• 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 Added 162,000 Jobs in March, Most in 3 Years

162,000 jobs during a month...is not especially notable, especially since 15 million jobs were lost
Yes, exactly:
 

Attachments

  • Enormous Job Gain.jpg
    Enormous Job Gain.jpg
    16.2 KB · Views: 5
So you forecast a negative jobs report for April? In the tune of what?

I'm saying that in the best of circumstances, this is going to be 5-7 year recovery.

Obama needs to get government OUT of the way. If anything we know about government, it's that it doesn't know how to turn a profit, and it doesn't know anything about efficiency.
 
I take great joy in some of those on the right revealing themselves. "Good news? OH NO! We can't have good news with democrats in power. However can we spin this into something bad? We must have bad news so we can win more in November."
 
I made the graph myself. It is historical bls data. Feel free to make your own and prove me wrong.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

The scale is most certainly questionable.

If the "blip" you site is 162k+ looking to possess a slope <1/20. My question to you is, why does the downward slope (appear to be) <-5? It does not make sense mathematically.
 
Last edited:
Only a mindless idealogue would see the jobs announcment as 'good news'.

Hey...'good news!' The federal government just added another 3.5 trillion to the federal debt this year in social spending that we dont have!

****ing morons.
 
I take great joy in some of those on the right revealing themselves. "Good news? OH NO! We can't have good news with democrats in power. However can we spin this into something bad? We must have bad news so we can win more in November."
Do you honestly believe I'm spinning "bad news"? Really?

The job situation is what it is. I've posted the data. I take the position that we'll need several months of growth before we have anything truly significant and even then, we're going to have historic unemployment numbers come election time.

That's never good news for the party in power.
 
Ayyyyyyup. Thats pretty much my opinion too.

The thing is...we would be about 4 years into recovery right now if they had just let it do its thing...as it is..we keep artificially staving it off as if it isnt going to happen.

No, we would still be falling had they let it do it's thing. The damage to the housing sector was too severe. We would still be in the early stages of a depression had nothing been done. Not to say it still won't happen.

Interest rates should have been brought up to normal levels six to eight years ago and the housing bubble and it's collapse would never have happened.
 
Only a mindless idealogue would see the jobs announcment as 'good news'.

Hey...'good news!' The federal government just added another 3.5 trillion to the federal debt this year in social spending that we dont have!

****ing morons.

3.5 trillion? I did not know that. Do you have a link?
 
The bottom line based on the BLS survey, Fed's minutes, CEO survey, among a growing body of data is that the labor market has stabilized and may now be moving into the early stages of a resumption of growth. Some headwinds remain, but the macroeconomic growth is underway and such growth is now sufficient to increase prospects for net job creation.

Hence, barring new shocks, it is likely that positive job growth will likely become more persistent and more robust in coming months, though volatility will remain. Another negative month cannot be ruled out. If I had to venture a guess based on a combination of the macroeconomic situation, monetary policy outlook, and taking into consideration recent recessions, the three-month average for the next quarter (July-September) would probably amount to +170,000 to +220,000 jobs per month. Furthermore, the upside potential might be greater than the downside potential, especially if firms work more aggressively to rebuild their inventories. By then, temporary Census-related hiring won't be a factor.
 
Last edited:
No, we would still be falling had they let it do it's thing. The damage to the housing sector was too severe. We would still be in the early stages of a depression had nothing been done. Not to say it still won't happen.

Interest rates should have been brought up to normal levels six to eight years ago and the housing bubble and it's collapse would never have happened.

No? Assuming its not going to happen? Of course it is. It HAS to. The market HAS to collapse. Housing costs HAVE to come down to more reasonable and affordable realms and yes, homeowners are going to take a beating...for a while...on their property values. Regardless...it has little to do with interest rates. Once houses are affordable again people will begin buying again. New homes will be able to be built. The market will be reinvigorated. HAS to happen.
 
The scale is most certainly questionable.

If the "blip" you site is 162k+ looking to possess a slope <1/20. My question to you is, why does the downward slope (appear to be) <-5? It does not make sense mathematically.
Where do you get 1/20? The difference in slope is more like ~5 or 6 vs ~-20.
 
3.5 trillion? I did not know that. Do you have a link?

Im sure your google works as well as mine...We are deficit spending to the tune of 1.5 trillion...added to actual budget amounts. We are 13.5 trillion in debt and congress just raised the debt ceiling to allow for 15 trillion...gee...wonder why...

"Spending surged due to tax credits to individuals and businesses, part of a three-year budget stimulus plan launched in February 2009.

White House has warned the deficit for 2009-2010 to reach $1.555 trillion because of government spending to stimulate economic recovery."

"The new requirement comes with lots of exemptions, however, and it's telling that it's part of legislation to increase the nation's debt limit by $1.9 trillion, an adjustment that's necessary because budget deficits are expected to reach $1.56 trillion this fiscal year and $1.27 trillion next year.

The government will be able to borrow as much as $14.3 trillion, enough to pay its bills at least through this year. Without the new limit, that authority probably would have been exhausted later this month."


And dont think this is an anti democrat or anti-Obama statement. BOTH parties put us in that hole. And WE (anyone that has a JOB) are going to pay for it.

And thats what you call a BAD thing...
 
What data exactly is it though? What years/months, and what is the vertical scale?
Nov-07 to the latest jobs report (+162k). As I've already stated, data are jobs (from BLS). I believe gridlines indicate 1 million jobs.
 
Last edited:
Im sure your google works as well as mine...We are deficit spending to the tune of 1.5 trillion...added to actual budget amounts.

Um, what?

You have to add revenue as well as spending to get a total deficit.

We are 13.5 trillion in debt and congress just raised the debt ceiling to allow for 15 trillion...gee...wonder why...

Assuming that's correct, that is an additional...1.5 trillion. Not 3.5.

"Spending surged due to tax credits to individuals and businesses, part of a three-year budget stimulus plan launched in February 2009.

White House has warned the deficit for 2009-2010 to reach $1.555 trillion because of government spending to stimulate economic recovery."

Yes - 1.5 trillion. Which is not 3.5 trillion.

"The new requirement comes with lots of exemptions, however, and it's telling that it's part of legislation to increase the nation's debt limit by $1.9 trillion, an adjustment that's necessary because budget deficits are expected to reach $1.56 trillion this fiscal year and $1.27 trillion next year.

The government will be able to borrow as much as $14.3 trillion, enough to pay its bills at least through this year. Without the new limit, that authority probably would have been exhausted later this month."

Okay, so they are expected to reach 1.56 trillion. Not 3.5 trillion. And then 1.27 trillion NEXT YEAR. Also not 3.5 trillion.

And thats what you call a BAD thing...

Wildly overstating your case is also a bad thing.
 
Nov-07 to the latest jobs report (+162k). As I've already stated, data are jobs (from BLS). I believe gridlines indicate 1 million jobs.

So months?

The scale is 1 million jobs - is this 1 million added or subtracted from the previous month, or total jobs?

Does the scale start at zero, or above it?
 
Im sure your google works as well as mine...We are deficit spending to the tune of 1.5 trillion...added to actual budget amounts. We are 13.5 trillion in debt and congress just raised the debt ceiling to allow for 15 trillion...gee...wonder why...

"Spending surged due to tax credits to individuals and businesses, part of a three-year budget stimulus plan launched in February 2009.

White House has warned the deficit for 2009-2010 to reach $1.555 trillion because of government spending to stimulate economic recovery."

"The new requirement comes with lots of exemptions, however, and it's telling that it's part of legislation to increase the nation's debt limit by $1.9 trillion, an adjustment that's necessary because budget deficits are expected to reach $1.56 trillion this fiscal year and $1.27 trillion next year.

The government will be able to borrow as much as $14.3 trillion, enough to pay its bills at least through this year. Without the new limit, that authority probably would have been exhausted later this month."


And dont think this is an anti democrat or anti-Obama statement. BOTH parties put us in that hole. And WE (anyone that has a JOB) are going to pay for it.

And thats what you call a BAD thing...

Obamas budget is 10% more than Bush's. Could the lack of revenue caused by Bush's recession have created that deficit? Or was it Obamas tax cuts and credits that did it?
Were you equally outraged that Bush doubled the debt during his reign?
 
many of our biggest states are bankrupt, don't forget that

interest on the federal debt alone is soon to reach a tril

housing foreclosures are expected to increase by SIXTY PERCENT this year

it's costing megacorps an extra bil just to stay in business, not a single new hire

foreign holders are dumping us debt at record levels

unemployment app's for the week just increased by 4.5%

uncertainties, insecurities and doubts surround our new health care reality, our future energy policy...

and entrails reading economists sing of blue skies a-coming---LOL!
 
So months?
Yes, BLS reports monthly. We just received the March jobs report.

The scale is 1 million jobs - is this 1 million added or subtracted from the previous month, or total jobs?

Does the scale start at zero, or above it?
Does the scale start at zero? LOL I certainly hope not - we'd be in huge trouble if there were only a million jobs out there.

To answer the other question it can be either/or, the graph would look exactly the same.
 
obama's 2010 budget proposal increased discretionary spending by 13.1%

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget]2010 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
Do you honestly believe I'm spinning "bad news"? Really?

The job situation is what it is. I've posted the data. I take the position that we'll need several months of growth before we have anything truly significant and even then, we're going to have historic unemployment numbers come election time.

That's never good news for the party in power.

Yes you certainly are spinning. We went from losing 663k jobs 1 year ago, to gaining over 100k jobs(not counting the temp jobs). Close to an 800k difference. You don't miraculously go from bleeding 250k + jobs a month to gaining big numbers of jobs a month overnight, but the trend has been for the losses to slow, and now starting to gain jobs. That is good news.

Yes, unemployment is going to remain high for some time. Yes, we are not recovered from our economic troubles. But we are gaining ground, and trends are going the right way. To focus simply on the negative is pure spin, trying to control the message for political reasons.
 
Um, what?

You have to add revenue as well as spending to get a total deficit.



Assuming that's correct, that is an additional...1.5 trillion. Not 3.5.



Yes - 1.5 trillion. Which is not 3.5 trillion.

"The new requirement comes with lots of exemptions, however, and it's telling that it's part of legislation to increase the nation's debt limit by $1.9 trillion, an adjustment that's necessary because budget deficits are expected to reach $1.56 trillion this fiscal year and $1.27 trillion next year.

The government will be able to borrow as much as $14.3 trillion, enough to pay its bills at least through this year. Without the new limit, that authority probably would have been exhausted later this month."

Okay, so they are expected to reach 1.56 trillion. Not 3.5 trillion. And then 1.27 trillion NEXT YEAR. Also not 3.5 trillion.



Wildly overstating your case is also a bad thing.

When you spend 1.5 trillion MORE than what you already spend and have allocated...

ah..whats the use...liberal ideologues swallow anything thier messiah feeds them. I guess that 13.5 (soon to be 15) trillion dollars in debt is ALL republican doing...and doesnt matter. And truth be told...when you are an under or unemployed crippled dependent pet...it DOESNT...
 
Obamas budget is 10% more than Bush's. Could the lack of revenue caused by Bush's recession have created that deficit? Or was it Obamas tax cuts and credits that did it?
Were you equally outraged that Bush doubled the debt during his reign?

Hell yes I was...thats PRECISELY why I am a libertarian. Left the party in 2003. I am CONSISTENTLY critical of BOTH parties. Or have you missed that? My first posts on this thread pointed to 4 years of foolish spending with regard to the housing crisis. I dont CARE about the parties...I care that we keep spending ourselves into oblivion and eventually it will destroy us.
 
Back
Top Bottom