Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-02-2010, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,054 posts, read 18,291,205 times
Reputation: 3826

Advertisements

Hope and change...

Job losses return for first time in 2010 - Jul. 2, 2010
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-02-2010, 07:46 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,878,379 times
Reputation: 2519
Some moron should be along shortly to crow about how the unemployment rate actually fell....LOL

I noticed in the link that the figures for May were revised...were they revised up or down???????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 07:52 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,496,494 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
Some moron should be along shortly to crow about how the unemployment rate actually fell....LOL

I noticed in the link that the figures for May were revised...were they revised up or down???????
oh, oh, oh,,,,can I be the moron...can I...please

Total nonfarm payroll employment fell by 125,000 in June as the government laid off 225,000 temporary census workers.

The decline was roughly in line with expectations. The median forecast in a Bloomberg News survey was for a decline of 130,000.


See full article from DailyFinance: Non-Farm Payrolls Fell 125,000 in June on Census Worker Lay-Offs - DailyFinance (http://srph.it/d1VnIS - broken link)


Unemployment fell slightly to 9.5%, or 14. 6 million people, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said on its website. That's because many unemployed have given up their search for jobs, and people in that category aren't included in the official unemployment rate.

See full article from DailyFinance: Non-Farm Payrolls Fell 125,000 in June on Census Worker Lay-Offs - DailyFinance (http://srph.it/d1VnIS - broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 07:55 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,054 posts, read 18,291,205 times
Reputation: 3826
(in before the Obama whiners make baseless accusations that posters in this thread want the economy to suffer)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 08:00 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,863,405 times
Reputation: 4585
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
oh, oh, oh,,,,can I be the moron...can I...please

Total nonfarm payroll employment fell by 125,000 in June as the government laid off 225,000 temporary census workers.

The decline was roughly in line with expectations. The median forecast in a Bloomberg News survey was for a decline of 130,000.


See full article from DailyFinance: Non-Farm Payrolls Fell 125,000 in June on Census Worker Lay-Offs - DailyFinance (http://srph.it/d1VnIS - broken link)


Unemployment fell slightly to 9.5%, or 14. 6 million people, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said on its website. That's because many unemployed have given up their search for jobs, and people in that category aren't included in the official unemployment rate.

See full article from DailyFinance: Non-Farm Payrolls Fell 125,000 in June on Census Worker Lay-Offs - DailyFinance (http://srph.it/d1VnIS - broken link)
It's funny isn't it. Those Census jobs were phony jobs according to some, now that they are over, they have become real jobs. The way I read it, exclude the Census workers, last month gained 41,000 non-farm, this month gained 100,000 non-farm. Certainly not great, but still preferable to losing 700,000. Growth is not as rapid as we would like, but it is growth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 08:06 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,134,648 times
Reputation: 9409
Like anyone else, I want the economy to recover yesterday. But i'd also like to hear a bit of acknowledgement of the piiss poor performance of congressional Democrats from those on the left who are quick to blame the Bush Administration for the current state of affairs. Democrats have held the majority in both chambers since late 2006, when the recession began, and Barack Obama has been in office for about 18 months. By my calculation, that's ~4 years of opportunity for Democrats to right this ship. So, what gives? Is Bush to blame for the economy, or are Democrats to blame for their inability to fix it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 08:08 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,054 posts, read 18,291,205 times
Reputation: 3826
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
It's funny isn't it. Those Census jobs were phony jobs according to some, now that they are over, they have become real jobs. The way I read it, exclude the Census workers, last month gained 41,000 non-farm, this month gained 100,000 non-farm. Certainly not great, but still preferable to losing 700,000. Growth is not as rapid as we would like, but it is growth.
Since they weren't excluded by the cheerleaders when the country showed "job growth", they can't be excluded now. Can't have it both ways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 08:14 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,863,405 times
Reputation: 4585
Quote:
Originally Posted by summers73 View Post
Since they weren't excluded by the cheerleaders when the country showed "job growth", they can't be excluded now. Can't have it both ways.
Uhh, the 41,000 was excluding them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 08:21 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,054 posts, read 18,291,205 times
Reputation: 3826
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
Uhh, the 41,000 was excluding them.
You are correct, my bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 08:29 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,878,379 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by summers73 View Post
Since they weren't excluded by the cheerleaders when the country showed "job growth", they can't be excluded now. Can't have it both ways.
Of course the rah rahs can...logic and facts aren't their strongpoint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:13 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top