Christmas season is what is saving jobs

[ihopehefails]

Last Christmas season we were losing 700,000 jobs a month, this season only 11,000 a month.

If there is no improvement in employment, why didn't we see 11,000 last Christmas?

There is no improvement in employment because there had not been a single month where jobs have increased so there has been a steady decline in jobs since November.

 

[ihopehefails]

God dammit people are stupid. Seriously, last November was the worst job month in the last 350 or so. Get that through your thick fucking minds.

How much worse would it have been if there was no christmas shopping to boost the economy?

you mean the day after thanksgiving isn't black friday every other year, you mental midget?

The only mental midgets are people trying to say that black friday is the beginning of holiday shopping but don't understand that people do a lot of holiday shopping before that day. Black Friday is just the official beginning of the holiday shopping. It does not mean that people don't begin before that for things like thanksgiving or just want to get a jump on christmas shopping.

 

[ihopehefails]

A fact apparently lost on ihopehefails....

that's because he/she/it is brain dead.

Is that you Monica? Are you angry that Bill really didn't love you?

 

[rightwinger]

Last Christmas season we were losing 700,000 jobs a month, this season only 11,000 a month.

If there is no improvement in employment, why didn't we see 11,000 last Christmas?

There is no improvement in employment because there had not been a single month where jobs have increased so there has been a steady decline in jobs since November.

Nice try to duck the question..

If the only reason we only lost 11,000 jobs last month is Christmas hiring, why is it that we lost 700,000 jobs a month last Christmas?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

NON FARM numbers is what it says

OK...I see that...now I think we will not know anything until February of next year...if the unemployment rate shoots back up after the Christmas season's over with the whole stimulus is a failure....bottom line.

These predictions have worked for decades and when you dont like what they say you dont trust them?

This is why the right is in so much trouble. You refuse facts you dont like.

I would think you would be happy for the country that there is a light showing at the end of the tunnel.

BUT NOOOOOOO you want the country to stay a mess simply so you can feel right politically.

No I don't...I want the government to keeps it's nose out of our business....and what you have failed to take into consideration is that although these "predictions have worked for decades" the GOVERNMENT WAS NOT pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy in a supposed bid to save us all from certain doom.

So you may want to rethink your post.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Last Christmas season we were losing 700,000 jobs a month, this season only 11,000 a month.

If there is no improvement in employment, why didn't we see 11,000 last Christmas?

directly attributable to Christmas hiring......

 

[rightwinger]

Last Christmas season we were losing 700,000 jobs a month, this season only 11,000 a month.

If there is no improvement in employment, why didn't we see 11,000 last Christmas?

directly attributable to Christmas hiring......

Then why wasn't the number of lost jobs 11,000 last Christmas?

 

[rightwinger]

OK...I see that...now I think we will not know anything until February of next year...if the unemployment rate shoots back up after the Christmas season's over with the whole stimulus is a failure....bottom line.

These predictions have worked for decades and when you dont like what they say you dont trust them?

This is why the right is in so much trouble. You refuse facts you dont like.

I would think you would be happy for the country that there is a light showing at the end of the tunnel.

BUT NOOOOOOO you want the country to stay a mess simply so you can feel right politically.

No I don't...I want the government to keeps it's nose out of our business....and what you have failed to take into consideration is that although these "predictions have worked for decades" the GOVERNMENT WAS NOT pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy in a supposed bid to save us all from certain doom.

So you may want to rethink your post.

Poor Patek..

The economy is improving and he doesn't know what to do with himself.

May I suggest more birther threads?

 

[pinqy]

Except that the method used for calculating unemployment contains adjustment to isolate the seasonal trends in the data.

A fact apparently lost on ihopehefails....

What part of that 80,000 hired is seasonal. If it is 100% then the hiring trend will stop after the season but if it is 50% then there is some hiring that will continue but when the economist adjusted for the seasonal hiring it showed a negative witch indicates most of it is seasonal so it showed a negative trend that will continue to get much worse after the season.

All and more of the 80,000 is seasonal...that's why it was removed. The trend is still a positive trend though...jobs were still lost, but not as many as in the past few months. Why would you expect the trend to get worse after the season when the season doesn't affect the trend? Just as the increased hiring is factored out, so too are the increased quits and layoffs after the season.

 

[uscitizen]

I expect it to get worse than just the ones hired for Xmas sales.
I figure after sales are at best flat with last years Christmas sales are annouunced we will have a slump.

 

[NYcarbineer]

S e a s o n a l l y

a d j u s t e d

 

[ihopehefails]

Last Christmas season we were losing 700,000 jobs a month, this season only 11,000 a month.

If there is no improvement in employment, why didn't we see 11,000 last Christmas?

There is no improvement in employment because there had not been a single month where jobs have increased so there has been a steady decline in jobs since November.

Nice try to duck the question..

If the only reason we only lost 11,000 jobs last month is Christmas hiring, why is it that we lost 700,000 jobs a month last Christmas?

Things ain't sucking quite as bad as last year but they are still sucking. There has been no improvement in employment only improvement in the rate of job losses but they are still job losses.

I'm not saying that things are as bad as last year but I'm pointing out that the sudden dry up of job losses might be because of the holiday season and no one has ever said the ecomony won't ever improve. Its inevitable that at some point things will turn around. I suspect that will happen in about six months but then it usually takes a year or more to return to full employment.

 

[pinqy]

I'm not saying that things are as bad as last year but I'm pointing out that the sudden dry up of job losses might be because of the holiday season

And it's been pointed out to you, multiple times in this thread, that it is NOT because of the holiday season because the numbers are adjusted to account for those effects. Employment DID go up...but because it didn't go up as much as it should have due to the effect of seasonal hiring, the trend is still a loss of jobs.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Last Christmas season we were losing 700,000 jobs a month, this season only 11,000 a month.

If there is no improvement in employment, why didn't we see 11,000 last Christmas?

directly attributable to Christmas hiring......

Then why wasn't the number of lost jobs 11,000 last Christmas?

Last Christmas you didn't have 800 billion dollatrs in taxpayer money floating the economy.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

These predictions have worked for decades and when you dont like what they say you dont trust them?

This is why the right is in so much trouble. You refuse facts you dont like.

I would think you would be happy for the country that there is a light showing at the end of the tunnel.

BUT NOOOOOOO you want the country to stay a mess simply so you can feel right politically.

No I don't...I want the government to keeps it's nose out of our business....and what you have failed to take into consideration is that although these "predictions have worked for decades" the GOVERNMENT WAS NOT pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy in a supposed bid to save us all from certain doom.

So you may want to rethink your post.

Poor Patek..

The economy is improving and he doesn't know what to do with himself.

May I suggest more birther threads?

Poor rightwinger...a grade school dropout who gets their talking points from ThinkProgress and Huffington.

May I suggest hemlock?

 

[VaYank5150]

There is no improvement in employment because there had not been a single month where jobs have increased so there has been a steady decline in jobs since November.

Nice try to duck the question..

If the only reason we only lost 11,000 jobs last month is Christmas hiring, why is it that we lost 700,000 jobs a month last Christmas?

Things ain't sucking quite as bad as last year but they are still sucking. There has been no improvement in employment only improvement in the rate of job losses but they are still job losses.

I'm not saying that things are as bad as last year but I'm pointing out that the sudden dry up of job losses might be because of the holiday season and no one has ever said the ecomony won't ever improve. Its inevitable that at some point things will turn around. I suspect that will happen in about six months but then it usually takes a year or more to return to full employment.

Nothing like slowly backpeddling from your earlier assertions once someone else had to point out your mistakes.....what a retard. If you were wrong (and you were) just say you were wrong...is that so hard?

 

[VaYank5150]

directly attributable to Christmas hiring......

Then why wasn't the number of lost jobs 11,000 last Christmas?

Last Christmas you didn't have 800 billion dollatrs in taxpayer money floating the economy.

So, are you now admitting that the stimulus money is helping? Are you admitting that the stimulus has helped us not lose the 700,000 jobs that we saw under BOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?

 

[uscitizen]

800 billion in stimulus money floating jobs?
I thought only a small fraction of that had been spent?

 

[VaYank5150]

800 billion in stimulus money floating jobs?
I thought only a small fraction of that had been spent?

I know for a fact that only a FRACTION of that amount has been spent to date. I'm still trying to get my head arouund what the hell PP is saying. Hopefully, he will clarify his statements with some facts and/or data. Oh wait, It's Patek, what the hell was I thinking?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Then why wasn't the number of lost jobs 11,000 last Christmas?

Last Christmas you didn't have 800 billion dollatrs in taxpayer money floating the economy.

So, are you now admitting that the stimulus money is helping? Are you admitting that the stimulus has helped us not lose the 700,000 jobs that we saw under BOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?

The ONLY reason why there wasn't another fucked month under the Obama bailout plan was that States like California and New York received BILLIONS of dollars in Federal aid so the States could meet their payrolls and NOT lay off 10's of thousands for the holidays....that's your job savings...all government....the private sector is hiring seasonal employees.....just like they do every year.