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.
Just when liberals were cheering the anemic employment numbers for September (142,000- we need 180,000 to 200,000 to "break even" with new potential employees entering the market), the real numbers showing the disaster of the Obama economy were revealed.
You are not to read past the headline of the article, or the title created by the OP.
It is considered rude to apply any type of 'critical thinking', or to mouth such things as "But the Baby Boomers are now retiring at a rate of 300,000 per month, so why are they included in the number", or "But women in the USA are giving birth at a rate of 1.89, or below the rate needed for the population to increase'.
I shall join Hawkeye in condemning President Obama for people retiring, or women not giving birth at a sustainable rate. Ah! If only Senator McCain had been elected, or that other guy (I forget his name) in 2012, then you would have seen some vastly different numbers!
LoL, so if you are retired and disabled now...you are considered unemployed?
Talk about just making up numbers.
That would have required their conservative readers to read the last two paragraphs and we all know the Cons only read the headline and the first paragraph, so retired people are all Obama's fault in the eyes of the Cons.
Did you read the article or just the headline? It tells you the truth in the numbers at the end of the article.
I wonder if the 3 of the 5 read the article and deflected?
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.