More economic GOOD NEWS: January unemployment rate falls to 9.7%

[rightwinger]

No one wants the economy to fail...we don't want to be lied to or told that it's improving when it clearly isn't.

Clearly isn't? By what measure?

- GDP has risen last two quarters
- unemployment rate dropped for first time in a year
- Index of leading economic indicators has risen for eight straight months
- stock market is up %50

You sure you are not rooting for the economy to fail?

These could be very good signs that despite Papa Obama's and the left's best efforts they have not killed off capitalism totally yet



The good news; they are still trying

Who said anything about Obama?

The thread is about economic GOOD NEWS .....it doesn't say anything about what caused it

You can acnowledge the economy is getting better and still hate Obama

 

[Neotrotsky]

Clearly isn't? By what measure?

- GDP has risen last two quarters
- unemployment rate dropped for first time in a year
- Index of leading economic indicators has risen for eight straight months
- stock market is up %50

You sure you are not rooting for the economy to fail?

These could be very good signs that despite Papa Obama's and the left's best efforts they have not killed off capitalism totally yet



The good news; they are still trying

Who said anything about Obama?

The thread is about economic GOOD NEWS .....it doesn't say anything about what caused it

You can acnowledge the economy is getting better and still hate Obama

Hmm, just because one disagrees with Papa Obama and the left's policies does not mean that they hate them

Don't they teach you that in the education camps- oh never mind


On a side note, maybe they are killing capitalism, since most of the job creation took place in the government sector

 

[rightwinger]

These could be very good signs that despite Papa Obama's and the left's best efforts they have not killed off capitalism totally yet



The good news; they are still trying

Who said anything about Obama?

The thread is about economic GOOD NEWS .....it doesn't say anything about what caused it

You can acnowledge the economy is getting better and still hate Obama

Hmm, just because one disagrees with Papa Obama and the left's policies does not mean that they hate them

Don't they teach you that in the education camps- oh never mind


On a side note, maybe they are killing capitalism, since most of the job creation took place in the government sectorhttp://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

33,000 jobs in the government sector (only 9000 census workers)

Manufacturers, helped by a weak dollar and a rebounding global economy, added 11,000 jobs in January – first increase in factory jobs since January 2007

We have a big rebound in the auto industry after a near collapse." Auto and auto parts companies added 22,700 jobs.

Temporary jobs rose by 52,000 in January and are up 247,000 since hitting a low last September; that's a good sign because employers typically hire temps just before they start adding full-time jobs.

Retailers added 42,000 jobs, and the federal government 33,000, including 9,000 temporary Census workers.

The average work week increased to 33.3 hours, from 33.2. That indicates employers are increasing hours for current workers, a step that usually precedes hiring.

The number of part-time workers who want full-time work, but can't find it, fell by almost 1 million. That lowered the "underemployment" rate, which also includes discouraged workers, to 16.5% from 17.3%.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Come to think of it, Perhaps you are blinded by your "love" for him

 

[PatekPhilippe]

No one wants the economy to fail...we don't want to be lied to or told that it's improving when it clearly isn't.

Clearly isn't? By what measure?

- GDP has risen last two quarters
- unemployment rate dropped for first time in a year
- Index of leading economic indicators has risen for eight straight months
- stock market is up %50

You sure you are not rooting for the economy to fail?

Thank TARP and Stimulus 1 for that....nothing more...nothing less. When people are unemployed they cannot spend money or contribute to the tax revenues for the government. This means that Obama and Bush propped up the economy with borrowed money from the Fed. Why do you think Obama wants more money for a new round of Stimulus spending? That's right...because the first round is going to run out and private sector jobs haven't returned...which means tax revenues haven't returned and the economy is still stagnant.

in case you missed it

 

[pinqy]

The biggest tip-off is that the unemployment rate goes down and we still lost jobs. How does this happen because in order for someone to get employed they have to get a job but if we lose jobs then where are these jobs for the unemployed coming from?

Again, different surveys measuring different things at slightly different times. Non-farm payroll employment went down 20,000, with a margin of error of around +-98,000, while employment from the household survey (which includes farms and self-employed) went up around 500,000 with a margin of error of +-420,000 (roughly..those numbers are from memory.

Wrong. The information came from the survey itself.....and what does a margin of error of +- 420,000 say to you when the claim is the employment rate went up by 500,000? Sounds like someone's playing 3 card Monte.....

What's wrong? I'm not sure what specific information you're talking about or which survey. Two different surveys measuring two different things of course aren't always going to add up.

As for the margin of error...a sample of 60,000 households representing 236,832,000 people, you're going to have significant margins of error. For December, the Employment level was 137,792,000 +-534,656 (.0388%) and in January it was 138,333,000 +-532,539
(0.385%) Now those are fairly small margins of error...less than 4/10 of a percent. But the margin of error for the change of course becomes a little large...what if December were at the low end of the range and January were at the high? That would be a change of +1,608,195 and if Dec was really at the high end of the range and Jan at the low? -526,195 So how is a margin of error of +-437,553 for the change unreasonable? Yes, that's +-81%, but how would you suggest that be gotten around? And how do you believe that's dishonest?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Again, different surveys measuring different things at slightly different times. Non-farm payroll employment went down 20,000, with a margin of error of around +-98,000, while employment from the household survey (which includes farms and self-employed) went up around 500,000 with a margin of error of +-420,000 (roughly..those numbers are from memory.

Wrong. The information came from the survey itself.....and what does a margin of error of +- 420,000 say to you when the claim is the employment rate went up by 500,000? Sounds like someone's playing 3 card Monte.....

What's wrong? I'm not sure what specific information you're talking about or which survey. Two different surveys measuring two different things of course aren't always going to add up.

As for the margin of error...a sample of 60,000 households representing 236,832,000 people, you're going to have significant margins of error. For December, the Employment level was 137,792,000 +-534,656 (.0388%) and in January it was 138,333,000 +-532,539
(0.385%) Now those are fairly small margins of error...less than 4/10 of a percent. But the margin of error for the change of course becomes a little large...what if December were at the low end of the range and January were at the high? That would be a change of +1,608,195 and if Dec was really at the high end of the range and Jan at the low? -526,195 So how is a margin of error of +-437,553 for the change unreasonable? Yes, that's +-81%, but how would you suggest that be gotten around? And how do you believe that's dishonest?

Thankyou for confirming that these sorts of reports contain SIGNIFICANT MARGINS OF ERROR!!!!

Let's hope they are to the good side for once.