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 07-06-2013, 02:55 PM
 
Location: California
37,135 posts, read 42,214,810 times
Reputation: 35013

Advertisements

I didn't work for 20 years by choice, I was NOT "unemployed". Now I work part time by choice, I am NOT "under employed". This is why I hate broad statistics
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-06-2013, 02:57 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,180,801 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Thats one of the most pathetic responses I've ever heard in my entire life. Who gives a **** how many are unemployed, as long as Republicans dont win right?
You must of missed the actual breakdown of that number, sad for you, probably why your buddy Romney only scored 47% of the vote.

Unless you think we have a 53% unemployment, then you are just plain dumb.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2013, 02:59 PM
 
Location: The analog world
17,077 posts, read 13,369,227 times
Reputation: 22904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossfire600 View Post
They are not to smart are they? Sad really.
Who are they? I've read several thoughtful responses to the OP's simplistic and sweeping generalizations about those who are not employed full-time, a group that includes me, a college-educated, married, mother of three children, who works part-time and volunteers for a youth organization. My husband is a professional, and our generous family income ensures we pay plenty in taxes. I am NOT a moocher, but the OP would characterize me as such, because I am part of the 53% who are not employed full-time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2013, 02:59 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
You must of missed the actual breakdown of that number, sad for you, probably why your buddy Romney only scored 47% of the vote.

Unless you think we have a 53% unemployment, then you are just plain dumb.
You must think that people going to school, people being disabled, housewives etc are a new idea in america..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2013, 03:00 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
http://stateofworkingamerica.org/cha...ulation-ratio/

Looks like its gone NO WHERE since Obama has been sworn into office...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2013, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,180,801 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
You must think that people going to school, people being disabled, housewives etc are a new idea in america..
Ah yes, you must be one of those who hated the 50s when a family could live off one income. When my wife and I have a baby and we can afford to have one of us stay home, I have no problem with letting my wife stay at home raising the baby.

What do you have against stay at home parents, students, disabled, etc?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2013, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,418,303 times
Reputation: 4190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
I didn't work for 20 years by choice, I was NOT "unemployed". Now I work part time by choice, I am NOT "under employed". This is why I hate broad statistics
On the other hand, as long as they don't change the methodology they provide a baseline useful for comparison.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2013, 03:05 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Ah yes, you must be one of those who hated the 50s when a family could live off one income. When my wife and I have a baby and we can afford to have one of us stay home, I have no problem with letting my wife stay at home raising the baby.

What do you have against stay at home parents, students, disabled, etc?
So now your excue is most people in america are staying home by choice because they like living in poverty. tell me, are they doing it just to make Obama look bad? Just when I thought you couldnt get any more pathetic, you prove me wrong..

Tell me Urban.. if the numbers are so good, and they really havent changed since Obama has been sworn into office, why the hell did you ***** and moan about them under Bush? Are you telling me so many people left the job market in 2007-2008 because they were having babies?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2013, 03:12 PM
 
11,768 posts, read 10,262,817 times
Reputation: 3444
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Employment-to-population ratio of population age 16 and older, 1948-2013 | State of Working America

Looks like its gone NO WHERE since Obama has been sworn into office...
Don't complain about government workers and then blame the government about less government workers.














Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2013, 03:14 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,180,801 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
So now your excue is most people in america are staying home by choice because they like living in poverty. tell me, are they doing it just to make Obama look bad? Just when I thought you couldnt get any more pathetic, you prove me wrong..

Tell me Urban.. if the numbers are so good, and they really havent changed since Obama has been sworn into office, why the hell did you ***** and moan about them under Bush? Are you telling me so many people left the job market in 2007-2008 because they were having babies?
No, people left the job market in 2008 because the financial and housing market collapsed.

Also, you must of forgotten what unemployment peaked at from that collapse and where we are now. I am sure there are plenty of people out there who would like to return to the workforce, though many people that were laid off ended up doing an early retirement.

Why do you whine about the percentage of working Americans when there was even less in the people in the workforce.
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 10:56 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