To: rickmichaels
Interesting, but after 2009 the “improvement” was due to ignoring those who quit seeking employment.
I would rather see percent of employment shown.
2 posted on
10/22/2016 9:27:47 AM PDT by
budj
(beam me up, scotty...)
To: rickmichaels
It would be interesting to see that with the more accurate labor participation rate. I doubt we would see nearly as much recover during Obama's misadministration.
3 posted on
10/22/2016 9:28:24 AM PDT by
KarlInOhio
(" T'was the witch of November come stealin' " And who could the stealing Witch of November be? Hmm?)
To: rickmichaels
North Dakota was fairly light except for the two Indian reservations. Northern Maine was dark the entire period as the paper mills continued to close.
To: rickmichaels
Based on completely biased dept of labor statistics.
6 posted on
10/22/2016 9:47:56 AM PDT by
Kirkwood
(Zombie Hunter)
To: rickmichaels
Next time, he should show only 40 hour work weeks and not part time jobs.
9 posted on
10/22/2016 10:21:54 AM PDT by
bgill
(From the CDC site, "We don't know how people are infected with Ebola")
To: rickmichaels
11 posted on
10/22/2016 12:22:53 PM PDT by
tuwood
To: rickmichaels
all based on those that haven't quit looking for work and DROPPED OUT of the labor pool
12 posted on
10/22/2016 12:26:07 PM PDT by
Chode
(You Owe Them Nothing - Not Respect, Not Loyalty, Not Obedience, NOTHING! ich bin ein Deplorable...)
To: rickmichaels
That statistic is based on those on unemployment. There are millions who are not on unemployment and can not find work.
The map is bogus and a waste of time.
13 posted on
10/22/2016 3:30:00 PM PDT by
orinoco
(Orinoco)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson