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.
Yeah, I see how you rationalize your habitual incivility.you're such a mess dude....really. go away somewhere, a drip, a padded room, have a ' lie down' as they say in merry ole....
What a pompous hypocrite you are!!!!!!!just please...I beg of you, be logical, be civil, that's all I ask.
not at all, you burnt that bridge with me a long time ago, remember? you seem to expect folks to lay down for your errant stupid remarks on a personal level and never get fed up....
I have never had a discussion with Pinqy, see how that works?
Yeah, each year you have a million Boomers retire of the over 3 million Boomers who reach retirement in each year. And you know that very well also, so stop deflecting from FOX's obvious lie in the OP!!!!!My God people
we got people trying to convince us that the available work force number has nothing to do with the not in work force number
MY GOD THE NOT IN WORK FORCE NUMBER GREW 1.6 million in 8 weeks and the available work force number goes down
So that means that about 100,000 leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retiring Boomers without creating a single NEW job!!!!!
You just can't admit you are wrong, so it must be that everyone else is "intellectually vacant."You know we went through this on another thread and I took the time to explain to you that the retirees are figured into the LPR as part of the denominator and the LF is is the numerator. I even took the time to link to the BLS glossary for you, but you are still playing dumb claiming that retirees are part of the numerator.Ok, fair enough, so you see my point then and what I am really asking or remarking upon?
we cannot claim that the # of discouraged workers ( who are dropped from the LPR) are all retirees, IF retirees are not included in the LF count, IF they are, then, the number is , well meaningless in a large and important context.
I realize that there is cyclical structural and secular issue(s) at work here, the key is what % of each is predominant/responsible.
At ( to be kind) 200K jobs a month, just 75K ( to be kind again I took the low new entrant #required of 125K) eating into the Labor pool of unemployed, the rates we are given are not related to reality and watching that number drop at the same time is, well, no wonder few trust the gov. anymore.
I'll be here...just please...I beg of you, be logical, be civil, that's all I ask.
The Labor Force is the numerator of the Labor Force Participation Rate, and retirees are PART of the Civilian Noninstitutional Population which is the denominator of the LPR.
Here is the link where I tried to correct your misinformation in spite of your repeated insults.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...s-120k-ue-rate-drops-to-8-2-march-2012-a.html
Some highlights:
Labor Force Characteristics (CPS)
Labor force
The labor force is the sum of employed and unemployed persons. The labor force participation rate is the labor force as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population. Browse various labor force characteristics. Data also are available by demographic characteristics. See also Not in the labor force.
Not in the labor force
Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.
BLS Glossary
Civilian noninstitutional population (Current Population Survey) Included are persons 16 years of age and older residing in the 50 States and the District of Columbia who are not inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities, homes for the aged), and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces.
and you are just as vacant intellectually here as you were there. you bolded my comment then answered your own question , not mine.
Yeah, I see how you rationalize your habitual incivility.What a pompous hypocrite you are!!!!!!!
not at all, you burnt that bridge with me a long time ago, remember? you seem to expect folks to lay down for your errant stupid remarks on a personal level and never get fed up....
I have never had a discussion with Pinqy, see how that works?
Oh, so now all of a sudden CON$ are using the seasonally adjusted numbers after bitching about how "seasonally adjusted" means cooked in Obama's favor. At the time I predicted that anytime the seasonally adjusted number was higher, CON$ would suddenly use the adjusted number.Yeah, each year you have a million Boomers retire of the over 3 million Boomers who reach retirement in each year. And you know that very well also, so stop deflecting from FOX's obvious lie in the OP!!!!!My God people
we got people trying to convince us that the available work force number has nothing to do with the not in work force number
MY GOD THE NOT IN WORK FORCE NUMBER GREW 1.6 million in 8 weeks and the available work force number goes down
So that means that about 100,000 leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retiring Boomers without creating a single NEW job!!!!!
Fox did not lie
the number of people looking for a job is 6.3 million
ot in labor force
85,977 88,322 88,288 85,608 86,503 86,697 87,874 87,564 87,897
Persons who currently want a job
6,250 6,376 6,041 6,500 6,595 6,385 6,319 6,378 6,299
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
Yeah, I see how you rationalize your habitual incivility.What a pompous hypocrite you are!!!!!!!
not at all, you burnt that bridge with me a long time ago, remember? you seem to expect folks to lay down for your errant stupid remarks on a personal level and never get fed up....
I have never had a discussion with Pinqy, see how that works?
You can blame me all you want for your unprovoked habitual incivility rather than take responsibility for your OWN actions. You only make yourself look smaller.Yeah, I see how you rationalize your habitual incivility.not at all, you burnt that bridge with me a long time ago, remember? you seem to expect folks to lay down for your errant stupid remarks on a personal level and never get fed up....
I have never had a discussion with Pinqy, see how that works?
apparently you just cannot comprehend the written word, you don't deserve any civility from me, because none was rendered by you, to me, to often. Read my comment again, slowly...
Oh, so now all of a sudden CON$ are using the seasonally adjusted numbers after bitching about how "seasonally adjusted" means cooked in Obama's favor. At the time I predicted that anytime the seasonally adjusted number was higher, CON$ would suddenly use the adjusted number.Yeah, each year you have a million Boomers retire of the over 3 million Boomers who reach retirement in each year. And you know that very well also, so stop deflecting from FOX's obvious lie in the OP!!!!!
So that means that about 100,000 leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retiring Boomers without creating a single NEW job!!!!!
Fox did not lie
the number of people looking for a job is 6.3 million
ot in labor force
85,977 88,322 88,288 85,608 86,503 86,697 87,874 87,564 87,897
Persons who currently want a job
6,250 6,376 6,041 6,500 6,595 6,385 6,319 6,378 6,299
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
FOX News - Opinion - Opinion Posts - What's the truth about the unemployment numbers?
The BLS's seasonal adjustments to the job numbers also make the labor market seem stronger than it actually is.
Yeah, I see how you rationalize your habitual incivility.not at all, you burnt that bridge with me a long time ago, remember? you seem to expect folks to lay down for your errant stupid remarks on a personal level and never get fed up....
I have never had a discussion with Pinqy, see how that works?
Your claim earlier that Fox was lying turns out not to be true
6.3 million are looking for work
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
ot in labor force
85,977 88,322 88,288 85,608 86,503 86,697 87,874 87,564 87,897
Persons who currently want a job
6,250 6,376 6,041 6,500 6,595 6,385 6,319 6,378 6,299
Yeah, I see how you rationalize your habitual incivility.
Your claim earlier that Fox was lying turns out not to be true
6.3 million are looking for work
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
ot in labor force
85,977 88,322 88,288 85,608 86,503 86,697 87,874 87,564 87,897
Persons who currently want a job
6,250 6,376 6,041 6,500 6,595 6,385 6,319 6,378 6,299
He makes many unsupported claims.
The unadjusted number, which FOX claims is the accurate number, is 6.041 million not 6.3 million, the adjusted number FOX says makes the labor market look stronger than it is. What you are admitting is FOX will use an adjusted number that they say is cooked if it makes Obama look worse.Oh, so now all of a sudden CON$ are using the seasonally adjusted numbers after bitching about how "seasonally adjusted" means cooked in Obama's favor. At the time I predicted that anytime the seasonally adjusted number was higher, CON$ would suddenly use the adjusted number.Fox did not lie
the number of people looking for a job is 6.3 million
ot in labor force
85,977 88,322 88,288 85,608 86,503 86,697 87,874 87,564 87,897
Persons who currently want a job
6,250 6,376 6,041 6,500 6,595 6,385 6,319 6,378 6,299
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
FOX News - Opinion - Opinion Posts - What's the truth about the unemployment numbers?
The BLS's seasonal adjustments to the job numbers also make the labor market seem stronger than it actually is.
No, you called there article a lie.
I was correcting your 1/2 truth
Actually the article is 100% correct, and no matter what the reason any-one would use what, the claim you made was false (in your mind it was not I am sure)
The question I would ask my-self is why would one do that? You should be proud of BHO performance either.
Never give your opponent ammunition to harm your reputation, for any reason. I say that with respect as you must be very young. Learn from your mistakes
You can blame me all you want for your unprovoked habitual incivility rather than take responsibility for your OWN actions. You only make yourself look smaller.Yeah, I see how you rationalize your habitual incivility.
apparently you just cannot comprehend the written word, you don't deserve any civility from me, because none was rendered by you, to me, to often. Read my comment again, slowly...
The numbers aren't dismal but they aren't good either.
Your claim earlier that Fox was lying turns out not to be true
6.3 million are looking for work
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
ot in labor force
85,977 88,322 88,288 85,608 86,503 86,697 87,874 87,564 87,897
Persons who currently want a job
6,250 6,376 6,041 6,500 6,595 6,385 6,319 6,378 6,299
He makes many unsupported claims.
Fox used the Seasonally adjusted numbers. He went to the BLS web site and found the not adjusted number was lower and called them a liar based on that.
As a general statement and by no means meant to be personal against any-one, doing those kind of things makes one look desperate
I know the closer we get to November this will be the norm from the left, especially from the biased media
It has all ready started. the OBL saga has been an embarrassing few days, you would have thought BHO and OBL had a gun fight. They also made a huge issue about the 4 pennies that gas fell in one week after god knows how many weeks it went up
ADP report: Private sector adds 119,000 jobs in April - May. 2, 2012
So......nutters..........what data do you think real Americans will focus on?
You guys suck dick.
Private sector job growth slows
By Annalyn Censky @CNNMoney May 2, 2012: 9:17 AM ET
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Private companies are pulling back on hiring.
Businesses added just 119,000 jobs in April, according to a report issued Wednesday by payroll-processing company ADP. The number fell far short of the 170,000 jobs economists were expecting.
Earlier this year, the same report showed companies added 201,000 jobs in March and 228,000 jobs in February.
"Those employment gains are not enough to get us back to full employment," said Joel Prakken, chairman of Macroeconomic Advisers. "I don't consider this to be a good number. It's tepid."
The warm winter could be to blame for the sudden slowdown in job growth in the spring, he said.
"There is some evidence that unusually warm weather boosted employment during the winter months, with a 'payback' now coming due," Prakken said, pointing to the construction industry in particular...
There is the unadjusted number FOX claims is most accurate. According to FOX, BLS plays games with the adjusted number.Lies, Damned Lies and Government Jobs Data | Fox Business
This is the link you called a lie
The link you choose has what to do with this link?
Nothing
I am at a loss of words as to why you want go on with this, you got called out. You brought it on your self
However, the unemployment rate is the number of people out of work but who are actively looking. The government doesnt count in that rate the now 6.3 million who have given up and stopped looking for work, but want jobs. That number has grown from 5.7 million in January 2009.
So, this "improvement" in the unemployment rate is artificial -- it was due to workers giving up and dropping out of the labor force.
It comes straight out of the not in work force but but still looking for work column
Not in labor force
85,977 88,322 88,288 85,608 86,503 86,697 87,874 87,564 87,897
Persons who currently want a job
6,250 6,376 6,041 6,500 6,595 6,385 6,319 6,378 6,299
Your dishonesty is legendary here. You can always rationalize your unprovoked incivility but but you can never back up your claims.You can blame me all you want for your unprovoked habitual incivility rather than take responsibility for your OWN actions. You only make yourself look smaller.apparently you just cannot comprehend the written word, you don't deserve any civility from me, because none was rendered by you, to me, to often. Read my comment again, slowly...
towards you? I take full responsibility and I told you why. your lack of reading/comprehension skillz are legendary here, you aren't helping yourself ....stop gilding the lilly.
