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 03-05-2011, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Sarasota FL
6,864 posts, read 12,078,177 times
Reputation: 6744

Advertisements

Easiest way to get unemployed % below 8%, 7% or even 6%. Stop passing benefit extention laws. This way when the benefits stop, the unemployed will no longer be counted as being 'unemployed'. But to make this scam work, they would also have to delete the U6 % since that shows people that are no longer looking for work or are under employed. The U6% is currently at a nasty 17%
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2011, 02:55 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post


Net jobs have been being created for well over a year now.



Ken
Um.. net jobs are reported MONTHLY, not yearly.. so your statement of net jobs being created for well over a year now, would indicate that well OVER a year would mean that monthly for OVER a year were positive.. Clearly they were not only not positive every month, but NUMEROUS months they were not..

Your non stop trying to spin this into you mean a subtotal of a year, and not monthly "for well over a year" is pathetic.. Just let it rest.. You were wrong.. Any fool knows reports are MONTHLY.. so claiming a YEARLY total is rather ridiculous, especially considering the negative trend for months in a row before the GOP took over Congress is very well recorded...

You've been discussing MONTHLY totals through this WHOLE thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
Net: 151,000 in December, 63,000 in January and 192,00 in February - that gives a total of net gain of 406,000 - which is a LOT better than any 3 month period in the last 3 years or so.
Now you want me to believe that you magically switched to mean a year when you didnt.. You were again.. Wrong.. you dont get to talk about monthly and pretend you meant yearly... Or did someone not tell you that December, January, and February were MONTHS.. not years
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 05:36 PM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
20,460 posts, read 26,330,678 times
Reputation: 7627
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Um.. net jobs are reported MONTHLY, not yearly.. so your statement of net jobs being created for well over a year now, would indicate that well OVER a year would mean that monthly for OVER a year were positive.. Clearly they were not only not positive every month, but NUMEROUS months they were not..

Your non stop trying to spin this into you mean a subtotal of a year, and not monthly "for well over a year" is pathetic.. Just let it rest.. You were wrong.. Any fool knows reports are MONTHLY.. so claiming a YEARLY total is rather ridiculous, especially considering the negative trend for months in a row before the GOP took over Congress is very well recorded...

You've been discussing MONTHLY totals through this WHOLE thread

Now you want me to believe that you magically switched to mean a year when you didnt.. You were again.. Wrong.. you dont get to talk about monthly and pretend you meant yearly... Or did someone not tell you that December, January, and February were MONTHS.. not years
When I MENTION a MONTH and a jobs number I think ANYONE with even HALF a BRAIN can understand I'm talking about a MONTHLY number. When I MENTION the word "YEAR" and don't even mention the word "MONTH" or the NAME of a MONTH, I think MOST PEOPLE are smart enough to understand I'm talking about the YEAR.

If YOU can't understand that then...
well, draw your OWN conclusions.



Ken
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 07:24 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,642 posts, read 26,378,527 times
Reputation: 12648
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
There are still people who want to believe the Repub efforts to stop job growth are working, when clearly they are not.




Job growth?

Pretty loose use of that term, isn't it?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W977W0Pmxc4
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:51 AM
 
Location: Southeast
4,301 posts, read 7,033,943 times
Reputation: 1464
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
As I said, the last year showed a NET job gain - a GAIN of over 1.2 MILLION new jobs.
Under Reagan the economy added that many jobs.. In a single month!!

During 1983 the economy added 3.5 million jobs.
For 1984, nearly 4 million jobs were added.

(This was nearly 30 years ago when the US population and workforce was much smaller, making the gains that much more impressive.)

And actually your math is wrong, 2010 did not even break the 1 million mark, it was 940k.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:55 AM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,893 posts, read 18,444,477 times
Reputation: 6465
Actual facts, i know personally 3 people fired from their jobs, supervisor jobs, manangement jobs, and a salesperson job. Two in the E.C. one out here. Sad thing is these are people who have been on their jobs for over 10 years, that is a long time. On person 20 years in management, now gone. I don't see this as fair, just to save a freaking buck, but this is what is happening. They gave these jobs, to those less qualified, for less money.

People are P.O. because they do not like the younger guy, taking on the management job, no one likes him, he is a young punk type guy, with no personality. And lacks the skills, as did the former employee. That is 3 people, but this is going on thruout the Country, and so much of this we are not hearing about, the only things and numbers we are hearing about are those TRUMP UP.

This is so not good, think you have a safe job, well after being on a job for 20 years and fired for no friggin reason, your jobs are not safe as you may think!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:59 AM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
20,460 posts, read 26,330,678 times
Reputation: 7627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117 View Post
Under Reagan the economy added that many jobs.. In a single month!!

During 1983 the economy added 3.5 million jobs.
For 1984, nearly 4 million jobs were added.


(This was nearly 30 years ago when the US population and workforce was much smaller, making the gains that much more impressive.)

And actually your math is wrong, 2010 did not even break the 1 million mark, it was 940k.
Sure, it was great rebound back then - no doubt about it (it's one of the reasons I think so highly of Reagan) - one accomplished with a combination of TAX CUTS AND DEFICIT SPENDING (same tactic Obama used). Of course back then the 3rd world countries were not the massive manufacturing engines they are today so if folks wanted to buy something they mostly bought American. It's just a different world today than it was then. Today America is not the worlds largest exporter anymore but rather #3 - that makes a HUGE difference in any economic recovery.

Ken

PS - For the jobs created number I mentioned I was referring not to 2010 but to the last 12 months (march 2010 - February 2011). Re-read my post and you'll see that.

Last edited by LordBalfor; 03-07-2011 at 10:06 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2011, 06:47 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,642 posts, read 26,378,527 times
Reputation: 12648
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55 View Post
One possible reason for the discrepancy. If you are underemployed or part time you may consider yourself unemployed, though the government does not.


Both Gallup and BLS seperate these groups.
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 04:12 PM.

© 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