Quote:
Originally Posted by loaded potato
Held steady at 14.7%
THE More accurrate assesment of the unemployment situation.
How does that make you sfeel Obamabots?
Are you going to acknowledge the real Unemployment rate or just go about in your fantasy worlds?
|
You guys are full of it man! I've never heard anyone use these parameters when talking about unemployment numbers with previous Presidents.
Did I hear ppl say that the "REAL" unemployment was wayyy over what was being reported during the Bush or Clinton years?
Surely ppl looking for jobs or being under-employed has always been the case even in great economic times.
What am asking is why isn't the same way unemployment was factored under previous presidents not good enough now that Obama is President? I seriously would like to know that answer.
No one is saying that those parameters you're talking about is not important but why determine the Unemployment % on those additional parameters now when its never been graded on it before?
For example if and when Bush came out during his tenure and said the Unemployment Rate is 5.5%. Ppl say ok the Unemployment Rate is 5.5%!
No one said "BUT WAIT MR. BUSH you have to add additional parameters (those who are underemployed, etc...) so President Bush the REAL unemployment is really 10%!"
So again if the previous unemployment numbers WERE NEVER JUDGED on those additional parameters....WHY START grading Obama's unemployment numbers with these additional set of parameters?