Jobs Report - still 8.2%

[Trajan]

How about the ones that count the people not looking for a job OR no longer able to collect unemployment? You add those in for the TRUE number.

Well, those not collecting Unemployment are already included in the UE rate....It has NEVER EVER been based on people collecting benefits.

As for people not trying to get a job....why do you think they should be classified as unemployed? Example: Person A is in high school, looked for a summer job last year, couldn't find one, stopped looking when school started again because didn't want a job while being a full time student. Graduates from high school, lives with parents, could now take a job but hasn't done anything about getting one. Unemployed or Not in the Labor Force?
Person B is a married woman, looking for a part time job, gets pregnant, so stops looking to have the baby, has the baby, could take a job now, but hasn't started looking for one yet. Unemployed or Not in the labor force?

Not having a job does not mean you're unemployed...there are retirees, stay home spouses, full time students, pot-heads living in their mother's basement, etc.

NOTE: U.S. employers added only 80,000 jobs in June, a third straight month of weak hiring that shows the economy is still struggling three years after the recession ended.

The unemployment rate was unchanged at 8.2 percent, the Labor Department said Friday.

The economy added an average of just 75,000 jobs a month in the April-June quarter — one-third of the pace in the first quarter.

For the first six months of 2012, employers added an average of 150,000 jobs a month. That's fewer than the 161,000 average for the first half of 2011.

THE LOST JOBS

Five million jobs.

That's how many the economy has still failed to recover since the Great Recession officially ended three years ago.

The nation lost nearly 8.8 million jobs between January 2008 and February 2010. Since then, it's regained more than 3.8 million — less than 44 percent.

The economy has added just 137,000 jobs a month since employment hit bottom. At that pace, it would take three more years for employment to return to where it was in January 2008.

— Paul Wiseman, AP Economics Writer

Read more: For a third straight year, job market is slumping | Fox News

we have to crank the GDP up above 4% to make this happen a lot sooner, how many over 3% quarters have we had since the recession ended july of 2009?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Maybe if your right wing assholes in the house would act like decent human beings and care more about this country than their own reelections then things would have been better huh?


but NOOOOOOOOOO

Either Obama saved the world from the great recession, a Depression and WW3 or he didn't. If the stimulus, TARP QE1, QE2, cash for clunker, UE extensions for 2 years, housing stimulus, mass food stamps and Obamacare didn't save us to where more and more and more stimulus of some kind is not needed then it is literally pure stupidity to claim Obama did anything to resolve the economic crisis.

This is proof that welfare and stimulus during a downturn only floats the economy, the correction and liquidation of mal investment MUST occur.


Thanks for the sig btw.

Very good post...but it falls on deaf ears. Truthdon'tmatter isn't worth the effort it takes to hit the send button.
Really trying to get folks to ignore her in the economy forum...this is the only forum where a thread can stay decent for a page or two before turning to crap.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Well, those not collecting Unemployment are already included in the UE rate....It has NEVER EVER been based on people collecting benefits.

As for people not trying to get a job....why do you think they should be classified as unemployed? Example: Person A is in high school, looked for a summer job last year, couldn't find one, stopped looking when school started again because didn't want a job while being a full time student. Graduates from high school, lives with parents, could now take a job but hasn't done anything about getting one. Unemployed or Not in the Labor Force?
Person B is a married woman, looking for a part time job, gets pregnant, so stops looking to have the baby, has the baby, could take a job now, but hasn't started looking for one yet. Unemployed or Not in the labor force?

Not having a job does not mean you're unemployed...there are retirees, stay home spouses, full time students, pot-heads living in their mother's basement, etc.

NOTE: U.S. employers added only 80,000 jobs in June, a third straight month of weak hiring that shows the economy is still struggling three years after the recession ended.

The unemployment rate was unchanged at 8.2 percent, the Labor Department said Friday.

The economy added an average of just 75,000 jobs a month in the April-June quarter — one-third of the pace in the first quarter.

For the first six months of 2012, employers added an average of 150,000 jobs a month. That's fewer than the 161,000 average for the first half of 2011.

THE LOST JOBS

Five million jobs.

That's how many the economy has still failed to recover since the Great Recession officially ended three years ago.

The nation lost nearly 8.8 million jobs between January 2008 and February 2010. Since then, it's regained more than 3.8 million — less than 44 percent.

The economy has added just 137,000 jobs a month since employment hit bottom. At that pace, it would take three more years for employment to return to where it was in January 2008.

— Paul Wiseman, AP Economics Writer

Read more: For a third straight year, job market is slumping | Fox News

we have to crank the GDP up above 4% to make this happen a lot sooner, how many over 3% quarters have we had since the recession ended july of 2009?

Papa Obama's cheap political ploy for the illegals/work permits has to factor in, as well.

We will have to add even more jobs just to keep up with population growth and the policy change.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

How about the ones that count the people not looking for a job OR no longer able to collect unemployment? You add those in for the TRUE number.

Well, those not collecting Unemployment are already included in the UE rate....It has NEVER EVER been based on people collecting benefits.

As for people not trying to get a job....why do you think they should be classified as unemployed? Example: Person A is in high school, looked for a summer job last year, couldn't find one, stopped looking when school started again because didn't want a job while being a full time student. Graduates from high school, lives with parents, could now take a job but hasn't done anything about getting one. Unemployed or Not in the Labor Force?
Person B is a married woman, looking for a part time job, gets pregnant, so stops looking to have the baby, has the baby, could take a job now, but hasn't started looking for one yet. Unemployed or Not in the labor force?

Not having a job does not mean you're unemployed...there are retirees, stay home spouses, full time students, pot-heads living in their mother's basement, etc.

I am still trying to get an answer as to why retirees are used as an excuse as to the the low LFPR....*shrugs*

Pheh
They are still trying to beat the dead horse - it is all they have to try and dispute that unemployment is terribly high.
We had Chris and crew in other threads trying to say unemployment was better than 8.2%
idiots

 

[Neotrotsky]

Well, those not collecting Unemployment are already included in the UE rate....It has NEVER EVER been based on people collecting benefits.

As for people not trying to get a job....why do you think they should be classified as unemployed? Example: Person A is in high school, looked for a summer job last year, couldn't find one, stopped looking when school started again because didn't want a job while being a full time student. Graduates from high school, lives with parents, could now take a job but hasn't done anything about getting one. Unemployed or Not in the Labor Force?
Person B is a married woman, looking for a part time job, gets pregnant, so stops looking to have the baby, has the baby, could take a job now, but hasn't started looking for one yet. Unemployed or Not in the labor force?

Not having a job does not mean you're unemployed...there are retirees, stay home spouses, full time students, pot-heads living in their mother's basement, etc.

I am still trying to get an answer as to why retirees are used as an excuse as to the the low LFPR....*shrugs*

Pheh
They are still trying to beat the dead horse - it is all they have to try and dispute that unemployment is terribly high.
We had Chris and crew in other threads trying to say unemployment was better than 8.2%
idiots

h/t Ace of Spades

Obama actually said that today's awful job numbers are "a step in the right direction".

So to recap...112,000 jobs and 5.6% unemployment was killing the middle class but 80,000 jobs (when there's clearly a job shortage) and 8.2% unemployment is "a step in the right direction".

When Democrats hear that, they chant, "Four more years!".​

They must miss the days when Papa Obama attacked Bush over job numbers
in June 2004.

The unemployment rate was...5.6% then

Bet Papa Obama wishes he had that number now
Of course, the Left would be telling us how "good" it is not bad

Funny how that works...




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w11S552oJBs]State Senator Obama 2004 Radio Address Attacks Bush on Dismal Economy - YouTube[/ame]

 

[pinqy]

How about the ones that count the people not looking for a job OR no longer able to collect unemployment? You add those in for the TRUE number.

Well, those not collecting Unemployment are already included in the UE rate....It has NEVER EVER been based on people collecting benefits.

As for people not trying to get a job....why do you think they should be classified as unemployed? Example: Person A is in high school, looked for a summer job last year, couldn't find one, stopped looking when school started again because didn't want a job while being a full time student. Graduates from high school, lives with parents, could now take a job but hasn't done anything about getting one. Unemployed or Not in the Labor Force?
Person B is a married woman, looking for a part time job, gets pregnant, so stops looking to have the baby, has the baby, could take a job now, but hasn't started looking for one yet. Unemployed or Not in the labor force?

Not having a job does not mean you're unemployed...there are retirees, stay home spouses, full time students, pot-heads living in their mother's basement, etc.

I am still trying to get an answer as to why retirees are used as an excuse as to the the low LFPR....*shrugs*

Because the LFPR is Labor Force divided by Adult Civilian non-institutional population. Retirees are still in the population but no longer in the Labor Force. So every retiree lowers the numerator without changing the denominator.

Retirees are not the biggest cause of change in the LFPR, and it's wrong to try to blame all of the decrease on them, but even though they're a smaller part of the population, 65 and older and 16-24 year olds (mostly choosing school over work) are a big downward push on the Labor Force Participation.

 

[Dr.House]

Well, those not collecting Unemployment are already included in the UE rate....It has NEVER EVER been based on people collecting benefits.

As for people not trying to get a job....why do you think they should be classified as unemployed? Example: Person A is in high school, looked for a summer job last year, couldn't find one, stopped looking when school started again because didn't want a job while being a full time student. Graduates from high school, lives with parents, could now take a job but hasn't done anything about getting one. Unemployed or Not in the Labor Force?
Person B is a married woman, looking for a part time job, gets pregnant, so stops looking to have the baby, has the baby, could take a job now, but hasn't started looking for one yet. Unemployed or Not in the labor force?

Not having a job does not mean you're unemployed...there are retirees, stay home spouses, full time students, pot-heads living in their mother's basement, etc.

I am still trying to get an answer as to why retirees are used as an excuse as to the the low LFPR....*shrugs*

Because the LFPR is Labor Force divided by Adult Civilian non-institutional population. Retirees are still in the population but no longer in the Labor Force. So every retiree lowers the numerator without changing the denominator.

Retirees are not the biggest cause of change in the LFPR, and it's wrong to try to blame all of the decrease on them, but even though they're a smaller part of the population, 65 and older and 16-24 year olds (mostly choosing school over work) are a big downward push on the Labor Force Participation.

What about retirees who are young enough to still want to (or have to) work? Many people retire early yet still need steady employment because their retirement funds aren't sufficient...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

obama's three and a half years as president is like a 24/7 365 marathon running of the keystone cops movie.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

BTW - no matter how you look at it - irrefutable fact - the economy has added less jobs so far in 2012 vs. 2011 which itself was nothing to brag about.
Another fact - the jobs market for 3 years running is stagnant at BEST.

 

[Neotrotsky]

obama's three and a half years as president is like a 24/7 365 marathon running of the keystone cops movie.

Indeed

Papa Obama said it himself the best, originally

Sadly, he does not seem to be a man of his word
But, we already knew that....


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCN5-ovvFL0]FLASHBACK: Obama: My Presidency Will Be 'A One-Term Proposition' If Economy Doesn't Turn In 3 Years - YouTube[/ame]

 

[pinqy]

I am still trying to get an answer as to why retirees are used as an excuse as to the the low LFPR....*shrugs*

Because the LFPR is Labor Force divided by Adult Civilian non-institutional population. Retirees are still in the population but no longer in the Labor Force. So every retiree lowers the numerator without changing the denominator.

Retirees are not the biggest cause of change in the LFPR, and it's wrong to try to blame all of the decrease on them, but even though they're a smaller part of the population, 65 and older and 16-24 year olds (mostly choosing school over work) are a big downward push on the Labor Force Participation.

What about retirees who are young enough to still want to (or have to) work? Many people retire early yet still need steady employment because their retirement funds aren't sufficient...

There's no category of "retired." There's Employed (working), Unemployed (available and looking for work) and Not in the Labor Force (not looking or not available). If someone officially retires but is looking for work, s/he is Unemployed.

 

[Dr.House]

Because the LFPR is Labor Force divided by Adult Civilian non-institutional population. Retirees are still in the population but no longer in the Labor Force. So every retiree lowers the numerator without changing the denominator.

Retirees are not the biggest cause of change in the LFPR, and it's wrong to try to blame all of the decrease on them, but even though they're a smaller part of the population, 65 and older and 16-24 year olds (mostly choosing school over work) are a big downward push on the Labor Force Participation.

What about retirees who are young enough to still want to (or have to) work? Many people retire early yet still need steady employment because their retirement funds aren't sufficient...

There's no category of "retired." There's Employed (working), Unemployed (available and looking for work) and Not in the Labor Force (not looking or not available). If someone officially retires but is looking for work, s/he is Unemployed.

Does the survey go into that level of detail or does it stop when they hear the word "retiree"?

 

[hjmick]

Seems like they'll need to be adding some more to those numbers now that the Dems and Obama are butting an entire industry out of business...

Roll-your-own cigarette operations to be snuffed out

A tiny amendment buried in the federal transportation bill to be signed today by President Barack Obama will put operators of roll-your-own cigarette operations in Las Vegas and nationwide out of business at midnight...

Faced with regulation costs that could run to hundreds of thousands of dollars, RYO machine owners nationwide are shutting down more than 1,000 of the $36,000 machines.

"I feel it's kind of shaky,'' Wiessen said. "The man who pushed for this bill is Sen. (Max) Baucus from Montana, and he received donations from Altria, a parent company of Philip Morris. Interestingly enough, there are also no RYO machines in the state of Montana. It really makes me question the morals and values of our elected speakers..."

 

[Neotrotsky]

Don't worry
Papa Obama has it covered

Green-jobs subsidies created 1 job for every $4.85 million spent

A $38.6 billion loan guarantee program that the Obama administration promised would create or save 65,000 jobs has created just a few thousand jobs two years after it began, government records show.

The program — designed to jump-start the nation’s clean technology industry by giving energy companies access to low-cost, government-backed loans — has directly created 3,545 new, permanent jobs after giving out almost half the allocated amount, according to Energy Department tallies. …

Obama’s efforts to create green jobs are lagging behind expectations at a time of persistently high unemployment. Many economists say that because alternative-*energy projects are so expensive and slow to ramp up, they are not the most efficient way to stimulate the economy.​

 

[pinqy]

What about retirees who are young enough to still want to (or have to) work? Many people retire early yet still need steady employment because their retirement funds aren't sufficient...

There's no category of "retired." There's Employed (working), Unemployed (available and looking for work) and Not in the Labor Force (not looking or not available). If someone officially retires but is looking for work, s/he is Unemployed.

Does the survey go into that level of detail or does it stop when they hear the word "retiree"?

While "retired" is an answer to some of the questions, that's not part of the published data. Someone can answer that they are retired and working or retired and looking for work. One of the answers to "why are you working part time" is "Retired/Social Security limit on earnings". Being retired does not stop the questioning about labor market activity...it's mostly for analysis purposes..

 

[Trajan]

Well, those not collecting Unemployment are already included in the UE rate....It has NEVER EVER been based on people collecting benefits.

As for people not trying to get a job....why do you think they should be classified as unemployed? Example: Person A is in high school, looked for a summer job last year, couldn't find one, stopped looking when school started again because didn't want a job while being a full time student. Graduates from high school, lives with parents, could now take a job but hasn't done anything about getting one. Unemployed or Not in the Labor Force?
Person B is a married woman, looking for a part time job, gets pregnant, so stops looking to have the baby, has the baby, could take a job now, but hasn't started looking for one yet. Unemployed or Not in the labor force?

Not having a job does not mean you're unemployed...there are retirees, stay home spouses, full time students, pot-heads living in their mother's basement, etc.

I am still trying to get an answer as to why retirees are used as an excuse as to the the low LFPR....*shrugs*

Because the LFPR is Labor Force divided by Adult Civilian non-institutional population. Retirees are still in the population but no longer in the Labor Force. So every retiree lowers the numerator without changing the denominator.

Retirees are not the biggest cause of change in the LFPR, and it's wrong to try to blame all of the decrease on them, but even though they're a smaller part of the population, 65 and older and 16-24 year olds (mostly choosing school over work) are a big downward push on the Labor Force Participation.

thank you.... edthecynic was saying that the jobs retirees are leaving are being back-filled by here to for unemployed workers, I asked him were that is reflected in the data,as in jobs created etc. he never answers...do you understand whats hes saying?

 

[Trajan]

Seems like they'll need to be adding some more to those numbers now that the Dems and Obama are butting an entire industry out of business...

Roll-your-own cigarette operations to be snuffed out

A tiny amendment buried in the federal transportation bill to be signed today by President Barack Obama will put operators of roll-your-own cigarette operations in Las Vegas and nationwide out of business at midnight...

Faced with regulation costs that could run to hundreds of thousands of dollars, RYO machine owners nationwide are shutting down more than 1,000 of the $36,000 machines.

"I feel it's kind of shaky,'' Wiessen said. "The man who pushed for this bill is Sen. (Max) Baucus from Montana, and he received donations from Altria, a parent company of Philip Morris. Interestingly enough, there are also no RYO machines in the state of Montana. It really makes me question the morals and values of our elected speakers..."

simply unreal and I don't care how voted for it.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Weak hiring continues into June as sluggish economy generates only 80,000 new jobs, well below expectations, keeping unemployment rate at 8.2 percent."

Note to Romney - HAMMER TIME !!!!!

"This continues to be the longest streak — 41 months — of unemployment of 8% or higher since the Great Depression. And recall that back in 2009, Team Obama predicted that if Congress passed its $800 billion stimulus plan, the unemployment rate would be around 5.6% today."
Team Obama Promised 5.6% Unemployment Today If Congress Passed Stimulus « Pat Dollard

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not to worry, obama is going to focus on jobs any day now

I have been following this all morning.
From TV to different radio stations while driving.
ANOTHER month of crappy job numbers.

Why do I get the feeling that the WH and all the lackeys
at MSNBC will turn this into a positive job story.
Another wonderful accomplishment by our Supreme Leader.

It's a step in the right direction.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxVF7_G5Hb8"]President Obama: 'Step In The Right Direction' - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What happened to 5.6% unemployment by mid-2012, if the stimulus is passed?

right here

Funny how the predictions tell us we would have been better off without the stimulus, but the experts still insist the stimulus worked.