Posted on 10/02/2009 5:40:51 AM PDT by Perdogg
I remember.
“The US economy shed 216,000 jobs in August, less than... the 225,000 loss economists were expecting, the Labor Department reported today.”
***
Does no one notice that 250,000 job losses is easily 0.25% of the total work force yet each time they come out and say Unemployment rate has risen just 0.10%, maybe?
So losing 1,000,000 jobs each four months raises unemployment only .4%?????
So when EVERY single job in America is gone, Unemployment will be at 40%?
Guess all the others are Union thugs and O thugs who “work” but don’t really work so ... we can’t count them?
Huh?
Do the math. Where is the government lying and cheating this time?
Did everyone hear also how they add a few 100,000 or so jobs back in each time cuz “small businesses PROBABLY created that many jobs this cycle, altho we don’t really know we’re just guessing”. !!!!!!!!
Huh?
I understand your thinking. I look at it as generational. Every so often, we get to learn the same lessons over again. Problem is, damage accrues in the meanwhile. I also believe in de-evolution. I think we’re getting worse as a culture on a steady basis. So that the next Reagan won’t be what the last one was, and so on. I believe the trendline is downward.
Thanks for posting that. 98-00 were good years.
++++++++++++++
Republican Congress had checked Clinton’s excesses for 4 years by then...some part of gridlock works well, when motion in government is toward socialism - like it has been with the Feds for 20 years and with the dim bulb party forever..
My point is to use the same numbers for comparison purposes. I thought I made that clear. I thought I thanked you already for posting the table.
Outsourcing is really working wonders for this economy.
Huck (post 72): “Either way, we should stick with one number for comparative purposes.”
Huck: My point is to use the same numbers for comparison purposes. I thought I made that clear.
++++++++++++++++++++
Sorry, I hadn’t seen your post 72, as I was on the bottom of the string..
I will however say, that under Obama that U6 rate has roughly doubled and it has been very bad since the Democrats took over 2/3 of the lawmaking function of the Feds.
We can also go back to the massive lack of oversight and blocking of accountability of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, though called for by Bush on many occasions (wow, wonder where the fringe media was on that??) to bring such, as to why the housing crisis and resulting bubble burst were so severe in Bush’s last year in office.
This is, of course, impossible, because 0bummer told us Unemployment would not exceed 8% if Porkulus passed.
No problem, SB. Just chewing the fat. The DEM controlled gubmint is a disaster. That much is clear. But the GOP did a bad job also. In a different way. I say the DEMs hurt us when they live up to their principles, the GOP hurts us when they don’t live up to theirs. Lately, I think we’ve gotten the old double whammy. In 06-07, when a lot of people saw all this stuff coming, nothing was done. It wasn’t a priority. I believe that’s because politicians, like their banker friends, don’t want to rain on the parade. As long as the music is still playing, they are happy to dance.
My point is that when GWB hit double digits in U6, I don’t think GOP supporters were touting the higher U6 number. It’s just silly. That’s my point.
+++++++++++++++
Well we’re making the comparisons here, and now, right?
And if you look at the averages under Bush and the averages under bammy - you see about a DOUBLING of that rate. We’ll see where we are in a year or two.
Apparently about every point of U3 (official rate) unemployment equals almost 2 points of the U6 un and underemployment rate.
So if Bush was at 4.5 to 5% UR most of his two terms, we know where that U6 rate was. And we see where it is with bammy so far.
Yeah, it’s good to compare apples to apples. And that goes with which party is in charge of Congress also. It’s instructive to know that the dim bulbs have been in charge of 100% of the Federal apparatus for a year and 2/3 of it for the past 3 years.
It would be silly not to point out those obvious differences or point out the good years in 1998 to 2000, without also giving some credit to the Republican Congress in charge at that time for its 5th and 6th straight years.
Mostly it was the tech boom though, and had nothing to do with either party. Once the tech boom crashed, so did everything else. They propped it up with a housing bubble, which helped GWB get through most of his term, but that crashed on his way out the door.
The debt situation seems to be the crux of all this, not politics. It's not just gubmint debt. Household and corporate debt is just as bad. I think of it as general cultural rot. We as a people are debt-ridden. We don't make stuff. We don't have national pride. We're reaping what we sow, and the parties merely reflect that.
I say the DEMs hurt us when they live up to their principles, the GOP hurts us when they dont live up to theirs.
+++++++++++++++
Agreed!
It’s not just gubmint debt. Household and corporate debt is just as bad. I think of it as general cultural rot. We as a people are debt-ridden. We don’t make stuff. We don’t have national pride. We’re reaping what we sow, and the parties merely reflect that.
++++++++++++
Yes right. I don’t think we need to continue down this path of de-evolution, as you put it.
Let’s take our country back!
Thanks .. that will help with some of my research. Going throuh gvt stats is slow and cumbersome, which I am certain is how they want it to be - discourage people from checking out what is going on.
I'd like to think we can take our country back, but from whom? Ourselves? There's 300 million people. How many of them have a clue? I'm very much the pessimist in this regard.
I think what we're seeing is people having to learn the hard way. And it's going to take some time.
The average hourly work week fell back to a record low of 33 in September. That figure is important because economists are looking for companies to add more hours for current workers before they hire new ones.
That last figure shows that there is room for businesses to grow at least 10-15% before they need to add any more employees to their companies. While this will increase the income of those employed, it will not do anything for those that are still looking.
Don't be surprised if Obama and our liberal Congress, mandates a 35 hour work week to spread the income around... using France as a model...
The opinion that I heard that Sarko and the French have of him applies to economics as well. Dangerously naive, yet to arrogant to learn anything.
That spells ignorant to me.
Obama music video - Anther day older and deeper in debt! - Merle Travis spoof (runs 1:58 minutes)
Send this to everyone on your e-mail list! ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.