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.
You can stay bitter and angry and reminisce about the days when the country was collapsing under Dubya. The rest of us will take this good news and power forward and target more job gains.
How will you take this good news and power(?) forward? Do you employ workers?
-750k vs +200k (with continuous shedding of public sector jobs since 2010)?
Sure that's stagnant alright..
jetgraphics rocked your freaking world. I was being nice by saying stagnant. Your progress still sucks...
Smacking three dollar whor...
BigJon3475
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics
Unemployment “rate” versus Employment level
Unemployment percentage only represents the number of recipients versus the working population, not the level of employment. A drop in the ‘unemployment rate’ only reflects the change in number of recipients.
....
Though the trend shows a job gain since the low of 2009, there is a NET loss of 2,085 thousand jobs (2 million jobs) from 2008 to 2012.
The trend shows a 2 million per year increase in jobs (roughly), which if it continues, would take two more years (2014) to reach 2007 levels.
Note: this survey only shows quantity, not quality of employment.
U.S. population has grown by 1.2% per year, which when added into the computation, shows that job growth would have to exceed 2007 levels by at least 6% (8 million more).
Politics is a sport. Haven't you noticed it's Obama vs. Republicans and Obama's pitching a shutout. The republicans are trying all kinds of trick plays but none work. No matter what they do, Obama wins elections, wars are ending, unemployment is dropping, the Dow is off the charts and Obamacare will be taking effect. Those things mean more of us are winning becuase Obama keeps winning. Of course one of the Republican trick plays is to move Obama's goalpost depending on where he is on the field, unemployment drops but no those aren't the real numbers and on and on. It's just time to get beyond the game was my point. It's been an Obama blowout, time for the Republicans to go away and rebuild their team, and stop onside kicking. It's not working. They are wasting our time with all the tricks.
Wow... where to start.
First, the government isn't supposed to be a win/lose entity. The problem with the Dems is they believe that a one party government would be awesome. You know... unrestrained government.
Second, the DOW is off and running on monetary devaluation. You do know what that means, right? Stocks and Commodities are supposed to move in opposite directions, but because of devaluation they are both skyrocketing. If you thinnk this is a good thing, you better invest in some seeds and water.
Third, unemployment rates are not the same as the unemployed. If they were to count the unemployed, it would be 16%. It;s really easy to understand, if you try.
jetgraphics rocked your freaking world. I was being nice by saying stagnant. Your progress still sucks...
Smacking three dollar whor...
BigJon3475
Lol big lame Jon, I will repeat: going from losing thousands of jobs and now we have just crossed the 200k threshold which many economists agree is what we need to hit to lower the unemployment rate...but I wouldn't expect anyone cheering for America to fail and pining for Dubyas days of blowing the surplus, getting 4000+ US citizens killed, and crashing the economy to cheer this and hope for more
Politics is a sport. Haven't you noticed it's Obama vs. Republicans and Obama's pitching a shutout. The republicans are trying all kinds of trick plays but none work. No matter what they do, Obama wins elections, wars are ending, unemployment is dropping, the Dow is off the charts and Obamacare will be taking effect. Those things mean more of us are winning becuase Obama keeps winning. Of course one of the Republican trick plays is to move Obama's goalpost depending on where he is on the field, unemployment drops but no those aren't the real numbers and on and on. It's just time to get beyond the game was my point. It's been an Obama blowout, time for the Republicans to go away and rebuild their team, and stop onside kicking. It's not working. They are wasting our time with all the tricks.
Hows the value of your money holding up? Can you buy more or less stuff?
But until 2009 was limited to landlines so it wasn't popular.
Once it moved to cellphones in 2009 the number of applicants literally exploded exponentially.
A lot of that was due to FCC failure to regulate though and many got multiple plans by different carriers.
They are fixing that though and have gone through 23 states cancelling duplicate free cellphone plans.
They are also constructing a master database which each carrier now much check and deny a free cellphone if the person is already receiving a free cell phone from another carrier.
That lack of regulation ended up in cost soaring from $800 million in 2008 to $2.1 billion last year and projected to cost $3 billion by the end of this year.
The point is it wasn't Obama who initiated the "Obamaphones."
Quote:
Under Bill Clinton, the program was expanded, and in 2008 — at the behest of wireless carriers and on George W. Bush’s watch — the feds started offering free cellphones, too. The only requirement was that recipients be on Medicaid, food stamps or another state or federal welfare program.
...
So give credit to Obama now: When his FCC last year forced the carriers to verify that Lifeline users needed aid, it found the program was riddled with fraud and waste.
Apparently you don't understand business and did not read my post. You are correct the "last years" operating expenses including employees salaries have been met... Again, for the previous year. But what about the current year. Do you think the small business owner drain the company of all working capital down to $0.00 dollars. No, they can't. They have to leave some of that money in the company so the company can function in the current year. If the owner wants to grow the business they leave even more money in the company. When Obama demands more tax revenue from small companies he is decreasing their ability to grow the business and forcing the company to lower expenses elsewhere, usually that means employee wages or the number of employees because that is one expense the owner has control over.
Another lib who showed us once again that they don't have a clue to how business works.
Profit is revenue minus expenses for a given period. Saying that maybe last year's profit could be used to pay for employees next year is simply moving the goalposts to cover up your error. Previous years' (unspent) profit is not called profit, it's called cash on hand. Do people say "Apple has $200 billion of profit?" No, they say "Apple has $200 billion cash on hand." It's funny that you claim that I don't understand how business works when your ignorance of standard accounting terms is on full display.
Also cute that you think I'm a "lib." Why? Because I pointed out that you don't understand what "profit" means. You're really demonstrating some superior reasoning ability here. Simple minds tend to resort to ad hominem attacks when they have no argument, but you should really try harder not to resort to such disreputable tactics.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,550 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6033
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h
That's the part they conveniently leave out, as they pat themselves on the backs for a job marginally failed. These unemployment figures = that pig with lipstick on it.
The sad thing... people are posting like 7.8% is good.
Reagans 5th year 7.3% (after inheriting Carter's mess which led to 10+%)
Clintons 5th year 5.6%
GWB's 5th year 5.3%
Reagan
March 1, 1981 - Unemployment rate:7.4
March 1, 1985 - Unemployment rate:7.2
net unemployment -0.2
Bush41
March 1, 1989 - Unemployment rate: 5.0
March 1, 1993 - Unemployment rate:7.0
net unemployment +2.0
Clinton
March 1, 1993 - Unemployment rate:7.0
March 1, 1997 - Unemployment rate:5.2
net unemployment -1.8
Bush43
March 1, 2001 - Unemployment rate:4.3
March 1, 2005 - Unemployment rate:5.2
net unemployment +0.9
Obama
March 1, 2009 - Unemployment rate: 8.7
March 8, 2012 - Unemployment rate: 7.7
net unemployment -1.0
pretty sure that it is better that unemployment go down 1% than it is for it to go UP almost 1%
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.
