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.
Why would one be surprised by numbers going up, if they've gone up all year? Come on, dont give us that line of bs that they didnt expect the numbers to continue to climb, THEY CAMPAIGNED on the fact they were climbing at such an alarming rate..
Complete revisionism, my dear. That's why the private sector projections were if anything even further off than the adminstration's. Nobody yet knew how bad the situation was. Nobody. The US economy had never been in a credit-induced free-fall before. Everyone saw the signs...everybody knew they were bad...nobody knew how bad until all that stuff started hitting the fan.
You can continue to lie about it if you want, but you would look so much more like an actual adult if you just climbed back on the wagon and gave all that crap up...
Did anyone check the birth/death model numbers for this current report ?
Why don't you explain to us why there is a birth/death model to begin with, how it is calculated, and then what actual effect it has on the final unemployment number?
Smash..that chart was so far off base they never showed it again after that and they have never uttered one comment about it.
LOL. That's the nature of projections. They are like weather forecasts. You do one, and then you toss it and do a new one. You don't just repeat Monday's forecast for Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. You do new ones. This is like Econometrics 087, here...
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
It's like it never existed. They screwed up horribly with that chart and they learned their lesson but good. There have been no more "projections" coming from the WH thank goodness.
Come on!!! The White House (CEA and OMB, in particular) run dozens of projections every week. The January 10, 2009, projection is meanwhile perfect. No matter how many times you go back and run and rerun it with those same best-available-at-the-time data, you will get exactly the same results.
The report including that lovely chart is what they used to sell the stimulus.
Once the information about the last couple jobs reports under Bush as well as the 4th quarter 08 GDP reports and earnings numbers were known everyone knew the scope of the situation the 8% figure was not used.
Ken, maybe I need help to understand why the words of Obama about the unemployment rate not going above 8% with the Stimulus and much higher without it. He fooled a lot of Dems in Congress with those numbers but few Republicans, as I recall it. Since less than half the stimulus money has been spent it seems a bit silly that it hasn't. Maybe the 8% would have been true if they had spent the stimulus money for something that could stimulate the economy. I guess some of those pork projects just didn't do much to stimulate.
It's not hard to understand - and several other posters here has ALREADY done so. The 8% estimate (and remember it was an ESTIMATE) was based on numbers collected by and tabulated by the OUTGOING ADMINISTRATION (ie that of GW Bush (Obama wasn't even sworn in yet)) - and the fact is THOSE numbers DRASTICALLY underestimated the just how FAST the situation was deteriorating. As I already mentioned - LOOK AT THE CHART posted by Sanrene. It shows divergence from the plan even BEFORE OBAMA was President (pretty OBVIOUS). At the time the Obama team made the best estimate they could with the data that they had. Problem is, subsequent numbers would show that the data they were using was WRONG - and the fact is, you can't get an accurate prediction if the data you are using to make that prediction is incorrect.
Obamas transition team was created in November 08. Bush was VERY generous with allowing Obama to come in prior to his sworn in date. They had a staff of 450 individuals..
Bush was always gracious and cooperative, as has been the tradition around here if you hadn't noticed, and for the most part made himself and his staff available as the incoming administration felt was needed. There was that one bit about keeping the Obama's out of Blair House until the last minute, but no big deal. Provisions for the staff and offices for the President-Elect however are established by law. Bush had nothing to do with that. It is all handled under ordinary procedures through GSA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
So you are going to tell me that Obama projected an imaginary turn around in employment numbers?
No, I am going to tell you that the question above is pure fluff, that it is relevant to nothing at all, and that it had no valid purpose in being brought into existence to begin with. Lewis Carroll wrote less nonsense than you do.
Once the information about the last couple jobs reports under Bush as well as the 4th quarter 08 GDP reports and earnings numbers were known everyone knew the scope of the situation the 8% figure was not used.
Who is the one who stood up in front of the nation and proclaimed that millions of jobs would be created if the stimulus bill passed ?
And the CBO..the ever faithful cruncher of wishful thinking fairy tale numbers provided the very numbers he needed to sell the bill.
The CBO report..this is what Obama and the Dems proclaimed:
The impact to employment would be
an increase of 0.8 million to 2.3 million by the end of 2009,
an increase of 1.2 million to 3.6 million by the end of 2010,
an increase of 0.6 million to 1.9 million by the end of 2011,
and declining increases in subsequent years as the U.S. labor market reaches nearly full employment, but never negative.
Really? Here's the report, including the chart. Tell me where the fraud is?
I've told you a dozen times, <sanrene>, since like a trained parrot or mynah bird, you've been repeatedly squawking about it for nearly a year now. The fraud is not in the report itself, but in the deliberate misrepresentation of what it and any projection actually is. Right-wingers feel they can get away with such sleazy things because most people will not be sophisticated enough to realize that the wool is being pulled over their eyes, and the ones who are sophisticated enough are never going to be dumb enough to vote Republican anyway, so nothing is lost on that front.
Do you want to answer any of the questions about the private sector projections now, or are you still holding off on those?
The CBO report..this is what Obama and the Dems proclaimed:
The impact to employment would be
an increase of 0.8 million to 2.3 million by the end of 2009,
an increase of 1.2 million to 3.6 million by the end of 2010,
an increase of 0.6 million to 1.9 million by the end of 2011,
and declining increases in subsequent years as the U.S. labor market reaches nearly full employment, but never negative.
They said created or saved. We do know many teaching jobs, as well as police jobs were saved due to cuts that were averted due to Stimulus funds.
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.
