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.
The fact remains that the automobile industry is the ONLY industry whose current performance is really worth celebrating, proving even more irrefutably that the absurd 'cash for clunkers' program was yet another dumb and 100% unnecessary program idea signed by an economically illiterate President.
That EPI story showed the real unemployment rate of 9.6%, and the abysmal 142,000 net new jobs created is yet another stinging indictment of our most inept President ever and his equally clueless fellow Democrats.
I think that Colin Quinn has described Obama the best. He said he's been vilified by the right and worshipped by the left but he's just another president.
The problem with the article in it's cheerleading for Obama over Reagan is how dishonest they had to be to do it. They did things like not differentiating between high paying jobs and low paying jobs, not differentiating between part time work and full time work, including the economic stimulus in the deficit in order to say that Obama reduced the deficit when it is in fact 50% higher, etc. The article is a propaganda piece, not a serious economic analysis.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,543 posts, read 16,528,077 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
hmmmmmm..... the """unemployment rate""""
yet the size of the workforce has SHRUNK
thank the globalist fascist liberal policies have been killing the USA
In July 2007 there were 147,315,000 employed.
As of now, there are 147,104,000 employed.
In July 2007 123,219,000 Americans worked Full-Time.
As of now, there are 119,472,000 Americans employed Full-Time.
Uhm, to make this Fail even funnier, the number of Americans age 55+ looking for Part-Time work is 324,000.
On the other hand, 1.14 Million Americans 55+ are looking for Full-Time work.
liberal policies always kill the middleclass
President Obama took office in 2009, why are you using Labor force numbers from 2007 ?
I mean, its a flawed argument overall because labor force participation has been dropping for almost 14 years, but if you are going to make a flawed argument, you might as well start from the right date and not just some random year like 2007.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,543 posts, read 16,528,077 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
The peak of baby boomer births was 1957.
They won't turn 66-67 for another 7-8 years. Full retirement for them is between 66-67.
2023 is when you will see peak retirement.
The person you responded to said nothing about "peal", and you say Peak like that negates the post you were responding to and it doesnt. there were 44 million baby boomers were born Between 1946 and 1956, and only 32 million born in 1957 forward.
If they were all alive today, it means 11 million reached full retirement aka dropped out of the labor force as of 2014, which was the point of the post you were responding to.
I have noticed this arbitrary argument pattern with you, you seem to always take a topic slightly off subject to try to make yourself seem right, why is that ?????
the population has grown over 13 million, and yet barely a few million jobs added in 5 years...and a loss of full time jobs
the population has expanded by 13 million, and less people are working full time, yet you have a lower RATE???
look at the RAW NUMBERS...while 3 million more people are working since Obama took over...8 million LESS are working FULL TIME
This is again a false argument, births exceed job age. The population adding 13 million people doesnt mean we need 13 million more jobs.
in 1995( those turning 18 last year), there were 3.892 million people born, All those people wont go immediately into the job market. Many will go to college(66% of high school grads go to college), but in bigger contrast, there were 3.957 births in 2013
then there is the fact that old people retire from their jobs or step down to part time.
in 1943( these people turned 66 in 2009), 3.102 million people turned old enough to retire, 2.939 million in 2010, 2.858 in 2011, 3.411 in 2012, 3.817 in 2013, and 3.637 in this coming year.
My argument is simply, that the ratio of births to jobs needed is not 1:1 as you were claiming.
Never mind the fact that this entire post is you attacking President Obama for a recession that started before he even took office.
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.
