survey — which is what establishes the unemployment rate — were pressured to fake surveys in order to fill in data gaps, when it was difficult to get adequate response rates on its surveys.

It also claims that instances of bad data being filled in is something that was going on back in 2010 — in other words, this is not a story about the infamous September 2012 jobs report. There's also no allegation here that there was pressure to manipulate the number up. The only claim is that there was pressure to fill in gaps where there was a shortfall in the number of survey respondents.

snip

The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.

Ironically, it was Labor’s demanding standards that left the door open to manipulation.

Labor requires Census to achieve a 90 percent success rate on its interviews — meaning it needed to reach 9 out of 10 households targeted and report back on their jobs status.

...

By making up survey results — and, essentially, creating people out of thin air and giving them jobs — Buckmon’s actions could have lowered the jobless rate.

Buckmon said he filled out surveys for people he couldn’t reach by phone or who didn’t answer their doors.

But, Buckmon says, he was never told how to answer the questions about whether these nonexistent people were employed or not, looking for work, or have given up."



Read more: New York Post Report On Household Survey - Business Insider

But of course, Nixon’s henchmen did actually burgle the DNC. What Crudele has uncovered is not evidence—at all—of a political conspiracy—but a very minor story about a single Census employee filing fake household reports rather than doing the work of surveying the households.

It turns out that the single Census employee Crudele found faking reports—Julius Buckmon—hasn’t worked for the Census since 2011, when, presumably, he was fired. That news came from CNBC’s Steve Leisman, and it moots the thesis of Crudele’s entire column.


All he’s got after that is a single anonymous source saying the Census intentionally interfered with the election, and that doesn’t come close to cutting it, particularly since Crudele’s reporting in the rest of the piece is fatally flawed.


To make matters worse for the Post, Buckmon was just one of 7,000 Census workers submitting reports, meaning he couldn’t have meaningfully affected the unemployment rate one way or another had he actually been working for the Census in 2012. Crudele himself even wrote that Buckmon “was never told how to answer the questions about whether these nonexistent people were employed or not, looking for work, or have given up.”

A bogus NY Post piece sets off a frenzy : Columbia Journalism Review

The fact you're trying to tell me 8 million jobs don't exist and NO ONE has noticed says all I really need to know about how interested you are in the truth.
Wow !! I wish Obama would have told us that he planned on blowing through 6 Trillion in 5 years JUST to break even.
Wow! I wish you had told me you were going to do your usual tactic of moving the goalposts and posting irrelevant word forts.

Well, I guess I already knew that was going to happen. You're fairly predictable. By the way, are you ready to admit you were wrong?
 
Call it what you wish. I don't trust the numbers being spun to us on a daily basis...That you believe the meme without question is also a measure of willing partisan blindness.
Except my belief in their legitimacy doesn't hinge on the administration at the reigns. Your suspicions are based one exactly that :shrug:
 
monthly jobs report. rage or rejoice.

it is meh.

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more), at 3.7 million,
changed little in March.

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for adult women increased to 6.2
percent in March, and the rate for adult men decreased to 6.2 percent. The rates for
teenagers (20.9 percent), whites (5.8 percent), blacks (12.4 percent), and Hispanics
(7.9 percent) showed little or no change.

If you read the actual report there is nothing to jump for joy over.

Employment Situation Summary

basically everything stayed the same and there was not a net gain of anything.
 
Really? Sheer desperation is to point out a survey worker admitted to making up many of his results to fit an agenda? How is pointing out the facts sheer desperation? It would almost seem that someone willing to ignore the facts is showing signs of partisan desperation.

BTW thanks for the link on the unemployment apps...while they are different it also seems that our modern journalist is also different.


It's the most reliable measure of labor market health we have to rely on. That you wish to cast it as propaganda is simply a product of your partisanship. The integrity of the BLS hasn't been compromised, but rather called into question out of sheer desperation.
 
A bogus NY Post piece sets off a frenzy : Columbia Journalism Review

The fact you're trying to tell me 8 million jobs don't exist and NO ONE has noticed says all I really need to know about how interested you are in the truth.
Wow! I wish you had told me you were going to do your usual tactic of moving the goalposts and posting irrelevant word forts.

Well, I guess I already knew that was going to happen. You're fairly predictable. By the way, are you ready to admit you were wrong?

Yes, being honest about our economic situation is "moving the goal post ".
 
Except my belief in their legitimacy doesn't hinge on the administration at the reigns. Your suspicions are based one exactly that :shrug:

i agree i think the BLS is semi-legit in their unemployment reports. the fact is this report is still no big deal nothing changed.
 
So we had 320k new jobless claims? 192k new jobs. Doesn't that mean a net loss of 118,000 jobs? Yet there seems to be some euphoria among the left? Do they see this as 118k more dependent so that will vote for them or something? I'm just trying to get their euphoric rise out of continually bad news...even if the media ignores it
 
no need for a reelection. Obama, Bush, and Hillary Clinton will cross the Potomac and form a new triumvirate. when this happens, every job report will become good and bad at the same time, resulting in division by zero and the space time continuum shrinking back to pre-big bang size and density. then everything will begin again.

max out your credit cards.

This is more of that "wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey" stuff, isn't it.
 
Really? Sheer desperation is to point out a survey worker admitted to making up many of his results to fit an agenda?

Pure conjecture. Also curious is the fact that these discrepancies were not reflected or corrected in the subsequent revisions done by multiple other individuals. His anecdotal claim is just that and nothing more.
 
I am willing to vote along party lines, for the party that is willing to end our wars on abstractions, and get us into fusion in eight years or less.
 
Yes, being honest about our economic situation is "moving the goal post ".
It is when that's not what you originally said. And, to be honest, I've never associated the word "honest" with you.

You could change that though. All you have to do is admit you were wrong, which should be easy because we both know you were about SB190.

So we had 320k new jobless claims? 192k new jobs. Doesn't that mean a net loss of 118,000 jobs? Yet there seems to be some euphoria among the left? Do they see this as 118k more dependent so that will vote for them or something? I'm just trying to get their euphoric rise out of continually bad news...even if the media ignores it
It astounds me people still don't understand how the jobs report works. It's simple math:

Jobs added - jobs lost = Net jobs gained/loss

After adding all the jobs added and subtracting all the jobs loss, our economy has 192,000 more jobs than we did last month.
 
So we had 320k new jobless claims? 192k new jobs. Doesn't that mean a net loss of 118,000 jobs?

No, it does not. The headline figure from the BLS is in net form. To put it simply if those 320,000 people had just recently lost their positions (Which we do not know for sure, as the potential pool for UI recipients is in the millions) , than roughly 500,000 people found employment in the same month. It's also important to note that the total number of UI recipients has declined in the past year.
 
oops.

I am willing to vote along party lines, for the party that is willing to end our wars on abstractions, solve simple poverty, and get us into fusion in eight years or less.
 
Back
Top Bottom