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.
U.S. Labor Force Participation Rate Period: Nov 2011
Value Previously: 64.20%
Change From Previous: -0.31%
Value One Year Ago: 64.50%
Change From Year Ago: -0.78% US Labor Force Participation Rate Chart and Data
Me neither, but Obama's duping the liberals ...again.
And worse than that, they count part-time people as employed, which skews it even worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob
If you don't like the UE calculation that has been used for decades, choose one of the other 5 that may fit your bias better. Simple solution for you.
Used for decades?
Clinton is the one who changed it in 1994 to keep his re-election bid from falling into the crapper.
The only thing Carter did was eliminate the prison population. Reagan did nothing more than count the military as employed (instead of unemployed). Both presidents were justified in the changes they made, because those changes did not create a false picture of the jobs situation.
Clinton's changes cannot possibly be justified.
Are you suggesting a part-time employee making minimum wage to $12/hour earns as much as a full-time worker earning $18/hour?
$174/week equals $720/week?
Really? What kind of weird bizarre math is that? Obamath?
A decline in household income will have no bearing on the economy?
Okay, whatever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz
the numbers are from THE TREASURY
The Clinton Surplus was a MYTH...
carry on
Worse than that, he got the "surplus" by increasing the public debt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea
I agree. My sister, for one personal example, 'gave up' looking for work this past summer when she turned 60 years of age, and she filed for widow's insurance benefits (her husband died three years ago).
How the federal government knew that she gave up looking for a job is beyond me. She had never received or got unemployment benefits, or been on disability. She had been 'looking for work' (i.e., sending out resumes) and then stopped. I guess some 'sensor' knew that she had 'ceased to look for work'.
Um, the BLS conducts a telephone survey of 60,000 households on the 12th of every month.
Note that the BLS doesn't actually conduct the survey, rather they contract it out (probably to Gallup).
Based on the responses of those 60,000 households, the BLS applies its idiotic Birth/Death Model and then comes up with a magical figure.
ADP bases its reports on payroll data it collects from employers, since ADP is a major out-source firm (that is to say companies outsource their payroll to ADP).
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
So only 64% of America is participating in the labor market while the other 36% sit home and watch Reality TV ? Are those 36% the 1% that we want to tax to death ?
Exactly. The average unemployment rate under G.W. Bush was lower than average unemployment rate for the '70s, '80s and '90s.
It was also the worst 8-year period of job growth among those decades, so much so that only 3.98 million jobs were created in first seven years (leaving the last year when the country lost 4.6 million jobs out). What good is low UE when job growth is THAT pathetic? Isn't that the argument being made with this drop in UE?
It was also the worst 8-year period of job growth among those decades, so much so that only 3.98 million jobs were created in first seven years (leaving the last year when the country lost 4.6 million jobs out). What good is low UE when job growth is THAT pathetic? Isn't that the argument being made with this drop in UE?
During a period of the Bush presidency, over 95% of the workforce had a job. Compare that to now!
False comparison since UE calculations got changed in 1994.
52 consecutive months of job growth under Bush. And there was one quarter, in 2004, when the GDP grew by over 7%... the largest growth since one quarter in 1984.
Economy Creates 120,000 Jobs, Rate Tumbles to 8.6%
The "experts" were "expecting" over 200K jobs, but what does that matter when obama's minions can fudge the UE rate to make it SEEM like really good news?
Does that justify 4/10th knocked off the UE rate? I don't think so.
So it seems obama WILL somehow, miraculously get that UE rate down, by hook or crook, by any means necessary.
Will our leader count the 100,000 postal employees reported to lost their jobs when the Post Office has to make its cuts? I wonder if they will count those people as unemployed so soon after going below 9.1%.
During a period of the Bush presidency, over 95% of the workforce had a job. Compare that to now!
How is that logically possible when only 3.9 million jobs were created (that is before 8.8 million were lost) when civilian labor force grew by 10.3 million? It ain't a secret either that the economy was struggling big time to add jobs... it wasn't until late 2003 that we finally saw jobs being added.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
52 consecutive months of job growth under Bush.
And at a pathetic pace of 47K jobs per month, even when labor force grew at three times the pace. Low UE? For the very same reason that we just saw a drop in UE. That low UE rate was presenting a rosier picture than the reality, just like the half percentage job this month is. Anything else is pure and simple... denial.
Sure, there was 52 consecutive months of job growth under Bush's 96 months in office, adding 3.9 million in first 84 and losing 4.6 million in last 12. Now we have 21 consecutive months of job growth under Obama's 34 months... if those were great times...
It really doesn't matter. But do remember that this economic downturn happened under Bush's watch.
Quote:
2001
April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)
2002
May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)
2003
February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.
September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)
October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)
November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)
2004
February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue." At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages. I don't think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there." ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)
June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)
2005
April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)
2007
August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)
August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)
December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)
2008
February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years." (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)
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.
