Dont read too much into one month's job's report.

Obama administration repeats same jobs line

June 2012: "Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available." (LINK: The Employment Situation in June | The White House)

May 2012: "Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available." (LINK: The Employment Situation in May | The White House)

April 2012: "Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available." (LINK: The Employment Situation in April | The White House)

March 2012: "Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available." (LINK: The Employment Situation in March | The White House)

February 2012: "Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign." (LINK: The Employment Situation in February | The White House)

January 2012: "Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign." (LINK: The Employment Situation in January | The White House)

December 2011: "Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report." (LINK: The Employment Situation in December | The White House)

November 2011: "Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report." (LINK: The Employment Situation in November | The White House)

October 2011: "The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and employment estimates are subject to substantial revision. There is no better example than August's jobs figure, which was initially reported at zero and in the latest revision increased to 104,000. This illustrates why the Administration always stresses it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report." (LINK: The Employment Situation in October | The White House)

September 2011: "Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report." (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/10/07/employment-situation-septembe

Are we allowed to Read anything into the pattern Over the last 3 Years? lol
 
Not many reasons to think it'll improve much either. I can't think of one, but I can think of some reasons why it could get worse. Trouble in Europe, China slowing down, ditto Brazil and India. And of course the trouble in the Middle East.
 
Beats losing jobs.
Unless you're one of the ones who has... Or out of work...

And.....the point of your faux sympathy?

Gaining jobs is better than losing them......for the country. No?

We have lost far more jobs than we gain. The UE number only goes down due to the mass number (300,000 THOUSAD ish) that fall off UE each month after 2 years of collecting. UE should be well over 10%, prolly near 14-18%. How else can 80k jobs keep UE at 8.2 when it's over 150k just shy of keeping up with population growth.


This is the "glitch" in the system and you need to know right now that UE was extended for 2 years for this very reason, it was no accident.

Put it like this, if UE were extended to everyone for the next 6 months starting today UE would rise at around 1% a month until the GE because you no longer would get to stop counting 300k people a month.
 
28 consecutive months of private sector job growth.

That means a lot to all the unemployed out there....:thup:

I'm sure they'll remember that when casting their ballot....

It certainly isn't keeping up with people looking for employment. Less than 90,000 new jobs should be an embarrassment.

It isn't great. But it sure beats losing 750,000.

If you could say with any honesty that yourvfucking party wasn't working to keep that number as low as possible......you might have a leg to stand on.
 
Not many reasons to think it'll improve much either. I can't think of one, but I can think of some reasons why it could get worse. Trouble in Europe, China slowing down, ditto Brazil and India. And of course the trouble in the Middle East.

True, but shouldn't we just pass another 1-2 trillion dollar stimulus package to get the union members back to work to prop up these numbers. Remember money is only paper. :eusa_whistle:
 
That means a lot to all the unemployed out there....:thup:

I'm sure they'll remember that when casting their ballot....

It certainly isn't keeping up with people looking for employment. Less than 90,000 new jobs should be an embarrassment.

It isn't great. But it sure beats losing 750,000.

It isn't anywhere near where we need to be on hiring, no matter how you idiots want to spin it...
 
That means a lot to all the unemployed out there....:thup:

I'm sure they'll remember that when casting their ballot....

It certainly isn't keeping up with people looking for employment. Less than 90,000 new jobs should be an embarrassment.

It isn't great. But it sure beats losing 750,000.

If you could say with any honesty that yourvfucking party wasn't working to keep that number as low as possible......you might have a leg to stand on.

I don't have a "fucking party", FTR. Yes it does beat losing 750,000, but if we had a prime time President, he wouldn't be doing the class warfare, big business is evil, evil rich people route in trying to move the economy. That is a big red flag to business.
 
It certainly isn't keeping up with people looking for employment. Less than 90,000 new jobs should be an embarrassment.

It isn't great. But it sure beats losing 750,000.

If you could say with any honesty that yourvfucking party wasn't working to keep that number as low as possible......you might have a leg to stand on.

I don't have a "fucking party", FTR. Yes it does beat losing 750,000, but if we had a prime time President, he wouldn't be doing the class warfare, big business is evil, evil rich people route in trying to move the economy. That is a big red flag to business.

LoneLaughingBoy is just playing the "spin the numbers" games...

It's like saying "Sure we're down 86 to 3 in the 4th quarter, but we just scored a field goal! Yay team!"...
 

Forum List

Back
Top