April Jobs report looks dismal, March numbers to be revised????

[edthecynic]

They pretend to support women staying home and taking care of the children, but if women with children want dignity then they better get to work.

I haven't caught that one.

Mitt Romney Says 'Dignity Of Work' Only Available To Women In The Paid Workforce - Forbes

Chris Hayes has turned up the video of a speech made by Mitt Romney in New Hampshire this past January where he spoke of his efforts, while serving as governor of Massachusetts, to force all mothers receiving government aid to get out of the house and into the workforce—or lose their benefits.

It wasn’t about the money. Romney calculates that getting these mothers to leave their kids and enter the workforce would actually cost the state more through the increased costs of providing day care for the children of these working mothers.

No, Romney had a higher goal in mind —he wanted these stay-at-home mothers to know the ‘dignity of work‘.

I know. Was it not Governor Romney who spent this past week exhorting the great dignity and hard work done by moms who elect to stay home and raise their kids? How does that square with his speech which touts his long-held view that certain stay-at-home mothers can only learn the dignity of work by getting out of the house and leaving the daytime care of their children to others?

Speaking to the New Hampshire audience, this is what the Governor had to say:

“I wanted to increase the work requirement,” said Romney. “I said, for instance, that even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, ‘Well that’s heartless.’ And I said, ‘No, no, I’m willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It’ll cost the state more providing that daycare, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.’”

I thought that if anything had been established through the eruption caused by CNN pundit Hillary Rosen’s poorly chosen words earlier this week, it was that there is, indeed, immense dignity in the work of stay-at-home moms. So said the President, the First Lady and the one-time First Lady of Massachusetts—Ann Romney.

And, for what it is worth, so say I.

The Governor’s suggestion that there is dignity in the work done by women who stay home to raise their kids (this week’s meme) but, apparently, only when they have sufficient financial resources to do so, completely proves the point Ms. Rosen sought to make—even if her comments were inartfully uttered.

 

[itfitzme]

You know I know a little bit about the law
Does therm slander mean anything to you?
I would watch calling an article by fox to be un true unless you can prove it as such
slander may not be the right word, yea calling one a liar when there not
That is being slanderous

Really? What are you, like 12?

I'd say, "you gotta be kidding", but I believe you think that you are actually serious.

 

[itfitzme]

They pretend to support women staying home and taking care of the children, but if women with children want dignity then they better get to work.

I haven't caught that one.

Mitt Romney Says 'Dignity Of Work' Only Available To Women In The Paid Workforce - Forbes

Chris Hayes has turned up the video of a speech made by Mitt Romney in New Hampshire this past January where he spoke of his efforts, while serving as governor of Massachusetts, to force all mothers receiving government aid to get out of the house and into the workforce—or lose their benefits.

It wasn’t about the money. Romney calculates that getting these mothers to leave their kids and enter the workforce would actually cost the state more through the increased costs of providing day care for the children of these working mothers.

No, Romney had a higher goal in mind —he wanted these stay-at-home mothers to know the ‘dignity of work‘.

I know. Was it not Governor Romney who spent this past week exhorting the great dignity and hard work done by moms who elect to stay home and raise their kids? How does that square with his speech which touts his long-held view that certain stay-at-home mothers can only learn the dignity of work by getting out of the house and leaving the daytime care of their children to others?

Speaking to the New Hampshire audience, this is what the Governor had to say:

“I wanted to increase the work requirement,” said Romney. “I said, for instance, that even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, ‘Well that’s heartless.’ And I said, ‘No, no, I’m willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It’ll cost the state more providing that daycare, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.’”

I thought that if anything had been established through the eruption caused by CNN pundit Hillary Rosen’s poorly chosen words earlier this week, it was that there is, indeed, immense dignity in the work of stay-at-home moms. So said the President, the First Lady and the one-time First Lady of Massachusetts—Ann Romney.

And, for what it is worth, so say I.

The Governor’s suggestion that there is dignity in the work done by women who stay home to raise their kids (this week’s meme) but, apparently, only when they have sufficient financial resources to do so, completely proves the point Ms. Rosen sought to make—even if her comments were inartfully uttered.

Thank you for the well articulated summary, Ed. I don't do video so your summary is very much appreciated.

I had the sense that your intelligence was not finding true expression in this mindnumbing circular banter of rehashed cut and paste cherry picked numbers.

These kind of subjects, like the one Romney tried to broach, does not lend well to generalizations.

As an anechdotal observation to his regard, I did learn of a particular social group of women that actually make an "industry" out of having babies and collecting government assistance. I was quite amazed, though not tremendously surpised understanding human nature and the economy, that they learn from each other how to make a living out of it. It is quite real.

The issue is whether it is predominate or simply a very small occurance. (As in .01% of 50 million is like 50,000 small). In the bigger scheme of things, one has to wonder if it is the "low hanging fruit" and if some myopic approach has any chance having any real social effect.

And the serious issue is often, implementing general programs and processes that are intended to target some minor sub-group ends up screwing a whole lot of other people that have a real need. I can tell you about one individual, seriously injured in an auto accident and disabled for life, that found every manner of problems when the government decided they needed to cut back on disability assistance.

On the other hand, I have heard (again not checked) that Maine did a good job with some welfare to work program. And there are perfectly viable methods of incentivising joining the labor market if the demand is actually there for the labor. You let people earn two dollars for every dollar they get cut back, and those that can will.

It's all a great emotionally loaded issue to rally the troops around, but is it worth the effort?

Personally, there are some people I would rather we paid to stay the h out of the way. (I'm pragmatic.)

It seems that the US has the highest incarceration rate of any industrialized country. (So I hear, haven't checked it). We have no problem spending extra ordinary amounts of money incarcerating people that we would rather keep out of the way but get all pissy about a third that amount for some other's that we are just as well better off keeping out of the way.

We are so damned efficient when it comes to food and housing. We have way more then we need of either. They are bulldozing abandoned houses in some counties. Somehow, I really doubt that the "drain on the economy" is as big as some might suppose.

And even if Romney is right, meaning exactly the group I recognize, I am not sure that he has the were-with-all to implement a more refined process that doesn't just screw things up. Isn't he the the Mass socialized medicine flip floppping governor?

The thing is, if there was all that much demand for labor, then the markets would demand it. Maybe the thing to focus on is why the demand isn't there for the labor and why the assistance is the better option for some people. All to often, we find it's an economic issue at it's core and has nothing to do with "dignity". It's about maximizing ones resources.

Just some general thoughts on it, where I truly believe that generalizations just don't work.

Thank for the intellectual relief. I swear I could have gotten drunk and killed fewer brain cells.

 

[Trajan]

Notice how after you posted a link that compared April 2011 to April 2012 to claim that no jobs were created when the UE rate went from 9% to 8.1% even though 2.237 million were created. And that same link showed that the number of people NILF who want a job went down, you have now shifted to 2009!!!
You fool no one by moving the goal posts.

Do what?
lets try this again
The drop in the unemployment rate comes with an asterisk: while there was a 278,000 gain in employment, there was a concurrent labor force decline of 315,000 from October. It would be far preferable for the unemployment rate to drop because the economy is creating over 200,000 per month consistently, rather than due to would-be employees leaving the work force,
November Unemployment: Why the big drop? - CBS News
That is the first big drop on the UE rate
Last month we had about the same event except we only created about 115k as I recall
we lost well over 300,000 in the labor force from March

I have no idea what 09 has to do with anything except the article you stated fox was lying about. You know I know a little bit about the law
Does therm slander mean anything to you?
I would watch calling an article by fox to be un true unless you can prove it as such
slander may not be the right word, yea calling one a liar when there not
That is being slanderous

Just because some people do not want the economy to improve does not mean that workers can't retire, go to school, get married and stay at home, and leave the labor force. Freedom means the freedom to leave the labor force!!!!

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life, including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die. They pretend to support women staying home and taking care of the children, but if women with children want dignity then they better get to work. And staying in school after you turn 16 only leads to a Liberal brainwashing, so off to work with you.

CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

People leave the labor force all the time, but people who want a job who are NILF has been going DOWN this past year. So these "would be employees" you are bitching about are not people who want a job, but who to CON$ should not be free to leave the workforce while a Democrat is president. Once a Republican becomes president and the NILF continues to rise, the CON$ will have no problem with it.

A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life,

such as? a few examples please?


including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die.

examples please?


CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

a few examples please?

 

[Annie]

Do what?
lets try this again
The drop in the unemployment rate comes with an asterisk: while there was a 278,000 gain in employment, there was a concurrent labor force decline of 315,000 from October. It would be far preferable for the unemployment rate to drop because the economy is creating over 200,000 per month consistently, rather than due to would-be employees leaving the work force,
November Unemployment: Why the big drop? - CBS News
That is the first big drop on the UE rate
Last month we had about the same event except we only created about 115k as I recall
we lost well over 300,000 in the labor force from March

I have no idea what 09 has to do with anything except the article you stated fox was lying about. You know I know a little bit about the law
Does therm slander mean anything to you?
I would watch calling an article by fox to be un true unless you can prove it as such
slander may not be the right word, yea calling one a liar when there not
That is being slanderous

Just because some people do not want the economy to improve does not mean that workers can't retire, go to school, get married and stay at home, and leave the labor force. Freedom means the freedom to leave the labor force!!!!

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life, including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die. They pretend to support women staying home and taking care of the children, but if women with children want dignity then they better get to work. And staying in school after you turn 16 only leads to a Liberal brainwashing, so off to work with you.

CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

People leave the labor force all the time, but people who want a job who are NILF has been going DOWN this past year. So these "would be employees" you are bitching about are not people who want a job, but who to CON$ should not be free to leave the workforce while a Democrat is president. Once a Republican becomes president and the NILF continues to rise, the CON$ will have no problem with it.

A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life,

such as? a few examples please?


including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die.

examples please?


CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

a few examples please?

I'm not going to go back and find all the posts, but must say this one brings to mind why I've been skipping over Ed's posts for awhile now. No moderation on his part. He wasn't always this way, got to think it's the change in prevailing political winds...

 

[Trajan]

Just because some people do not want the economy to improve does not mean that workers can't retire, go to school, get married and stay at home, and leave the labor force. Freedom means the freedom to leave the labor force!!!!

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life, including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die. They pretend to support women staying home and taking care of the children, but if women with children want dignity then they better get to work. And staying in school after you turn 16 only leads to a Liberal brainwashing, so off to work with you.

CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

People leave the labor force all the time, but people who want a job who are NILF has been going DOWN this past year. So these "would be employees" you are bitching about are not people who want a job, but who to CON$ should not be free to leave the workforce while a Democrat is president. Once a Republican becomes president and the NILF continues to rise, the CON$ will have no problem with it.

A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life,

such as? a few examples please?


including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die.

examples please?


CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

a few examples please?

I'm not going to go back and find all the posts, but must say this one brings to mind why I've been skipping over Ed's posts for awhile now. No moderation on his part. He wasn't always this way, got to think it's the change in prevailing political winds...

I had been to since he went off the reservation in the robert kennedy jr. thread. but I am bored....*shrugs*

 

[edthecynic]

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life,

such as? a few examples please?


including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die.

examples please?


CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

a few examples please?

I'm not going to go back and find all the posts, but must say this one brings to mind why I've been skipping over Ed's posts for awhile now. No moderation on his part. He wasn't always this way, got to think it's the change in prevailing political winds...

I had been to since he went off the reservation in the robert kennedy jr. thread. but I am bored....*shrugs*

And you are full of shit too! I only "went off the reservation in the robert kennedy jr. thread" in your IMAGINATION since I never posted in a "robert kennedy jr. thread."

 

[JRK]

Notice how after you posted a link that compared April 2011 to April 2012 to claim that no jobs were created when the UE rate went from 9% to 8.1% even though 2.237 million were created. And that same link showed that the number of people NILF who want a job went down, you have now shifted to 2009!!!
You fool no one by moving the goal posts.

Do what?
lets try this again
The drop in the unemployment rate comes with an asterisk: while there was a 278,000 gain in employment, there was a concurrent labor force decline of 315,000 from October. It would be far preferable for the unemployment rate to drop because the economy is creating over 200,000 per month consistently, rather than due to would-be employees leaving the work force,
November Unemployment: Why the big drop? - CBS News
That is the first big drop on the UE rate
Last month we had about the same event except we only created about 115k as I recall
we lost well over 300,000 in the labor force from March

I have no idea what 09 has to do with anything except the article you stated fox was lying about. You know I know a little bit about the law
Does therm slander mean anything to you?
I would watch calling an article by fox to be un true unless you can prove it as such
slander may not be the right word, yea calling one a liar when there not
That is being slanderous

Just because some people do not want the economy to improve does not mean that workers can't retire, go to school, get married and stay at home, and leave the labor force. Freedom means the freedom to leave the labor force!!!!

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life, including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die. They pretend to support women staying home and taking care of the children, but if women with children want dignity then they better get to work. And staying in school after you turn 16 only leads to a Liberal brainwashing, so off to work with you.

CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

People leave the labor force all the time, but people who want a job who are NILF has been going DOWN this past year. So these "would be employees" you are bitching about are not people who want a job, but who to CON$ should not be free to leave the workforce while a Democrat is president. Once a Republican becomes president and the NILF continues to rise, the CON$ will have no problem with it.

A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

what are you talking about
this has nothing to do with school, wind blowing, and all the other stuff your babbling about
Until we get job creation that gets us back to the numbers we had from the 80s to 2007 and then maintain the same level as the increase in the labor force it is un acceptable

Stop spinning it
we are millions of jobs short of 2008 levels
That is un acceptable

 

[starcraftzzz]

Do what?
lets try this again
The drop in the unemployment rate comes with an asterisk: while there was a 278,000 gain in employment, there was a concurrent labor force decline of 315,000 from October. It would be far preferable for the unemployment rate to drop because the economy is creating over 200,000 per month consistently, rather than due to would-be employees leaving the work force,
November Unemployment: Why the big drop? - CBS News
That is the first big drop on the UE rate
Last month we had about the same event except we only created about 115k as I recall
we lost well over 300,000 in the labor force from March

I have no idea what 09 has to do with anything except the article you stated fox was lying about. You know I know a little bit about the law
Does therm slander mean anything to you?
I would watch calling an article by fox to be un true unless you can prove it as such
slander may not be the right word, yea calling one a liar when there not
That is being slanderous

Just because some people do not want the economy to improve does not mean that workers can't retire, go to school, get married and stay at home, and leave the labor force. Freedom means the freedom to leave the labor force!!!!

CON$ pretend to believe in freedom, but in practice they want to control every aspect of your life, including requiring you to work till you are too physically broken to work another day, and then to die. They pretend to support women staying home and taking care of the children, but if women with children want dignity then they better get to work. And staying in school after you turn 16 only leads to a Liberal brainwashing, so off to work with you.

CON$ are always on both sides of every issue depending on which way the wind blows at the moment.

People leave the labor force all the time, but people who want a job who are NILF has been going DOWN this past year. So these "would be employees" you are bitching about are not people who want a job, but who to CON$ should not be free to leave the workforce while a Democrat is president. Once a Republican becomes president and the NILF continues to rise, the CON$ will have no problem with it.

A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

what are you talking about
this has nothing to do with school, wind blowing, and all the other stuff your babbling about
Until we get job creation that gets us back to the numbers we had from the 80s to 2007 and then maintain the same level as the increase in the labor force it is un acceptable

Stop spinning it
we are millions of jobs short of 2008 levels
That is un acceptable

Hey dumbass people who retire, go to school, or take care of children are consdiered not int he labor force so tell us that its bad that people are retireing and going to school only futheres toe fact that you are a retard

 

[saveliberty]

Many people have decided to retire because they needed the money and their unemployment benefits had expired. They didn't want to be without a job. We also have an equally large problem with underemployment. A subject the left never brings up.

 

[edthecynic]

Many people have decided to retire because they needed the money and their unemployment benefits had expired. They didn't want to be without a job. We also have an equally large problem with underemployment. A subject the left never brings up.

Again, the BLS reports how many of the NILF want a job and it's not 88 million, it's a little over 6 million, and only a little over 2 million of them would accept a job if it was offered to them on the spot!

A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

 

[saveliberty]

Many people have decided to retire because they needed the money and their unemployment benefits had expired. They didn't want to be without a job. We also have an equally large problem with underemployment. A subject the left never brings up.

Again, the BLS reports how many of the NILF want a job and it's not 88 million, it's a little over 6 million, and only a little over 2 million of them would accept a job if it was offered to them on the spot!

A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

An older worker may have specialized skills they wish to use in their job or may not be able to take one requiring physical demands. I was not trying to account for all of the people. Just noting a significant group. I see you are going to ignore the underemployed.

 

[Trajan]

I'm not going to go back and find all the posts, but must say this one brings to mind why I've been skipping over Ed's posts for awhile now. No moderation on his part. He wasn't always this way, got to think it's the change in prevailing political winds...

I had been to since he went off the reservation in the robert kennedy jr. thread. but I am bored....*shrugs*

And you are full of shit too! I only "went off the reservation in the robert kennedy jr. thread" in your IMAGINATION since I never posted in a "robert kennedy jr. thread."

thimerosal,hello.


still waiting on answers-

didn't you say you were guessing at the retiree thing and you never answered me as to how a job gets filled without employing someone there-by, taking the number down.. remember?

 

[pinqy]

Many people have decided to retire because they needed the money and their unemployment benefits had expired. They didn't want to be without a job.

Ok, true. How would you like to see that reflected in the data and why? It's already covered under "wants a job now" or unemployed(if they actually look do for work.

We also have an equally large problem with underemployment. A subject the left never brings up.

How should "underemployed" be defined and measured? BLS has "part time for economic reasons" which is people willing and able to work full time who are working part time due to cut hours or can't find full time.

 

[JRK]

Not sure who said that there was 88 million in any other place than the not in labor force. Libs tend to go off of the res just to change the path of the conversation

This number has exploded and no matter what is said as to explain why, the simple fact of the matter is none of it is good