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.
One thing I would have done if I were in charge of the GOP is this: Instead of just giving a year extension on the payroll tax thingie with no strings, the GOP should have required that an additional 12 weeks of unemployment benefits be reauthorized for those whose 99 weeks have expired.
Once you added all those people back on the rolls for 2 months, even the government's number for UE would have been in the 9.5 - 10% range.
They could have exacted a political price from Barry while doing what the Democrats do best - demagoging an issue to help win an election instead of thinking about the long term consequences.
If you are talking about the House coming to an agreement today about extending that payroll tax cut, which I doubt many here know about yet, I will have to say that I see another reason for a new Speaker next year. Boehner is just giving in too easily every time these days.
Yes, you are right about what should have been done by the Republicans but as long as Boehner is doing the dealing these things won't change.
Not so fast. The Obama mantra is that the economy is heading in the right direction. An increase in the unemployment rate belies that assertion. And even if you assume no change that means the economy has stalled. It's not moving, much less in the right direction. But I guess Obama would spin this as another "speed bump" on the road to recovery. We've hit so many speed bumps in the past three years that the wheels are threatening to fall off.
An increase of 8.3 to 8.4% is not going to matter to anyone. An increase to 9-10% does. That is the way it is.
Obama inc. can tweak the numbers all they want but folks know reality. Remember the recession ended two years ago according to him. His army of stooges run out every time we don't LOSE as many jobs the last quarter and start screaming the economy is fine or they bray about how the GDP numbers are high until they are adjusted downward later and then for some reason the braying stops. All just bucket carriers for their leader. No common sense or sanity among most. They still actually believe in hope and change. They think Obama hasn't been lying to them for three years and everythign is Bush's fault. No wonder this guy can get elected with all the idiots running around this country fueled up on class warfare, white guilt and the new found entitlement attitude. Stalin would win by a landslide in today's Amerika.
I am trying to do as you say but when we are forced to use Obama appointees' numbers it doesn't seem really fair. Maybe Gallup has become a staunch supporter of the right. Could it be that they are the twisters of numbers and not the BLS? I think not.
Oh fer facks sake...the department of labor secretary is and always has been a political appointment -- that's not a power specially reserved for democratic presidents. Look, I know you don't want to accept the truth that even the Wall Street Journal now admits to be beyond dispute, which is that the economy is indeed recovering. I know you don't want to admit it, but you can either face reality or choose to live in a parallel universe.
If you are talking about the House coming to an agreement today about extending that payroll tax cut, which I doubt many here know about yet, I will have to say that I see another reason for a new Speaker next year. Boehner is just giving in too easily every time these days.
Yes, you are right about what should have been done by the Republicans but as long as Boehner is doing the dealing these things won't change.
By all means, make Cantor the speaker. See what happens. If you think the republitards are starting to pay a political price for their myopic agenda now, just wait until someone like Cantor or Blunt takes over. The democratic party will be using the GOP as toilet paper come election time. People are starting to figure them out now. Game's over. But by all means, I hope the GOP commandos continue to keep fighting the good fight and keep living in that alternate universe. Would be great for the rest of us to keep exposing the truth.
Clearly people are making a big deal out of this because Obama got a polling bump, probably due to this. So the real question is what the bump means. I don't think very much. He's up 5.7 vs. Romney (RCP avg). But how much does that mean before the general campaign when Romney (presumably) will have to define himself, especially with regard to economic policy? Not much.
Obama job approval is now 48, the high end of the 43-49 range where he has hovered since 2010. We still have the same high unemployment, high gov't check, low opportunity, low housing mkt.
Plus any bump he got from an 8.3 pct unemployment is going to be obliterated if gas goes to $5.00/gal, with food prices in tow.
Gee, who should we believe? The Obama administration, which claims 8.3% unemployment, or Gallup?
First, why are you getting news from Newsmax? Second, why don't you stop being lazy and go do some research on Gallup vs the usual unemployment indicators. Are they always different? What do economists think about the differences between them? Are they different for a reason?
First, why are you getting news from Newsmax? Second, why don't you stop being lazy and go do some research on Gallup vs the usual unemployment indicators. Are they always different? What do economists think about the differences between them? Are they different for a reason?
This is City DATA. Go get some.
Somebody is disturbed that there's an independent news outlet that isn't parroting the Obama administration's propaganda!
Sorry, irgnorance, not everyone blissfully regurgitates the pap that is spoonfed to them by the DNC and Obama.
First, why are you getting news from Newsmax? Second, why don't you stop being lazy and go do some research on Gallup vs the usual unemployment indicators. Are they always different? What do economists think about the differences between them? Are they different for a reason?
This is City DATA. Go get some.
It's interesting--I heard this Gallup report referenced on talk radio a couple days ago. Then googled to see if I could get more details. I could only find 1 news story on it, and that was from the Washington Times. Nothing about an interesting news bit from the NYT, WaPo, ABC, NBC, etc. Nothing. Maybe that's why people end up going to newsmax.
As I understand it the main difference between Gallup and BLS is that the BLS uses 'seasonal adjustment' whereas Gallup uses only raw numbers.
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.
