Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I haven't looked at the raw numbers for many, many months now. I have no idea what they look like. But the two conventions have blathered on and on about jobs being lost and jobs being created. I don't honestly care which direction things are going, I just want the USA to get better than it is right now. I voted for Mr O and there's a big part of me that would like to see that decision vindicated rather than the tremendous regret I feel for my choice today. Romney did a fine job of blasting Obama every which way for his failure to create jobs. Mr Obama did an fine job of patting himself on the back for creating jobs. Both men can't be telling the truth.
So I'm going to post this thread. Then I'm going to go to the Department of Labor's website and see what they have for numbers. About the Stats in Question:
The Unemployment Rate has become an increasingly useless statistic because the numbers keep getting fiddled with and cleaned up to look better -- or worse -- than they really are. Labor Participation Rate the raw stat. No BS. No data manipulation. If you are homo sapien, a resident of the USA and have a pulse LPR counts you. Housewives who would rather be working. Retired elderly that would rather not start working.
EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rikoshaprl
No! The labor participation rate only considers employment age people 16 - 64.
People can say they added jobs but in order to reduce real unemployment, you have to create jobs faster than the population is increasing. So the truest measure = What percentage of working age Americans are currently employed? Is it increasing or decreasing? If the numbers have gone up since Mr O took office, then he's telling the truth. If they're trending upwards, at least he can claim an eleventh hour recovery going into the election.
Median household income is pretty straightforward too. Is the average American making more money or less money? If possible I'll find stats adjusted for inflation so we can see the real numbers. If Joe Blow was working as business executive in 2008 and he is currently flipping hamburgers for minimum wage, his income went down obviously. Just having a job isn't enough. Having a job with an income that actually supports a family is the real test. Has Mr Obama had a substantial positive impact on median household income? If he has, then mission accomplished and a job well done. If median household income has been shrinking then he's been failing.
So let's post this thing so I can go look up the numbers ...
Last edited by godofthunder9010; 09-07-2012 at 06:14 PM..
Okay, looks like the LPR is has dropped very single year that Barack Obama has been in office. So on job creation relative to the nation's population, Obama gets an F in job creation. No, 2012 has not been a year of recovery. And let's bear in mind that those numbers are people. With a 65.7% LPR when Obama took office and a current LPR of 63.5%. The USA has a population of 314 million, so Obama has presided over a net loss of 6.908 million jobs.
Guess that means the Obama is the one BS'ing us on the jobs stats. I guess that part of me that wanted vindication will just have to live with disappointment.
Obama almost has the job numbers back to even. And that is the problem. That still leaves tens of millions with out work. And for it to take over 3 1/2 years to get to that point, shows that whats been tried is not working and they are out of ideas. Technically, he is still at a net loss by a few hundred thousand. Sorry, that is just dismal. The amount of money they spent on "stimulus", the amount of money added to the debt, and its taking him over 3 1/2 years plus to get even.
We need to have government out of the way. Period. That is not going to happen with Obama. Confidence is not going to occur under Obama. We will not see a rapid pace of restoration to this country with him in office. It is possible, but not the way him and the Dems are going about it.
They said that we would be in the 5% unemployment range by this point in time with what they enacted. They arent just off, but waaaaaaay off. Sorry, but that sort of failure, that sort of inability to get things moving again at a better rate and restoring confidence just doesnt cut it. He has to be shown the door. That is what you do when someone fails to do their job. You fire them. You dont cheer about another speech. You dont cheer that poll numbers show he has a chance. You fire the guy. Another 4 years is not going to turn the country around. He has shown he is not up to the task, and that lack luster, repeat garbage of a speech, shows he doenst know what to do, except talk.
Couldn't find stats fixed for inflation so the above graph is worse than it looks because the buying power of one US dollar is smaller today than it was four years ago. But so be it, there's the raw numbers. Most of Obama's presidency has seen median household income falling off the proverbial cliff. Good to see it leveling off, but it's definitely still a net decrease ... bigger than it looks because of inflation. Okay so Obama's presidency is seeing some signs of life on this front, but rather than a bounce, they're getting a leveling off -- which isn't what they were hoping for no doubt. Obama gets a D+ for median household income.
If anyone has better stats, please post them. All I would ask is that you try to draw them from as unbiased of sources as possible. I couldn't find median household income on the bureau of labor's website for example.
I think a major driver of change in labor participation is the boomer retirements. They are accelerating rapidly. A large bulge of our population is moving out of the prime working years. And this has started since about 2008 or so. I am not sure how big this effect is, but it is not trivial.
I think a major driver of change in labor participation is the boomer retirements. They are accelerating rapidly. A large bulge of our population is moving out of the prime working years. And this has started since about 2008 or so. I am not sure how big this effect is, but it is not trivial.
No! The labor participation rate only considers employment age people 16 - 64.
I think a major driver of change in labor participation is the boomer retirements. They are accelerating rapidly. A large bulge of our population is moving out of the prime working years. And this has started since about 2008 or so. I am not sure how big this effect is, but it is not trivial.
There are always retirements. Perhaps some are retiring earlier than they wanted to due to the economy.
The I dont think that changes anything much. The fact of the matter is this President has not done his job well enough to deserve re-election. Not even close.
And people say well, we dont trust Romney and we dont know or like what hes going to do. Those same people wouldve said the same thing about Reagan, and they wouldve voted for Carter again. Thank God there were less dumb people back then or more people willing to realize that Carter failed and it was time to move on.
LOL, my mistake, thanks for the clarification. I'm sure I knew that at some point and it completely slipped my mind. So housewives, handicapped people, etc -- we expect those folks to be unemployed which is why numbers in the 65% range is not as big a deal as one might think. But to make the honest claim that "I created jobs and reduced unemployment" the LPR would need to actually be increasing and not decreasing.
LOL, my mistake, thanks for the clarification. I'm sure I knew that at some point and it completely slipped my mind. So housewives, handicapped people, etc -- we expect those folks to be unemployed which is why numbers in the 65% range is not as big a deal as one might think.
Still the difference between 67% and 64% is millions of unemployed people that are not being counted as unemployed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
