Unemployment Falls To 7.8% After 43 Months of 8% or Higher

05 Oct 2012 09:02 #11 by LadyJazzer
rofllol :lol:

Sux to be you, don't it... Yeah, it must be "something fishy"... 7.8%, 873,000 new jobs last month... They must have cooked the books... rofllol :lol:

Another talking-point on shaky ground... Is it where we'd like it to be? No. Would we like to see it lower? Yep.

Yeah, we really want to go back to Bush policies of the previous administration that put us in the tank.

Only the TeaPublicans could be outraged and upset that the economy is improving. They'd much rather see it in the tank since it's more important, politically, to be bad instead of improving for the American people. Thanks for showing your true colors again... (Poor Mitch McConnell must be apoplectic this morning...)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 09:16 #12 by BearMtnHIB

Only the TeaPublicans could be outraged and upset that the economy is improving. They'd much rather see it in the tank since it's more important, politically, to be bad instead of improving for the American people.

Don't worry LJ- most of us know the economy will really start improving as soon as we elect Romney.

Getting this communist out of the white house will do wonders for the job market.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 09:19 #13 by LadyJazzer
:lol:

Yeah... All we need is Gov Mitt-Flop in there, trying to run away from all of his teabagger rhetoric in the primaries... Sending jobs overseas, hiding his money offshore, telling 47% of the public that they are "takers" and "moochers"...

:lol:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 09:49 #14 by lionshead2010

Democracy4Sale wrote: rofllol :lol:

Sux to be you, don't it... Yeah, it must be "something fishy"... 7.8%, 873,000 new jobs last month... They must have cooked the books... rofllol :lol:

Another talking-point on shaky ground... Is it where we'd like it to be? No. Would we like to see it lower? Yep.

Yeah, we really want to go back to Bush policies of the previous administration that put us in the tank.

Only the TeaPublicans could be outraged and upset that the economy is improving. They'd much rather see it in the tank since it's more important, politically, to be bad instead of improving for the American people. Thanks for showing your true colors again... (Poor Mitch McConnell must be apoplectic this morning...)


There is no outrage for me...only disbelief. If I actually thought the numbers were legitimate and accurate I'd be very happy as I have close friends and relatives who are suffering due to a crappy job market.

My disbelief lies with the fact that the Admininstration would provide numbers that are clearly "cooked" for the purpose of winning an election.

I'm also amazed that in this time of suffering as a nation the key focus of the numbers (good or bad) would be how they are going to help one candidate or another get re-elected or elected. Sounds like politics and not caring. If it was about "care" then none of the articles would mention how "good" the numbers are for Mr. Obama's re-election bid.

Can you see the difference or is this stuff going over your head? For a party that claims to "care" so much about the American people I'm just not seeing the empathy. You don't walk the talk and that makes me question the sincerity of your convictions. IMO.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 10:10 - 05 Oct 2012 10:13 #15 by LOL
For anyone interested in an explanation of the UE number, here is the BLS response. Sounds like they need to tweak their "seasonal adjustment factor" It will no doubt be corrected in sometime in November, LOL :)

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-575 ... onspiracy/

Haugen explained that one factor that likely led to the 0.3 percent drop in this month's unemployment is the fact that people in the 20-24 age group (including college students and people who are often working temporary summer jobs) left the job market this summer earlier than expected.

"In August you had an unusually large decline in employment" among that demographic, he said. Because the BLS does seasonal adjustments for its data, it was primed for a big decline in September, when young people have traditionally left the work force. What happened was there was a big decline in August and not a decline in September.


If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2

Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 10:11 #16 by LadyJazzer

lionshead2010 wrote: For a party that claims to "care" so much about the American people I'm just not seeing the empathy.


Yeah, I know what you mean....

[youtube:24ntyvh6]
[/youtube:24ntyvh6]

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 10:13 #17 by LadyJazzer

LOL wrote: For anyone interested in an explanation of the UE number, here is the BLS response. Sounds like they need to tweak their "seasonal adjustment factor" It will no doubt be corrected in November


Yeah, October 5th is the perfect time for "seasonal adjustments"... (Pssst...The "season" doesn't start until November...)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 10:14 - 05 Oct 2012 10:19 #18 by LOL
Maybe you should read the BLS article I linked before you make an uninformed incorrect comment. LOL They are referring to the summer season.

If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2

Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 10:14 - 05 Oct 2012 10:23 #19 by lionshead2010
Remarkably, some fairly astute business people are amazed by this remarkable "recovery" in the jobs numbers. So it's not just the little people seeing this anomaly.

Jack Welch tweets conspiracy theory over better-than-expected jobs number
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/20 ... bs-number/

Friday’s better-than-expected jobs report sparked stock futures and conspiracy theories.

The jobs report also prompted a tweet from former General Electric boss Jack Welch, who appeared to accuse the Obama administration of cooking the books:

"Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can't debate so change numbers."


I don't know. It walks like a duck. It quacks like a duck. It even swims like a duck. A remarkable coincidence that it isn't a duck to me. What would a guy like Mr. Welsh know about such things as job numbers? I bet he was NEVER a community organizer.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Oct 2012 10:17 #20 by FredHayek

Democracy4Sale wrote: rofllol :lol:

Sux to be you, don't it... Yeah, it must be "something fishy"... 7.8%, 873,000 new jobs last month... They must have cooked the books... rofllol :lol:

Another talking-point on shaky ground... Is it where we'd like it to be? No. Would we like to see it lower? Yep.

Yeah, we really want to go back to Bush policies of the previous administration that put us in the tank.

Only the TeaPublicans could be outraged and upset that the economy is improving. They'd much rather see it in the tank since it's more important, politically, to be bad instead of improving for the American people. Thanks for showing your true colors again... (Poor Mitch McConnell must be apoplectic this morning...)

Only a irrational Obama supporter would be excited about 7.8% after 43 years of massive unemployment. Too little, too late.

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.167 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+