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.
I don't have a TV and I'm engaged in all manner of leisurely pursuits both subtle and gross, so I don't have time to waste on silly websites pretending to provide "news."
The claim that the number of jobs "increased by a robust 252,000 in December 2014" is absurd and untruthful, contradicting reality.
147,666,000 Employed November 2014
147,190,000 Employed December 2014
---------------
476,000 Americans lost their jobs.
We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false. - William Casey, CIA Director
Looks like it's complete....
Mircea
We go through this every single time Mircea. I really pegged you as smarter than that. Numbers are seasonally adjusted to even out wild swings. You know that. I know that.
its the nature of that growth when you loo at details. Its just a fact that US workers are less and less skilled for middle class jobs now days. Many jobs they will not do is what illegals flock here for. The reduction of need and not wanting liability has long pushed the replacement of many manual jobs with equipment. Robotics just has replaced the need for a human operating machines more and more.
And you are wrong, because they are not the same thing.
Your government says so:
Face it, Ken, you're just a sore loser.
The Parentheses indicate a parenthetical remark, clarifying "population."
People like you who cannot handle Truth always engage in this Fallacy:
Quibbling We quibble when we complain about a minor point and falsely believe that this complaint somehow undermines the main point. To avoid this error, the logical reasoner will not make a mountain out of a mole hill nor take people too literally.
The context of this thread is Employment/Labor, which very obviously does not include children.
The BLS does not publish data on the entire population, only the population eligible or available to work, and intelligent people know that.
And how does the BLS style its data?
Stop quibbling and get over it.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
Um, the only US Labor/Unemployment Data I have ever posted on this forum comes strictly from the BLS.
This may come as a shock to you, but jobs don't pay personal income taxes or FICA/HI payroll taxes.
People pay those taxes, not the jobs.
There 476,000 fewer Americans paying FICA/HI payroll taxes in December than in November.
Regardless of the number of jobs created, you didn't create enough jobs to keep the employment level from decreasing.
I never said there was relationship.
Yes, that would be this....
What about it?
Then you have framed the argument as Quantity vs Quality.
You're so desperate that creating a job that lasts 4 weeks is more important and valuable than creating a job that lasts 10 to 20 years.
Okay, so Obama has created more temporary jobs that folded after 4 weeks than any person who ever existed.
Wrong, Ken.
1984 4,105,000
1941 3,718,000
1978 3,680,000
1994 3,178,000
1997 2,990,000
1998 2,961,000
1988 2,878,000
1979 2,851,000
1995 2,851,000
1977 2,833,000
1942 2,747,000
1973 2,717,000
1999 2,685,000
1985 2,611,000
2014 2,503,000
2012 2,428,000
1966 2,427,000
1947 2,325,000
1996 2,322,000
2013 2,320,000
1987 2,299,000
2000 2,297,000
1989 2,286,000
1951 2,260,000
1976 2,251,000
2006 2,223,000
1969 2,131,000
2005 2,073,000
1972 2,010,000
1965 2,003,000
2011 1,971,000
1993 1,931,000
1943 1,732,000
1959 1,702,000
1986 1,661,000
1968 1,644,000
1946 1,626,000
1940 1,550,000
1955 1,487,000
2004 1,393,000
1953 1,370,000
1956 1,365,000
1967 1,296,000
2007 1,294,000
1950 1,274,000
1964 1,257,000
1962 1,256,000
1974 1,036,000
1990 988,000
1981 959,000
1948 834,000
1963 768,000
1952 755,000
1960 650,000
1983 578,000
1980 293,000
1957 148,000
1970 137,000
1992 134,000
1971 5,000
Why don't you explain why CNN cherry-picked the year 1999?
Is CNN claiming that the US was created in 1999?
Oh, maybe CNN chose 1999, since that's the year the US ceased to be a constitutional federal republic.
Whenever anyone on this forum mentions the Budget Deficit, what's the very first thing you and Finn start screaming about?
You can't do that....you can't look at the Budget Deficit by itself....you have to look at the deficit as a percentage of the GDP or as a percentage of the inverse square of the amount of Dark Matter between Earth and Alpha Epsilon or as percentage of the number of bats flying at 3:05 AM on a Tuesday morning....
Right?
Don't make me dig up your posts and throw them back in your face.
I have a BA in Economics, so I don't say stupid stuff like "Consumer Demand creates Jobs."
But Liberals do.
If Consumer Demand creates Jobs, then logically...
an increase in the Population creates an inherent increase in Consumers
and that should inherently increase Demand
which should inherently increase the number of Jobs created.
Question: Is that happening?
Answer: No.
In 1984...
Working Age Population: 176,383,000
Labor Force: 113,544,000
Jobs Created: 4,105,000
In 1994...
Working Age Population: 196,814,000
Labor Force: 133,056,000
Jobs Created: 3,178,000
In 2014...
Working Age Population: 247,947,000
Labor Force: 155,922,000
Jobs Created: 2,503,000
Spin it all you want.....2014 was a mediocre year.
Statistically...
Mircea
It's not spin, it's just a simple statement of FACT. 2014 saw the most jobs created since 1999. Did it see more people employed since 1999? No, the but CNN article NEVER SAID THAT. The CNN article said MORE JOBS WERE CREATED THAN ANY YEAR SINCE 1999 - and that's a FACT. CNN mentioned 1999 because that was the last time the U.S. created this many jobs - again, it's a simple statement of fact - and it's GOOD NEWS.
As far as consumer demand creating jobs - of course it does but not every age group consumes the same amount (or the same things) and demographic changes (specifically in the age make up of the population) means changes in consumer spending patterns. Young people spend more than older people - any TV advertising exec will tell you that - that's why particular age demographic are a more desirable target audience than others are. The fact is, older folks don't consume as much as younger folks (and by consume I don't just mean "eat"). They are not having babies so they are spending gobs of money on new clothes for their rapidly growing kids every 6 months. They don't go out as much, they go to bed earlier. As they get older they don't travel as much. They are not as concerned about fashion so they don't update their clothes as often, etc, etc, etc. All in all, they don't spend as much on consumer goods as younger folks do. That's just a fact of life.
The MAKE UP of the population is JUST AS IMPORTANT as the SIZE of the population. This is true in regards of CONSUMPTION and IMPACT ON THE WORKFORCE - and the fastest growing age demographic group in the country is the older folks.
Older people just don't work at the same rate they did when they were younger - that's just a fact. That has profound impact on all kinds of things - including the size of the workforce and the amount that America as whole produces and consumes.
And no, I'm sorry, but I don't believe for ONE MINUTE that you have a BA in Economics.
Ken
Last edited by LordBalfor; 01-12-2015 at 02:42 PM..
We go through this every single time Mircea. I really pegged you as smarter than that. Numbers are seasonally adjusted to even out wild swings. You know that. I know that.
Yup - the "adjusted" vs "unadjusted" numbers don't make a lot of difference in the bigger picture because in some months the "adjusted" numbers are bigger while in other months the "unadjusted" numbers are bigger. This is because they are SEASONAL variations that tend to show the same pattern year after year after year and season after season after season. The wingnuts on this board always jump on the "unadjusted" numbers when they are not as good as the "adjusted" numbers, but they are strangely silent on the "unadjusted" numbers during the months when those "unadjusted" numbers blow the "adjusted" numbers away.
its the nature of that growth when you loo at details. Its just a fact that US workers are less and less skilled for middle class jobs now days. Many jobs they will not do is what illegals flock here for. The reduction of need and not wanting liability has long pushed the replacement of many manual jobs with equipment. Robotics just has replaced the need for a human operating machines more and more.
You're wrong. Americans have always done construction and landscaping jobs for a fair wage until illegal aliens flooded those industries. Jobs that use to go to our American youth as entry level ones were also flooded by illegal aliens willing to work for less.
We go through this every single time Mircea. I really pegged you as smarter than that. Numbers are seasonally adjusted to even out wild swings. You know that. I know that.
"Seasonal adjustment is a statistical technique that attempts to measure and remove the influences of predictable seasonal patterns to reveal how employment and unemployment change from month to month.
...Annual average estimates are calculated from the not seasonally adjusted data series."
Maybe you can't see how attempting to "measure" something is wrong when you're analyzing data. Did you seasonally adjust your grades in school? Did you seasonally adjust your recipes for the holidays? Did you seasonally adjust the chemicals in the pool?
Of course not, because it's an absolutely stupid thing to do unless you're trying to explain data to chimp.
How are you going to mesh global climate change and seasonally adjusted data together? (Snickers)
You'll never believe them. You've done nothing so far to disprove that the current data isn't the truth.
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.
