• 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!

AP-GfK Poll: Most expect GOP victory in November

Kobie said:
I think it's hilarious that you simultaneously accept and reject statistics from the same source.
Click to expand...

No that is not true. There is a big difference between u3 and u6
 
pinqy said:
I missed you showing any inaccuracies. All I've seen is your complete ignorance of labor force statistics.
Click to expand...

You mean you ignore the fact that U6 is more accurate that what you and Obama use
 
ptif219 said:
Depends what part you use. Obama and the government use deceptive figures
Click to expand...

You say that, but you falsely claimed only people reporting to state employment agencies were considered unemployed.
So we know you've been deceptive and wrong.
 
ptif219 said:
You mean you ignore the fact that U6 is more accurate that what you and Obama use
Click to expand...
They measure different things. Do you really think including people who have jobs, including some people who usually work full time is an accurate measure of how many people can't find any work? Do you really think including people who aren't trying to work is an accurate measure of how hard it is to find a job?
 
pinqy said:
You say that, but you falsely claimed only people reporting to state employment agencies were considered unemployed.
So we know you've been deceptive and wrong.
Click to expand...

Not for the unemployment figures the government uses. the U6 is never used in government reports. You like the deceptive figures that make Obama look not so bad. Remember the unemployment went down because people that stopped looking weren't counted. The U6 stays close to double the U3
 
pinqy said:
They measure different things. Do you really think including people who have jobs, including some people who usually work full time is an accurate measure of how many people can't find any work? Do you really think including people who aren't trying to work is an accurate measure of how hard it is to find a job?
Click to expand...

The people that are't trying to work have given up. When the economy gets better and jobs become available they will again work. You justify the lies and deceptions of the government
 
pinqy said:
What is "Not for the unemployment figures the government uses.?"

It's published in the same report as the U3!
Click to expand...

Which is a false figure. When it goes down because people stop looking not because people get jobs that shows it is false and deceptive
 
ptif219 said:
The people that are't trying to work have given up.
Click to expand...
That's not true. Most are retired, disabled, students, stay home spouses etc. Over 92% of those not looking for work don't want a job. Of those who say they do, most stopped looking for personal reasons, not "giving up."


When the economy gets better and jobs become available they will again work.
Click to expand...
Some, yes, which is why they are tracked. But you're saying that someone who Is not trying to work is the same as someone trying

If an employer has job openings, and 60 people apply, and 20 people in towww n aren't working but didn't know about the job and didn't apply, and 50 get hired, how many more people could the employer have hired if he had enough openings?
 
ptif219 said:
Which is a false figure. When it goes down because people stop looking not because people get jobs that shows it is false and deceptive
Click to expand...
The U6 also goes down when people stop looking.
And you didn't clarify what you meant about "not what the government uses."
 
pinqy said:
That's not true. Most are retired, disabled, students, stay home spouses etc. Over 92% of those not looking for work don't want a job. Of those who say they do, most stopped looking for personal reasons, not "giving up."



Some, yes, which is why they are tracked. But you're saying that someone who Is not trying to work is the same as someone trying

If an employer has job openings, and 60 people apply, and 20 people in towww n aren't working but didn't know about the job and didn't apply, and 50 get hired, how many more people could the employer have hired if he had enough openings?
Click to expand...

That is crap. Unemployment has dropped because people stopped looking More lies to falsely protect Obama

Unemployment Rate Down As Americans Give Up On Work - Forbes

Why are people leaving the workforce? - CBS News
 
pinqy said:
The U6 also goes down when people stop looking.
And you didn't clarify what you meant about "not what the government uses."
Click to expand...

The government uses U3 not U6 when they publicly claim what unemployment is which is running half of what U6 is
 
pinqy said:
That's not true. Most are retired, disabled, students, stay home spouses etc. Over 92% of those not looking for work don't want a job. Of those who say they do, most stopped looking for personal reasons, not "giving up."



Some, yes, which is why they are tracked. But you're saying that someone who Is not trying to work is the same as someone trying

If an employer has job openings, and 60 people apply, and 20 people in towww n aren't working but didn't know about the job and didn't apply, and 50 get hired, how many more people could the employer have hired if he had enough openings?
Click to expand...
You can invent all the plausible excuses you want, but the general feeling by most people and reported in the news is that the job picture is false and incomes are down. Obama job approval sucks because no one really believes the job numbers.
 
ptif219 said:
That is crap. Unemployment has dropped because people stopped looking
Click to expand...
But you still haven't articulated why people not trying to work should be considered unemployed, the same as people trying to work. And worse, you refuse to explain why some people not trying to work should not be counted and others should. The closest has been your claim that people "might" start looking one day, but that doesn't explain why they should be considered part of the labor market now.

Are you incapable of actually making an argument?


More lies to falsely protect Obama

Unemployment Rate Down As Americans Give Up On Work - Forbes

Why are people leaving the workforce? - CBS News[/QUOTE]
 
American said:
You can invent all the plausible excuses you want, but the general feeling by most people and reported in the news is that the job picture is false and incomes are down. Obama job approval sucks because no one really believes the job numbers.
Click to expand...

Real incomes are down. Starting to go back up. And the only people I've run across who think the job picture is false are those who don't understand the jobs numbers.
 
Slyfox696 said:
This country is made up of over 300 million people and nearly 3.8 million square miles. Only an idiot would think what is happening in their small corner of the country can be equally applied to the rest of the country.
. . . .
Click to expand...

Really? Isn't this one of the most uttered justifications to ObamaCare, that it worked, well sort of, in Massachusetts?

Bottom line here is that are aren't enough Americans working full time and that there are far too many Americans that would gladly have a full time well paying job, but can only find part time work, and that this is a direct result of the failed liberal policies of Obama and his administration.

The only reason that the unemployment number looks as low as it is, is because so many have exhausted their unemployment, and have given up. Not to mention that disability claims are at an all time high (probably where the unemployment benefit demand has shifted to).

Furthermore, these policies of Obama and this administration have retarded and weakened the recovery.

You can try and put lipstick on this pig, but it's not gonna make it look any better.
 
eohrnberger said:
The only reason that the unemployment number looks as low as it is, is because so many have exhausted their unemployment, and have given up.
Click to expand...
What do you think employment benefits have to do with anything?
 
pinqy said:
What do you think employment benefits have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

Nothing else in my post that you'd like to respond to?

As trotted out by the administration from time to time as some sort of claim of things being better and some sort of claim that the administration has succeeded, which they've not.
 
eohrnberger said:
Nothing else in my post that you'd like to respond to?

As trotted out by the administration from time to time as some sort of claim of things being better and some sort of claim that the administration has succeeded, which they've not.
Click to expand...

No, I was questioning your claim that "The only reason that the unemployment number looks as low as it is, is because so many have exhausted their unemployment" Why do you think exhausting benefits has anything to do with the unemployment numbers. The survey used for the unemployment rate doesn't even ask about benefits.
 
pinqy said:
No, I was questioning your claim that "The only reason that the unemployment number looks as low as it is, is because so many have exhausted their unemployment" Why do you think exhausting benefits has anything to do with the unemployment numbers. The survey used for the unemployment rate doesn't even ask about benefits.
Click to expand...

Once someone's unemployment benefits are exhausted, they are no longer counted as unemployed?

From what I can tell, it's a weird relabeling of the BLS reported unemployment number (actually drawing unemployment benefits), U3 if I recall, when a more realistic statistic is the U6 number, if I recall, which is all people looking for a job that don't have one. Perhaps little more than the usual government misleading statistics. You know what they say, liars, dam liars, and statistics (which can be made to read however you want them to).
 
eohrnberger said:
Once someone's unemployment benefits are exhausted, they are no longer counted as unemployed?
Click to expand...
That is untrue. The Unemployment level and rate has never ever been based on whether or not someone is eligible for or receiving UI benefits. It's not even asked about.

From what I can tell, it's a weird relabeling of the BLS reported unemployment number (actually drawing unemployment benefits), U3 if I recall, when a more realistic statistic is the U6 number, if I recall, which is all people looking for a job that don't have one. .
Click to expand...

Wrong on both counts. The official rate (U3) is Unemployed as a percent of the labor force, with unemployed defined as not working, able to start work, and actively looked for work in the previous 4 weeks. (those on temporary layoff are unemployed whether or not they've looked for work).

The U6 is unemployed plus marginally attached to the labor force plus those working part time for economic reasons divided by the labor force plus the marginally attached.

Marginally attached are those who are not working, able to start work, looked for work in the last 12 months but not the last 4 weeks (note that most stopped looking for work due to personal reasons, not "giving up")
Part time for economic reasons are those who want to and are available to work 35+ hours/week, but worked less than 34 hours due to slow business or inability to find full time work.

But let me get this straight...you felt comfortable criticizing the numbers even though you had no knowledge about how they were collected or calculated. Do you see why I find that odd?
 
pinqy said:
Real incomes are down. Starting to go back up. And the only people I've run across who think the job picture is false are those who don't understand the jobs numbers.
Click to expand...

You have nothing credible to show incomes are going back up, no one in the news has been saying it.
 
pinqy said:
That is untrue. The Unemployment level and rate has never ever been based on whether or not someone is eligible for or receiving UI benefits. It's not even asked about.



Wrong on both counts. The official rate (U3) is Unemployed as a percent of the labor force, with unemployed defined as not working, able to start work, and actively looked for work in the previous 4 weeks. (those on temporary layoff are unemployed whether or not they've looked for work).

The U6 is unemployed plus marginally attached to the labor force plus those working part time for economic reasons divided by the labor force plus the marginally attached.

Marginally attached are those who are not working, able to start work, looked for work in the last 12 months but not the last 4 weeks (note that most stopped looking for work due to personal reasons, not "giving up")
Part time for economic reasons are those who want to and are available to work 35+ hours/week, but worked less than 34 hours due to slow business or inability to find full time work.

But let me get this straight...you felt comfortable criticizing the numbers even though you had no knowledge about how they were collected or calculated. Do you see why I find that odd?
Click to expand...

If we look at the entire opening post
eohrnberger said:
Really? Isn't this one of the most uttered justifications to ObamaCare, that it worked, well sort of, in Massachusetts?

Bottom line here is that are aren't enough Americans working full time and that there are far too many Americans that would gladly have a full time well paying job, but can only find part time work, and that this is a direct result of the failed liberal policies of Obama and his administration.

The only reason that the unemployment number looks as low as it is, is because so many have exhausted their unemployment, and have given up. Not to mention that disability claims are at an all time high (probably where the unemployment benefit demand has shifted to).

Furthermore, these policies of Obama and this administration have retarded and weakened the recovery.

You can try and put lipstick on this pig, but it's not gonna make it look any better.
Click to expand...

We see more than just a criticism, or rather a distinct lack of trust, in the reported BLS numbers, but more so the observation and main point of the post being:

Bottom line here is that are aren't enough Americans working full time and that there are far too many Americans that would gladly have a full time well paying job, but can only find part time work, and that this is a direct result of the failed liberal policies of Obama and his administration.
Click to expand...

and

Furthermore, these policies of Obama and this administration have retarded and weakened the recovery.
Click to expand...

So OK, I may be off on some of the details of the BLS reporting, fine. However, I stand by my 2 main points, which I've highlighted for you above.
 
American said:
You have nothing credible to show incomes are going back up, no one in the news has been saying it.
Click to expand...

Real wages average weekly earnings
latest_numbers_CES0500000012_2004_2014_all_period_M09_data.gif


Real wages average hourly earnings
CES0500000013_674332_1414958518397.gif


Not, I'm not saying things are great, and I've made no comments on any government policies, just that there are signs of improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom