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.
WRONG. The chart was from before all the bad economic news during the last couple months was known. No one estimated the massive job losses, the massive GDP drop, and the horrific 4th quarter earnings report, all of that info came out after the chart.
Ok, you keep spinning this into, "they didnt know the economy was bad".. Then WHY THE HELL WERE THEY CREATING A STIMULUS PACKAGE?
So they don't use the number of people getting unemployment as part of their numbers? If people getting unemployment don't count where do they get their numbers from?
Ok, you keep spinning this into, "they didnt know the economy was bad".. Then WHY THE HELL WERE THEY CREATING A STIMULUS PACKAGE?
I see you have nothing better to do than to tell a lie and putting words in my mouth. I was not trying to say the economy wasn't bad. It was bad and everyone knew and stated it was bad. We all knew we were in a pretty serious recession. What I said was while everyone knew the situation was quite bad no one knew or predicted the extent. While large job losses were predicted and expected no one thought we were going to be seeing losses in excess of 700,000 a month. Everyone knew the GDP in the 4th quarter of 08 was going to be quite bad, and they thought the 4th quarter earnings reports were going to be quite bad. However, the extent of how fast it was falling off the cliff, how horrid those 4th quarter 08 reports were surprised everyone. We all knew it was bad, the extent surprised everyone.
You've already backpedaled on the above, might as well go all the way.
The chart with the 8% was released in early Jan based off figures known in mid December. The last couple months of job reports were not known at that time, the 4th quarter GDP reports and 4th quarter earnings reports were not known at that time. However, shortly after the report those figures started to coming in. That is when everyone knew the extent of the damage and how fast our economy was falling off the cliff. The 8% figure were based off estimates BEFORE the 4th quarter information was out. The great depression claim was AFTER the 4th quarter information was out.
And the unemployment rate increased to 9.9% after 3 months at 9.7%.
Yes, funny how that happens. The liberals claim all these jobs "created", yet the unemployment rate rises. It will be harder to explain that farce to voters in the fall and in 2012.
Yes, funny how that happens. The liberals claim all these jobs "created", yet the unemployment rate rises. It will be harder to explain that farce to voters in the fall and in 2012.
What part of more people re-entered the labor force can't you grasp??
Yes, funny how that happens. The liberals claim all these jobs "created", yet the unemployment rate rises. It will be harder to explain that farce to voters in the fall and in 2012.
The jobless rate is a direct function of how many people are using their unemployment insurance. For this reason the jobless rate can be misleading, when there are more jobs available more people start looking again and filing unemployment insurance claims which will raise the rate. The bottom line is jobs created are jobs created.
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.
As the budget cuts of 2010 take place with the elimination of many teacher jobs , how would you count these teacher positions that were "saved" in 2009 due to the stimulus, but lost in 2010. Do they still count in the created or saved category or do they no longer count in that category as they no longer exist?
Not trying to be a wise a$$, but I'm curious as to how this will be accounted for officially.
I see you have nothing better to do than to tell a lie and putting words in my mouth. I was not trying to say the economy wasn't bad. It was bad and everyone knew and stated it was bad. We all knew we were in a pretty serious recession. What I said was while everyone new the situation was quite bad no one knew or predicted the extent. While large job losses were predicted and expected no one thought we were going to be seeing losses in excess of 700,000 a month. Everyone knew the GDP in the 4th quarter of 08 was going to be quite bad, and they thought the 4th quarter earnings reports were going to be quite bad. However, the extent of how fast it was falling off the cliff, how horrid those 4th quarter 08 reports were surprised everyone. We all new it was bad, the extent surprised everyone.
Yup. They knew it was going to be BAD, in fact, they knew it was going to be VERY BAD. What they didn't know was that it was going to be EVEN WORSE.
It's pretty easy to understand. The ONLY people here who don't understand are those who don't WANT to understand (for purely political reasons). Funny how these are the SAME PEOPLE who don't WANT to understand that now the economy is RECOVERING.
As the budget cuts of 2010 take place with the elimination of many teacher jobs , how would you count these teacher positions that were "saved" in 2009 due to the stimulus, but lost in 2010. Do they still count in the created or saved category or do they no longer count in that category as they no longer exist?
Not trying to be a wise a$$, but I'm curious as to how this will be accounted for officially.
Well, I don't know how they will be "counted" but I'll tell you this much. If I'd lost my job and ended up getting a stimulus funded job that got me through until the economy turned around and I was able to find a PERMANENT position somewhere, I'd be pretty darned happy. It would certainly beat being laid off over that time.
You have to remember that the stimulus money was NEVER meant to provide PERMANENT jobs. It was meant kick start the economy and provide jobs for people to "bridge" them over until the economy comes back to life and private business begins hiring again.
And in that, I would say it succeeded.
Did it provide EVERYONE who was laid off with a job?
Of course not. That certainly wasn't going to happen with the amount of money they had to work with - but the fact is, EVERY PERSON who got a stimulus funded job (or was able to hold on to a job that otherwise would have been cut) was a success - especially with the economy starting to turn around. Will some folks get laid off as the stimulus money fades? Of course - but those folks will have a LOT better chance finding a job a lot quicker THIS YEAR than they would have had LAST YEAR.
And THAT is a very good thing.
Ken
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.
