• 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. Added 266,000 Jobs in November; Unemployment at 3.5%

RabidAlpaca said:
Nope, you arbitrarily drew the line at Trump's inauguration so that the same results became magically amazing overnight.
Click to expand...

Nope. You drew the arbitrary line asking why these numbers on this job report are good while they wouldn't be good under Obama. I pointed out to you that these numbers wouldn't look good during a recovery because the need in a recovery to replace jobs lost during a recession. The recession lasted over 6 years under Obama, by far the longest in history, by a few years.

The Obama recovery ended in 2014 , and unemployment reached a respectable 5% and plateaued in later 2015. There is a marked improvement in that unemployment number beginning precisely when Trump took office that Obama had nothing to do with, and that noticeable improvement is present regardless of the version of unemployment you use (U-3, U-6, etc.)

Also, when at beyond-full employment, these kinds of job growth numbers create a competition in a market for labor resources which translates to higher YOY earnings as businesses are forced to pay more to land new employees, as seen in the rise in wages. And, again, the wage rise in a competitive market is different that wage rise during a recession where it is artificially inflated by the loss of low wage jobs pushing up the wage averages.

Look, you asked, and I am telling you. I'm sorry this is happening to you.
 
pinqy said:
The U.S. Population is approximately 330,000,000. 200,000 is a bit less than a tenth of a percent. I think he just got confused between .001 and .001%

But that doesn't explain why you would multiply 200,000 by a thousand. I don't know what you think that represents.
Click to expand...

Because he said 200K was "less than one thousandth of a percent."
 
Threegoofs said:
So your math is telling you that 2/3rds of the US population holds a part time job?

I’m beginning to understand why you accept absurd denier blogs do uncritically.
Click to expand...

No. My math tells me that you made a math error.
 
Last edited:
calamity said:
Yes, WalMart always staffs up before Christmas.
Click to expand...

Look at all those great jobs Obama created


Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12032194
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level - Part-Time for Economic Reasons, All Industries
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Hours at work: 1 to 34 hours
Reasons work not as scheduled: Economic reasons
Worker status/schedules: At work part time
Years: 2008 to 2019

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 4846 4902 4904 5220 5286 5540 5930 5851 6148 6690 7311 8029
2009 8046 8796 9145 8908 9113 9024 8891 9029 8847 8979 9114 9098
2010 8530 8936 9233 9178 8845 8577 8500 8800 9246 8837 8873 8935
2011 8470 8464 8645 8652 8576 8427 8281 8788 9166 8657 8447 8171
2012 8305 8238 7775 7913 8101 8072 8082 7974 8671 8203 8166 7943
2013 8151 8178 7722 7964 7937 8103 8099 7816 7764 7936 7718 7827
2014 7296 7299 7435 7509 7254 7422 7402 7177 7020 7025 6898 6856
2015 6808 6671 6629 6608 6628 6383 6249 6423 6043 5811 6174 6084
2016 5941 5978 6066 6006 6467 5748 5926 5995 5918 5971 5738 5621
2017 5753 5603 5455 5279 5234 5266 5281 5237 5179 4912 4866 4986
2018 4982 5115 4969 4952 4920 4736 4588 4368 4656 4630 4781 4657
2019 5147 4310 4499 4654 4355 4347 3984 4381 4350 4438
Click to expand...
 
Re: U.S. Adds 266,000 Jobs in November

Phys251 said:
If cons had gotten their way then we would have taken the Herbert Hoover approach. How well did Hoover solve the Great Depression? :lol:
Click to expand...

Cons did get their way, focus on the private sector, elimination of the Obama anti Growth EO's, tax and regulations cuts after Trump took office. What is it about liberalism that creates your kind of loyalty? You going to answer my question about that loyalty?
 
American said:
You couldn't back that up in your wildest dreams.
Click to expand...

Rather interesting isn't it how our "racist" President has established historic low unemployment for African Americans beating our first African American President by over 2%. Hope the radicals and anti Trump zealots enjoy the attached video. I see a lot of minority faces in this video and a lot of white faces making radical racial claims

WATCH VIDEO: Fake News Media Has Been Thunderstruck! | Republican News Watch
 
Conservative said:
Rather interesting isn't it how our "racist" President has established historic low unemployment for African Americans beating our first African American President by over 2%. Hope the radicals and anti Trump zealots enjoy the attached video. I see a lot of minority faces in this video and a lot of white faces making radical racial claims

WATCH VIDEO: Fake News Media Has Been Thunderstruck! | Republican News Watch
Click to expand...

Record deficits during a so-called booming economy. Almost looks like someone is buying their good press. :roll:
 
American said:
You couldn't back that up in your wildest dreams.
Click to expand...

It's clear to see by anyone not wearing partisan blinders. Don't believe me?

Just answer why deficits suddenly don't matter again.
 
calamity said:
Record deficits during a so-called booming economy. Almost looks like someone is buying their good press. :roll:
Click to expand...

Record deficits???? Where were you in 2009-2010-2011-2012? You seem to be clueless when it comes to reality and data, any idea what 7 interest rate hikes in 2017-2018 did to the deficits? Of course not as this is all about attacking Trump while showing your ignorance of data. Trump has been in office three years with two budgets, the 2018 and 2019. Seems that being civics challenged is another problem for you
 
calamity said:
It's clear to see by anyone not wearing partisan blinders. Don't believe me?

Just answer why deficits suddenly don't matter again.
Click to expand...

Why do I keep opening your stupid posts? I just have to break the habit.
 
calamity said:
Record deficits during a so-called booming economy. Almost looks like someone is buying their good press. :roll:
Click to expand...

I complained when Bush spent too much. You on the other hand, never complained in your entire life until Trump. <<<< Your **** is fake news.
 
Conservative said:
Trump sycophants? This coming from a so called Libertarian? Amazing the loyalty the left has for Obama and liberalism but didn't expect that from someone like you. I posted the official results and context which you want to ignore. The higher the GDP the lower the percentage change is going to be but that doesn't negate the dollar growth. Trillion dollar GDP growth is something Obama never generated in any year and that is exactly what Trump did in 2018 after growing GDP over 200 billion in 2017 reversing the Obama GDP dollar decline.

It is amazing how percentage change is relevant to the left when it relates to only the issues they believe benefits their ideology as actual dollar change doesn't matter. It does seem that you are caught in that liberal rut of believing percentages and ignoring actual data that matters like the number of actual people working part time for economic reasons, or the Actual gov't spending dollars as part of the Obama GDP growth, or the actual dollars added to the debt vs the percentage change.

Don't know what it is about liberalism but after spending 35 years in the private sector, being involved in yearly targets affected by context, I see the real problem with liberalism is lack of understanding of the data that really matters. People aren't percentages and the people got it, 4 million fewer voted for Obama in 2012 whereas 10 million more voted for Reagan with what was a similar recession. Obama lost the House in 10 and 12 then the Congress in 14-16. We shall see if that happens to Trump but no President in history has ever had an over 50% approval rating on the economy and lost re-election.

So why don't you tell me what those alternate facts are in that libertarian world in which you live?
Click to expand...

Trump is as authoritarian a president as we've ever had. He's certainly no libertarian, nor conservative.

an no matter how you spin it, the economy has been steadily growing since 2009 and Trump is not responsible for said growth.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Trump is as authoritarian a president as we've ever had. He's certainly no libertarian, nor conservative.

an no matter how you spin it, the economy has been steadily growing since 2009 and Trump is not responsible for said growth.
Click to expand...

Enjoy the video. It is obvious to me that you have no understanding of leadership nor apparently can explain how the economic results have been obtained. Pro growth economic policies including the tax cuts and regulation cuts along with the elimination of Obama anti growth EO's were entirely Trump with the support of a Republican Congress. Steady growth to you was meager at best and coming off what was called the worst recession in American history was a disaster

How do you explain the stock market reaction to the 2016 elections, a going away party for Obama?

WATCH VIDEO: Fake News Media Has Been Thunderstruck! | Republican News Watch
 
Oh good Lord, there's always a huge hiring jump to cover the Christmas shopping and shipping rushes. And many of those jobs are temporary.
 
Lursa said:
Oh good Lord, there's always a huge hiring jump to cover the Christmas shopping and shipping rushes. And many of those jobs are temporary.
Click to expand...

Then there have 6.5 million temporary jobs created since January 2017
 
Conservative said:
So tell us was the 18+k stock market on election day to 19k stock market a going away gift to Obama? How about the 28k stock market today? Trump obviously had nothing to do with that did he? No tax and regulation cuts allowing people to keep more of their income to spend and businesses more profit to grow. Interesting liberal logic on your part
Click to expand...

stock-market-performance-by-president-2019-12-09-macrotrends.jpg
Stock Market Performance by President

You lie because you have an agenda. The stock market did better under Obama.

jmotivator said:
Nope. You drew the arbitrary line asking why these numbers on this job report are good while they wouldn't be good under Obama. I pointed out to you that these numbers wouldn't look good during a recovery because the need in a recovery to replace jobs lost during a recession. The recession lasted over 6 years under Obama, by far the longest in history, by a few years.

The Obama recovery ended in 2014 , and unemployment reached a respectable 5% and plateaued in later 2015. There is a marked improvement in that unemployment number beginning precisely when Trump took office that Obama had nothing to do with, and that noticeable improvement is present regardless of the version of unemployment you use (U-3, U-6, etc.)

Also, when at beyond-full employment, these kinds of job growth numbers create a competition in a market for labor resources which translates to higher YOY earnings as businesses are forced to pay more to land new employees, as seen in the rise in wages. And, again, the wage rise in a competitive market is different that wage rise during a recession where it is artificially inflated by the loss of low wage jobs pushing up the wage averages.

Look, you asked, and I am telling you. I'm sorry this is happening to you.
Click to expand...

There is no economic metric you can point to where Trump is any bit better than most of the years under Obama. Which is why the only thing you guys point to is "record high stock market", which is true for almost every president in history. It's purely about your feelings. The entire economy turned on a dime in January 2017 when Trump was elected. Total nonsense.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
View attachment 67269605
Stock Market Performance by President

You lie because you have an agenda. The stock market did better under Obama.



There is no economic metric you can point to where Trump is any bit better than most of the years under Obama. Which is why the only thing you guys point to is "record high stock market", which is true for almost every president in history. It's purely about your feelings. The entire economy turned on a dime in January 2017 when Trump was elected. Total nonsense.
Click to expand...

Oh, give a fricken break you radicals. the stock market was over 14k in October 2007 and that was the target for Obama, not the targets you want to set and the targets created by the Democrats who controlled the Congress thus the purse strings and legislative process from January 2007 to January 2011. they wanted the WH more than doing the job for the American people thus setting up Obama so that people like you can claim success. He was a complete failure and that is reality. too bad actual reality is ignored by you
 
RabidAlpaca said:
View attachment 67269605
Stock Market Performance by President

You lie because you have an agenda. The stock market did better under Obama.



There is no economic metric you can point to where Trump is any bit better than most of the years under Obama. Which is why the only thing you guys point to is "record high stock market", which is true for almost every president in history. It's purely about your feelings. The entire economy turned on a dime in January 2017 when Trump was elected. Total nonsense.
Click to expand...

Sustaining growth past 10 years is much more difficult than building growth in a recession. If you do nothing at all, the market tends to grow again. We are at the 10 year mark now, this is the time when the economy is most likely to falter. It looks rather strong though.
 
Conservative said:
Oh, give a fricken break you radicals. the stock market was over 14k in October 2007 and that was the target for Obama, not the targets you want to set and the targets created by the Democrats who controlled the Congress thus the purse strings and legislative process from January 2007 to January 2011. they wanted the WH more than doing the job for the American people thus setting up Obama so that people like you can claim success. He was a complete failure and that is reality. too bad actual reality is ignored by you
Click to expand...

It was well under 14 in October 2007. It's always interesting how you don't care about the Republicans who crashed the market but only complain that "the recovery was too slow" when the market outperformed Trump's current performance by quite a bit. Over 21k when Obama left office.

OpportunityCost said:
Sustaining growth past 10 years is much more difficult than building growth in a recession. If you do nothing at all, the market tends to grow again. We are at the 10 year mark now, this is the time when the economy is most likely to falter. It looks rather strong though.
Click to expand...

Sure, I'd agree it is. But it's an objective fact that Obama had 8 consecutive years of solid growth and the conservatives complained simply because it was a Democrat. They pretend everything magically changed in January 2017, the economy changed on a dime and was suddenly good after sucking for so long.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
It was well under 14 in October 2007. It's always interesting how you don't care about the Republicans who crashed the market but only complain that "the recovery was too slow" when the market outperformed Trump's current performance by quite a bit. Over 21k when Obama left office.



Sure, I'd agree it is. But it's an objective fact that Obama had 8 consecutive years of solid growth and the conservatives complained simply because it was a Democrat. They pretend everything magically changed in January 2017, the economy changed on a dime and was suddenly good after sucking for so long.
Click to expand...

Interesting how you claim Republicans who didn't have any control in the Congress crashed the economy and how you ignore that the Democrats were just as responsible for the recession as Republicans. You have a very selective memory and actual data doesn't matter to you. You cannot seem to grasp that the "worst recession since the Great Depression" makes it easier for the economy to grow than a strong economy inherited and yet the Obama recovery was the worst in history. What does that say about his policies.

As for the stock market, jobs, unemployment the target will always be the record which at the time was 14.2k, 146 million employed. Obama left us with 18.2k and 152 million employed. There is absolutely nothing independent in your posts
 
Conservative said:
Interesting how you claim Republicans who didn't have any control in the Congress crashed the economy and how you ignore that the Democrats were just as responsible for the recession as Republicans. You have a very selective memory and actual data doesn't matter to you. You cannot seem to grasp that the "worst recession since the Great Depression" makes it easier for the economy to grow than a strong economy inherited and yet the Obama recovery was the worst in history. What does that say about his policies.

As for the stock market, jobs, unemployment the target will always be the record which at the time was 14.2k, 146 million employed. Obama left us with 18.2k and 152 million employed. There is absolutely nothing independent in your posts
Click to expand...

So then you give half of the credit for this "so much better economy" to the Democrats for their role in Congress? Just be honest, you're wearing rose colored goggles. It's also quite hilarious how you're making up nonsensical rules trying to cut off years of his presidency to make the growth seem less immense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom