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.
Who thinks Barry and company has cooked the books on this.
No president has ever got re-elected with it over 8%.
I don't think they "cooked the books" and I am a Romney supporter. As far as no president ever getting re-elected with unemployment over 8%, FDR did, but none has since then. Actually, though, no president has been re-elected since FDR with unemployment over 7.4% (Reagan in 1984...and that was with 7% growth in the economy). None other than Reagan has been re-elected with it over 6%.
A survey of households is used to determine the UE rate. It is a lot more volatile than the establishment survey, which is used to calculate nonfarm payrolls. Nonfarm payrolls are what we SHOULD be paying more attention to. Of course the media is paying attention to the UE rate. The nonfarm payrolls number of 114,000 is not high enough to even account for population growth.
The household survey showed about 870,000 more people employed, IIRC. However, the last two (at least...I will have to look up the June one to see whether it did as well) household surveys actually showed less people employed even though the establishment surveys showed job creation. A lot of this is likely statistical noise. Obama just got very lucky, IMO. People's perceptions of the economy in election years tend to be shaped long before October, but I am concerned that this could hurt Romney's post-debate bounce (yes....he is getting a bounce....see today's polls out of OH/FL/VA).
The other thing to consider is seasonal adjustments...seasonal adjustments are done on all this data and there is some evidence that the seasonal adjustments could be way out of whack because of the job losses in 2008/2009.
Who thinks Barry and company has cooked the books on this.
No president has ever got re-elected with it over 8%.
Not sure, but I mean come one it took 4 years. I think the economy would have righted itself by now anyhow. Not sure he should get too much credit for it. 7.8% is still too high, we can do better, and we will do better.
I'm loving it. I thought it would come down as elections approached.
And we might be able to squeeze in one more month's data before going to the polls.
I'm loving it. I thought it would come down as elections approached.
And we might be able to squeeze in one more month's data before going to the polls.
I predict 7.5%
Funny that. It is sort of how trends tend to work. Doesn't really matter when the election is held, the trend shows that jobs creation has increased steadily all year. It was kind of inevitable that the UE rate would go down (again) at some point. I'd even bet that it will go down again after the election, no matter who wins.
Why can't you guys be happy that America's economy is recovering. What do you have against the USA? Why does it bother you so much?
Why is the unemployment rate still at 15% and hasn't moved then? Why are food stamps still being utilized by 46 million people? Do you actually believe there's a recovery?
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.
