Jack Welch: Economy is not growing at breakneck speed contrary to Obama's BLS claims

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Discouraged workers DECLINED from 844,000 to 802,000.

Part time jobs can lead to full time jobs, getting a foot in the door is hardly discouraging.

300,000 Boomers reach retirement age each month. They all might not retire, though more than half do.

Now you have the actual facts CON$ervoFascist.

Its simple, from 2007 to today there are 3.5 million fewer jobs thanks to Barry's liberal idiocy

and, 2/3 of the new jobs in the last report are part time jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11. Barry has buried the middle class. Plus, Krugman has a book out called "End This Depression Now."

I have a news flash for you, Obama was not president in 2007. In Jan 2009 when Bush crawled away in disgrace there were 142,187,000 jobs, now there are 142,974,000 jobs.

"there are fewer net jobs in the country today than there were on the day Obama took office. But the claim invites us to look at the numbers more closely and from different angles.

No matter which figures you use, or how you interpret them, they can’t obscure the fact that the economy’s still weak, and has rebounded from the great recession slowly."

and of course this does not mention that 2/3 in the last report were part time Obama jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11.


In fact, Krugman calls it a Depression.

 

[pinqy]

and of course this does not mention that 2/3 in the last report were part time Obama jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11

Well, that's because you have no evidence to back up that claim. The number of part time workers went down, in the household survey (the establishment survey doesn't distinguish between full and part time)

 

[edthecynic]

Its simple, from 2007 to today there are 3.5 million fewer jobs thanks to Barry's liberal idiocy

and, 2/3 of the new jobs in the last report are part time jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11. Barry has buried the middle class. Plus, Krugman has a book out called "End This Depression Now."

I have a news flash for you, Obama was not president in 2007. In Jan 2009 when Bush crawled away in disgrace there were 142,187,000 jobs, now there are 142,974,000 jobs.

"there are fewer net jobs in the country today than there were on the day Obama took office. But the claim invites us to look at the numbers more closely and from different angles.

No matter which figures you use, or how you interpret them, they can’t obscure the fact that the economy’s still weak, and has rebounded from the great recession slowly."

and of course this does not mention that 2/3 in the last report were part time Obama jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11.


In fact, Krugman calls it a Depression.

There are 748,000 MORE net jobs today then the day Obama took office. No matter what angle you try, your numbers are dishonest.

 

[Caroljo]

No, just programmed, poorly. The chip in his empty skull has a limited number of responses.

brainless violent liberal without the IQ to respond with substance so is reduced to violence

Whatever.

GOOD come-back!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I have a news flash for you, Obama was not president in 2007. In Jan 2009 when Bush crawled away in disgrace there were 142,187,000 jobs, now there are 142,974,000 jobs.

"there are fewer net jobs in the country today than there were on the day Obama took office. But the claim invites us to look at the numbers more closely and from different angles.

No matter which figures you use, or how you interpret them, they can’t obscure the fact that the economy’s still weak, and has rebounded from the great recession slowly."

and of course this does not mention that 2/3 in the last report were part time Obama jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11.


In fact, Krugman calls it a Depression.

There are 748,000 MORE net jobs today then the day Obama took office. No matter what angle you try, your numbers are dishonest.

too stupid!! Krugman calls it a depression based largely on unemployment!!!


The American economy is experiencing the slowest recovery in 70 years. In addition to persistently high unemployment, labor force participation has fallen sharply since the recession began in December 2007. Today, nearly 5 million fewer Americans are working or looking for work. This drop accounts for virtually the entire reduction of the unemployment rate since 2009—those not looking for work do not count as unemployed.


Heritage.org:
"Demographic changes explain approximately one-fifth of the drop in labor force participation. The baby boomers are aging and thus more likely to retire, dropping out of the labor force. The remaining drop in participation primarily comes from millions more people going on disability insurance or attending school. While those enrolled in school will probably return to the labor force, those going on the disability rolls will not. They will remain permanently outside the labor force."

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I have a news flash for you, Obama was not president in 2007. In Jan 2009 when Bush crawled away in disgrace there were 142,187,000 jobs, now there are 142,974,000 jobs.

"there are fewer net jobs in the country today than there were on the day Obama took office. But the claim invites us to look at the numbers more closely and from different angles.

No matter which figures you use, or how you interpret them, they can’t obscure the fact that the economy’s still weak, and has rebounded from the great recession slowly."

and of course this does not mention that 2/3 in the last report were part time Obama jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11.


In fact, Krugman calls it a Depression.

There are 748,000 MORE net jobs today then the day Obama took office. No matter what angle you try, your numbers are dishonest.

and unemployment has gone up since BO took office too, except for last report where slight down tick was due to shrinking workforce and part time jobs.

 

[edthecynic]

"there are fewer net jobs in the country today than there were on the day Obama took office. But the claim invites us to look at the numbers more closely and from different angles.

No matter which figures you use, or how you interpret them, they can’t obscure the fact that the economy’s still weak, and has rebounded from the great recession slowly."

and of course this does not mention that 2/3 in the last report were part time Obama jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11.


In fact, Krugman calls it a Depression.

There are 748,000 MORE net jobs today then the day Obama took office. No matter what angle you try, your numbers are dishonest.

and unemployment has gone up since BO took office too, except for last report where slight down tick was due to shrinking workforce and part time jobs.

In U.S., Unadjusted Unemployment at 7.3% in Mid-October

 

[pinqy]

"there are fewer net jobs in the country today than there were on the day Obama took office. But the claim invites us to look at the numbers more closely and from different angles.

No matter which figures you use, or how you interpret them, they can’t obscure the fact that the economy’s still weak, and has rebounded from the great recession slowly."

and of course this does not mention that 2/3 in the last report were part time Obama jobs at Mickey Ds and 7-11.


In fact, Krugman calls it a Depression.

There are 748,000 MORE net jobs today then the day Obama took office. No matter what angle you try, your numbers are dishonest.

and unemployment has gone up since BO took office too, except for last report where slight down tick was due to shrinking workforce and part time jobs.

Where did you learn math? How is going from 154,645,000 to 155
,063,000 shrinking? Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age)

And part time workers went down as well.

 

[uscitizen]

The economy IS growing at brokeneck speed!

 

[Rshermr]

Check my prior posts in this thread. I'm not gonna reinvent the wheel for ya.

translation: As a liberal I'm afraid to explain what GDP growth is and is not so I'll just pretend I already won this debate .

Reality: I'm not a liberal and my posts answered your question very directly. Stop being a lazy idiot.

Ed is not always a lazy idiot. Once in a great while, about every year or so, he is not lazy.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

translation: As a liberal I'm afraid to explain what GDP growth is and is not so I'll just pretend I already won this debate .

Reality: I'm not a liberal and my posts answered your question very directly. Stop being a lazy idiot.

Ed is not always a lazy idiot. Once in a great while, about every year or so, he is not lazy.

You're not the first or last to testify about that. Doesn't matter though. He's on ignore now. I could care less about brain dead trolls.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Reality: I'm not a liberal and my posts answered your question very directly. Stop being a lazy idiot.

Ed is not always a lazy idiot. Once in a great while, about every year or so, he is not lazy.

You're not the first or last to testify about that. Doesn't matter though. He's on ignore now. I could care less about brain dead trolls.

typical liberal personal attack because a liberal will lack the IQ for substance

 

[Rshermr]

Ed is not always a lazy idiot. Once in a great while, about every year or so, he is not lazy.

You're not the first or last to testify about that. Doesn't matter though. He's on ignore now. I could care less about brain dead trolls.

typical liberal personal attack because a liberal will lack the IQ for substance

U of Arkansas study Study “Proves” Conservatism Linked To Stupidity - The Ulsterman Report

British Cohort study Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says controversial study - and conservative politics can lead people to be racist | Mail Online

LiveScience study Social conservatives have a lower I.Q.? (probably) | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

Watching Fox makes you stupid Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid | Jillian Rayfield | Politics News | Rolling Stone

 

[Toro]

You're not the first or last to testify about that. Doesn't matter though. He's on ignore now. I could care less about brain dead trolls.

typical liberal personal attack because a liberal will lack the IQ for substance

U of Arkansas study Study “Proves” Conservatism Linked To Stupidity - The Ulsterman Report

British Cohort study Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says controversial study - and conservative politics can lead people to be racist | Mail Online

LiveScience study Social conservatives have a lower I.Q.? (probably) | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

Watching Fox makes you stupid Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid | Jillian Rayfield | Politics News | Rolling Stone

TGG says GDP growth isn't economic growth.

you want to pretend that GDP growth equals economic growth and that is just not the case at all.

Do you agree?

 

[oldfart]

TGG says GDP growth isn't economic growth.

you want to pretend that GDP growth equals economic growth and that is just not the case at all.

Do you agree?

I vote for real per capita GDP adjusted with a scalar for the Gini coefficient and another scalar for a sustainability index. I haven't seen it but it can be done with existing data. In the meantime how about just using real GDP per capital like the CIA does.