Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Doesn't mean shit if you loose 300,000 jobs.
216,000 jobs gained vs 300,000 jobs lost is still a loss of 84,000 jobs
How many jobs don't exist any longer?not one GOP spin....... quite disappointing
How many were dropped from the roles again?
I just want the numbers to have some real meaning.
You do realize that 300-400k people stop looking for work many months right? They are counted as jobs created in the sense that it brings the UE rate down.
yes.... creating jobs costs money. when has that every changed? business have to use money to create more jobs......and that matters why?and this cost how many trillions ?
lol...oh it doesn't matter at all.. after all its free money !
I am sure the BLS number will be close. Though I am glad we had a "plus" month, the issue is, the media will ballyhoo this, so, welcome to the new normal, its still, taking into account where we are, anemic. 130K for new entrants we net 80k....that wont get it done. iam is right we need some serious numbers, 400k+ etc.
I am sure the BLS number will be close. Though I am glad we had a "plus" month, the issue is, the media will ballyhoo this, so, welcome to the new normal, its still, taking into account where we are, anemic. 130K for new entrants we net 80k....that wont get it done. iam is right we need some serious numbers, 400k+ etc.
Wait a week or so...the number will be revised downward. It has for awhile now.
not one GOP spin....... quite disappointing
and retarded logic of the right continues....not one GOP spin....... quite disappointing
You seem so let down.
Just to renew your faith in the resiliency of the opposition, check this table:
When the Big 0 was elected trumpeting the worst economy since the Great Depression, there were just shy of 139 million Americans employed.
Now there are just shy of 133 million Americans employed.
Luckily, according to the Obama Administration, the best way to stimulate the economy is to distribute Food Stamps.
We should be having an economy on fire right now following that prescription and yet, not so much.
The incredible shrinking labor force continues to shrink even as the population, growing at the slowest rate since the end of WW2 continues to rise at the rate of 8%.
Jobs are shrinking and population is growing. Do the math. Your man is a loser and he's leading us to be like him.
Current Employment Data Employment-2000-January 2012
Driven by the Recession, a Baby Bust Hits the U.S.
and retarded logic of the right continues....not one GOP spin....... quite disappointing
You seem so let down.
Just to renew your faith in the resiliency of the opposition, check this table:
When the Big 0 was elected trumpeting the worst economy since the Great Depression, there were just shy of 139 million Americans employed.
Now there are just shy of 133 million Americans employed.
Luckily, according to the Obama Administration, the best way to stimulate the economy is to distribute Food Stamps.
We should be having an economy on fire right now following that prescription and yet, not so much.
The incredible shrinking labor force continues to shrink even as the population, growing at the slowest rate since the end of WW2 continues to rise at the rate of 8%.
Jobs are shrinking and population is growing. Do the math. Your man is a loser and he's leading us to be like him.
Current Employment Data Employment-2000-January 2012
Driven by the Recession, a Baby Bust Hits the U.S.
yes.... creating jobs costs money. when has that every changed? business have to use money to create more jobs......and that matters why?
lol...oh it doesn't matter at all.. after all its free money !
yes.... creating jobs costs money. when has that every changed? business have to use money to create more jobs......lol...oh it doesn't matter at all.. after all its free money !
Do what? No it doesn't. Jobs are created when businesses are doing well, bring in more money and need to expand their workforce to meet demand. Companies do not spend money to create jobs. The hire people because they need them and can afford it. When you get out of high school and get a job, you'll understand how the real world works. Sadly, Obama still doesn't understand it and like you, thinks he has to spend money to create jobs. What a bunch of hooey.
yes.... creating jobs costs money. when has that every changed? business have to use money to create more jobs......
Do what? No it doesn't. Jobs are created when businesses are doing well, bring in more money and need to expand their workforce to meet demand. Companies do not spend money to create jobs. The hire people because they need them and can afford it. When you get out of high school and get a job, you'll understand how the real world works. Sadly, Obama still doesn't understand it and like you, thinks he has to spend money to create jobs. What a bunch of hooey.
Actually, what you say is not necessarily true.
Smart companies do not hire to meet demand....for by the time the person is hired and up to speed, the demand was already not satisfied...and the customer went elsewhere.
Smart business owners use people like me (I just retired a month ago)....I would analyze the market, compare quarters; compare market trends; review the competition...and determnine when the spike in demand will take place....then recruit and hire the individual well ahead of time.....so the individual is ready when the spike hits.
Bridge loans for such hires are commonplace when needed.
Nearly 250,000 jobs created but the unemployment number didn't go down?
Nearly 250,000 jobs created but the unemployment number didn't go down?
you still have to spend money to bring employees in. whether that is time with yourself or if you have an HR department, spend time to do the market research, or actually get a loan, everything in business costs money.Do what? No it doesn't. Jobs are created when businesses are doing well, bring in more money and need to expand their workforce to meet demand. Companies do not spend money to create jobs. The hire people because they need them and can afford it. When you get out of high school and get a job, you'll understand how the real world works. Sadly, Obama still doesn't understand it and like you, thinks he has to spend money to create jobs. What a bunch of hooey.
Actually, what you say is not necessarily true.
Smart companies do not hire to meet demand....for by the time the person is hired and up to speed, the demand was already not satisfied...and the customer went elsewhere.
Smart business owners use people like me (I just retired a month ago)....I would analyze the market, compare quarters; compare market trends; review the competition...and determnine when the spike in demand will take place....then recruit and hire the individual well ahead of time.....so the individual is ready when the spike hits.
Bridge loans for such hires are commonplace when needed.
True, but it's because you HAVE analyized it and know profits are coming that allows you to afford workers and pay off the bridge loan. What company borrows money simply to hire more employees in the hopes that customers will magically appear? Companies that operate that way go out of business.
Hiring in the private sector picked up in February, according to a report released Wednesday by payroll processor ADP.
Private employers added 216,000 jobs in the month, ADP said, roughly in line with forecasts for 218,000 jobs gained.
Small businesses -- those with fewer than 50 employees -- made up half of the job gains in February, hiring 108,000 people.
A rise in manufacturing jobs was particularly encouraging. Factories added 21,000 jobs.
ADP Says U.S. Added 216,000 Jobs in February - Bloomberg
Private firms added 216,000 jobs in February, study says - latimes.com
ADP: Private sector adds 216,000 jobs in February - Mar. 7, 2012
With Democrats in the White House, the average annual job creation for the last 48 years was just a hair under 2.2 million additional jobs.
Under Republican presidents, half of that, 1.1 million jobs. GDP growth under Democrats, 3.2%. Under Republicans, 2.1%.
Now here it gets fun: Average annual S&P 500 growth rate under Democrats, 10.8%. Under Republicans, 2.3%.
All of this is public knowledge, you can get these results from Bloomberg, BLS and BEI. You can't argue with data. You can spin as much as you want, BS to the high heavens, but so many critical indices show again and again (I didn't even bring up debt to GDP performance) to very heavily favor Democratic presidents. So either there is an ideological economic advantage to Democratic policies, or Republicans have made terrible presidents.
Or maybe a little of both. Either way, you can't argue facts with opinions alone, and win any logical argument.
how will the GOP try to spin this their way now?
