More Economic GOOD NEWS: Unemployment falls

[Sinatra]

LOL, you think this is a reason to celebrate?

From your own link:



Yes, we should be celebrating that some places unemployment dropped below 15% !!!!


Keep on spinnin'!!!!!

So lets get this straight.....Unemployment rates fell in April for more than 90% of the nation's 372 largest metro areas as hiring picked up around the country......and you bitch because it wasn't 100% ??

I'm not bitching about anything. I'm laughing at you and your spin job of a post.

Hey, here is more "good news":

WASHINGTON – Job creation by private companies grew at the slowest pace since the start of the year, as a wave of census hiring lifted payrolls by 431,000 in May. The unemployment rate dipped to 9.7 percent as people gave up searching for work.

The Labor Department's new employment snapshot released Friday suggested that outside of the burst of hiring of temporary census workers by the federal government many private employers are wary of bulking up their work forces.

That indicates the economic recovery may not bring relief fast enough for millions of Americans who are unemployed.

Virtually all the job creation in May came from the hiring of 411,000 census workers. Such hiring peaked in May and will begin tailing off in June.

By contrast, hiring by private employers, the backbone of the economy, slowed sharply. They added just 41,000 jobs, down from 218,000 in April and the fewest since January.

"Although the economic outlook is improving, the recovery is still pretty tepid," said Paul Ashworth, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics.

President Barack Obama acknowledged that temporary census jobs drove the overall payroll gain. But he said private sector hiring is growing. He noted five straight months of job gains after devastating losses from the recession. He said the recovery is still in its early stages, and that it will be uneven in the months ahead.

Economy adds 431K jobs but few in private sector - Yahoo! News

____

Well done - you have utterly dismantled the premise of this laughable thread.

The White House has proven to be inept at even estimating the jobs report a couple days in front of its release.

The market is plummeting again today in part because of the dire news that over 90% of the jobs "created" in May were census jobs - and 95% of all jobs created in May were government jobs.

The private sector remains dangerously weak folks - due in great part to this administration's continued attack on small business America.
_____

 

[Yurt]

LOL, you think this is a reason to celebrate?

From your own link:



Yes, we should be celebrating that some places unemployment dropped below 15% !!!!


Keep on spinnin'!!!!!

So lets get this straight.....Unemployment rates fell in April for more than 90% of the nation's 372 largest metro areas as hiring picked up around the country......and you bitch because it wasn't 100% ??

I'm not bitching about anything. I'm laughing at you and your spin job of a post.

Hey, here is more "good news":

WASHINGTON – Job creation by private companies grew at the slowest pace since the start of the year, as a wave of census hiring lifted payrolls by 431,000 in May. The unemployment rate dipped to 9.7 percent as people gave up searching for work.

The Labor Department's new employment snapshot released Friday suggested that outside of the burst of hiring of temporary census workers by the federal government many private employers are wary of bulking up their work forces.

That indicates the economic recovery may not bring relief fast enough for millions of Americans who are unemployed.

Virtually all the job creation in May came from the hiring of 411,000 census workers. Such hiring peaked in May and will begin tailing off in June.

By contrast, hiring by private employers, the backbone of the economy, slowed sharply. They added just 41,000 jobs, down from 218,000 in April and the fewest since January.

"Although the economic outlook is improving, the recovery is still pretty tepid," said Paul Ashworth, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics.

President Barack Obama acknowledged that temporary census jobs drove the overall payroll gain. But he said private sector hiring is growing. He noted five straight months of job gains after devastating losses from the recession. He said the recovery is still in its early stages, and that it will be uneven in the months ahead.

Economy adds 431K jobs but few in private sector - Yahoo! News

awesome post, i was going to post this to show just how dishonest rightwinger is....good job

 

[Foxfyre]

Of course...it's all they have these days. What else do they have to offer except reinstatement of failed Bush policies and bitching because Obama didn't turn our economy around on a dime? Sometimes, I think they truly believe that "Messiah" crap they spew...

Where did I blame Obama? Personally I don't believe the President has jack shit to do with the economy, its much more on Congress with taxes and laws that add costs to private industry, such as mandated health care.

I agree. The President cannot fix the economy nor hurt the economy. All he can do is provide encouragement and support for Congress and sign the bills it passes.

The partisan hacks who continue to blame President Bush for the current fiscal mess always seem to forget that Pelosi and Reid took over the reins in January 2007 and that is about when things started deteriorating. And with the Democrats at the helm, most of what the Administration was recommending--some of it good--was falling on totally deaf ears. Bush IS to blame for promoting TARP which most of the lefties defend these days. He, along with Clinton, DOES share some of the blame in a housing bubble that triggered the recession when it burst though President Bush was sounding the alarm about that long before it happened.

But he is otherwise not the villain in a deteriorating economy the last several years. Pelosi and Reid and now His Arrogance have continued to exacerbate the problem and so far have done little they can point to as any kind of fix.

I know everybody has seen this graph many times now. It was created BEFORE the healthcare bill was passed, so the Obama numbers would look worse if adjusted for that. But it does help keep things in persepctive.

 

[Jarhead]

"President Barack Obama acknowledged that temporary census jobs drove the overall payroll gain. But he said private sector hiring is growing. He noted five straight months of job gains after devastating losses from the recession. He said the recovery is still in its early stages, and that it will be uneven in the months ahead."

So let me get this straight.
The stimulus did exactly what the opposition siad it would do. Commit a trillion dollars and do absolutely nothing more than what would have happened without a trillion dollar commitment.
Likewise, why is it that everytime Obama refers to the economy, it is still in its "early stages" of recovery?

 

[VaYank5150]

"President Barack Obama acknowledged that temporary census jobs drove the overall payroll gain. But he said private sector hiring is growing. He noted five straight months of job gains after devastating losses from the recession. He said the recovery is still in its early stages, and that it will be uneven in the months ahead."

So let me get this straight.
The stimulus did exactly what the opposition siad it would do. Commit a trillion dollars and do absolutely nothing more than what would have happened without a trillion dollar commitment.
Likewise, why is it that everytime Obama refers to the economy, it is still in its "early stages" of recovery?

Because it obviously is. Why did Bush NOT know we were in a recession while he was POTUS?

 

[Zander]

The "drop" in unemployment was due to 411,000 temp jobs at the census, and 325,000 people just giving up looking. Good news? Only if you are a smoking crack.
Full story Here

 

[Mr Natural]

Maybe if all those manufacturing and IT jobs didn't go to third-world countries, our employment situation wouldn't be so bleak.

 

[VaYank5150]

The "drop" in unemployment was due to 411,000 temp jobs at the census, and 325,000 people just giving up looking. Good news? Only if you are a smoking crack.
Full story Here

So where are all of those private sector jobs that Jarhead keeps saying Obama is oppressing?

 

[Sinatra]

The "drop" in unemployment was due to 411,000 temp jobs at the census, and 325,000 people just giving up looking. Good news? Only if you are a smoking crack.
Full story Here

____

Quite right Zander.

What we have today is employment figures that look quite bleak.

We also have a White House that appears completely out of the loop in respect to those #s, marching the president out earlier in the week proclaiming the job report would be looking good.

Quite the opposite - 95% of jobs created were government - most of those temporary census jobs.

The president looks very foolish yet again. The guy is reaching presidential parody status very very quickly...

 

[Jarhead]

"President Barack Obama acknowledged that temporary census jobs drove the overall payroll gain. But he said private sector hiring is growing. He noted five straight months of job gains after devastating losses from the recession. He said the recovery is still in its early stages, and that it will be uneven in the months ahead."

So let me get this straight.
The stimulus did exactly what the opposition siad it would do. Commit a trillion dollars and do absolutely nothing more than what would have happened without a trillion dollar commitment.
Likewise, why is it that everytime Obama refers to the economy, it is still in its "early stages" of recovery?

Because it obviously is. Why did Bush NOT know we were in a recession while he was POTUS?

What do you mean he was not aware? He most certainly was aware and thus the failed attempt of a tax rebate early in 2008. Why did it did not work? Most people do not spend in a recession, thus why a recession. His was but a political mopve to enhance the GOP voter base. Sort of what the stimulus is all about...and I can explain it in detail if you ask. And someone like you, who is not swayed by typical talking points may actually agree with it when I lay it out.

My question was really meant to say "why does Obama continually say "a few more months" every "few more months".
If the recovery takes 8 years, is he going to say "see, I told you give it time!"

 

[Foxfyre]

"President Barack Obama acknowledged that temporary census jobs drove the overall payroll gain. But he said private sector hiring is growing. He noted five straight months of job gains after devastating losses from the recession. He said the recovery is still in its early stages, and that it will be uneven in the months ahead."

So let me get this straight.
The stimulus did exactly what the opposition siad it would do. Commit a trillion dollars and do absolutely nothing more than what would have happened without a trillion dollar commitment.
Likewise, why is it that everytime Obama refers to the economy, it is still in its "early stages" of recovery?

The Bush budgets were bringing down the deficit substantially year after year once his tax cuts fully kicked in. You don't reduce deficits substantially during recessions, but you can take measures to minimize them during recessions.

Referring to that graph up there, we can see that a recession was beginning at the end of Clinton's second term. There was still a modest surplus but one that was much less than the year before. (Clinton did have a GOP Congress for the last six years of his term.)

2002 was the first "Bush" budget and it came during the deepened recession triggered by 9/11 but by modern standards, it only involved a modest deficit. By 2003 and 2004, the war expenses plus other unnecessary spending had created unreasonable deficits, but by 2005 the tax cuts had fully kicked in, stimulated the economy, and deficits were coming down substantially despite the war expenses. If the housing bubble had not burst, Obama would most likely have started with no deficit at all despite expansion of government during the Bush administration.

Even with the housing bubble bursting, most of the $400+ deficit in 2008 was the half of the TARP money that was spent in 2008. The rest was handed over to the Obama administration to administer in 2009.

2008 was the first Pelosi/Reid budget and every budget since then has been passed by Democrats.

I don't expect the numbnuts to look at this objectively. But I am hoping that the smart people will. We cannot continue to spend at the rate the Democrats, aided and abetted by the President, intend to spend. As great as the US economy is, it cannot keep piling on massive increases in the National Debt and remain solvent.

 

[VaYank5150]

"President Barack Obama acknowledged that temporary census jobs drove the overall payroll gain. But he said private sector hiring is growing. He noted five straight months of job gains after devastating losses from the recession. He said the recovery is still in its early stages, and that it will be uneven in the months ahead."

So let me get this straight.
The stimulus did exactly what the opposition siad it would do. Commit a trillion dollars and do absolutely nothing more than what would have happened without a trillion dollar commitment.
Likewise, why is it that everytime Obama refers to the economy, it is still in its "early stages" of recovery?

Because it obviously is. Why did Bush NOT know we were in a recession while he was POTUS?

What do you mean he was not aware? He most certainly was aware and thus the failed attempt of a tax rebate early in 2008. Why did it did not work? Most people do not spend in a recession, thus why a recession. His was but a political mopve to enhance the GOP voter base. Sort of what the stimulus is all about...and I can explain it in detail if you ask. And someone like you, who is not swayed by typical talking points may actually agree with it when I lay it out.

My question was really meant to say "why does Obama continually say "a few more months" every "few more months".
If the recovery takes 8 years, is he going to say "see, I told you give it time!"

I guess we will have to wait and see at the end of his second term...

 

[Zander]

The "drop" in unemployment was due to 411,000 temp jobs at the census, and 325,000 people just giving up looking. Good news? Only if you are a smoking crack.
Full story Here

So where are all of those private sector jobs that Jarhead keeps saying Obama is oppressing?

Why ask me?

Is it because I am white? You think all white people look the same? WTF!! You're a god damned racist!!!!

 

[VaYank5150]

The "drop" in unemployment was due to 411,000 temp jobs at the census, and 325,000 people just giving up looking. Good news? Only if you are a smoking crack.
Full story Here

So where are all of those private sector jobs that Jarhead keeps saying Obama is oppressing?

Why ask me?

Is it because I am white? You think all white people look the same? WTF!! You're a god damned racist!!!!

Sure beats being an moran...

 

[Sinatra]

"President Barack Obama acknowledged that temporary census jobs drove the overall payroll gain. But he said private sector hiring is growing. He noted five straight months of job gains after devastating losses from the recession. He said the recovery is still in its early stages, and that it will be uneven in the months ahead."

So let me get this straight.
The stimulus did exactly what the opposition siad it would do. Commit a trillion dollars and do absolutely nothing more than what would have happened without a trillion dollar commitment.
Likewise, why is it that everytime Obama refers to the economy, it is still in its "early stages" of recovery?

The Bush budgets were bringing down the deficit substantially year after year once his tax cuts fully kicked in. You don't reduce deficits substantially during recessions, but you can take measures to minimize them during recessions.

Referring to that graph up there, we can see that a recession was beginning at the end of Clinton's second term. There was still a modest surplus but one that was much less than the year before. (Clinton did have a GOP Congress for the last six years of his term.)

2002 was the first "Bush" budget and it came during the deepened recession triggered by 9/11 but by modern standards, it only involved a modest deficit. By 2003 and 2004, the war expenses plus other unnecessary spending had created unreasonable deficits, but by 2005 the tax cuts had fully kicked in, stimulated the economy, and deficits were coming down substantially despite the war expenses. If the housing bubble had not burst, Obama would most likely have started with no deficit at all despite expansion of government during the Bush administration.

Even with the housing bubble bursting, most of the $400+ deficit in 2008 was the half of the TARP money that was spent in 2008. The rest was handed over to the Obama administration to administer in 2009.

2008 was the first Pelosi/Reid budget and every budget since then has been passed by Democrats.

I don't expect the numbnuts to look at this objectively. But I am hoping that the smart people will. We cannot continue to spend at the rate the Democrats, aided and abetted by the President, intend to spend. As great as the US economy is, it cannot keep piling on massive increases in the National Debt and remain solvent.

___

Great factual post.

You are quite correct that the tax cuts helped, not hindered the economy. It was the rampant spending that negated that economic benefits of the tax cuts under Bush - and that spending coincides with the Democrat takeover in 2006.

Now we have a scenario of vastly increased government spending, and higher taxes, and that spells economic doom for the economy.

It is why the recovery has been so slow in coming. Obama and the Democrats simply do not understand, or choose not to understand, that the path they are taking us is exactly the path that destroyed the governments of Europe, Greece, etc.

Today the French financial system is buckling, Hungary could default, Italy and Spain are teetering, and on and on...

 

[Jarhead]

The "drop" in unemployment was due to 411,000 temp jobs at the census, and 325,000 people just giving up looking. Good news? Only if you are a smoking crack.
Full story Here

So where are all of those private sector jobs that Jarhead keeps saying Obama is oppressing?

OK VaYank. You asked for it, I shall give it to you:

Two approaches to stimulate the economy. Both have one thing in mind. To put people to work and increase the demand for goods and services.

Stiumulus is a two part plan and one that costs 1 trillion dollars of tax payer money:

Part One: Put them to work in non private sector and cherry picked private sector positions. The people get cash in their pockets and ready to spend. They are not manufacturing, but they have the money to spend.
Part two: Manufacturers see there is an increase in demand so now they need to hire and meet the demand.
They hire and manufacturing is up, demand is met, all are happy. One trillion dollars spent.
Problem: Many people who are hired with stimulus money realize they are only temporary jobs and are less likely to spend out of fear of the job ending. So it may work or it may not. Big gamble but if it works, all is good. If it doesnt, one trillion spent but little to no growth. ANd being a two step plan, it takes time to evolve.

Second approach: Tax breaks for those that hire:

This is a one step plan.

Employers feel "if I hire, I get a tax break, but it will still cost me some money. But if I hire and others do as well, it may put money in the pockets of the consumer and increase demand for product"
Cost. Zero to the taxpayer as every tax break results in new income tax revenue and less state burden for unemployement.
Problem: What if other companies do not hire. Then it is a lost cause. But the gamble has no cost.

Both have the same goal, one costs a trillion dollars and one costs nothing. So one is a gamble, the other is not.

BUT....

The stiumulus ALSO increases the voter base for the party that enacts the plan. How? Take a look at who actually got the money. Non profit organizations, unions, special interest groups.

By the way. I said in the stimulus "cherry picked" private sectore companies. Why is that not good?

Comapny A gest stimulus. Comapny B does not. Company A can afford to bid lower than company B. Comapny A has an increase in demand for its services so it must hire. THAT IS GOOD. No? Not really. Becuase company B needs to layoff. And company A hires the laid off talent from company B. A totral wash from an employment standpoint.

So where are the private sector jobs?

Nowhere. The stimulus failed. People are still not spending money. They know their jobs are temporary.

 

[GHook93]

I heard all over the radio why unemployment fell. The number 1 reason was because of all the temporary census worker jobs. They hired 200,000+ people. The number 2 reason is the only sector to increase employment was the government worker sector.

So lets be honest here. Unemployment fell because of a ginormous temporary government project and because the government increase hiring. Aka government spending adding to the largest budget deficit in World History is the cause of this "good" news!

This would be like saying. I have $1 million dollars in the bank, too bad I used to have $100 million just yesterday!

 

[Foxfyre]

I heard all over the radio why unemployment fell. The number 1 reason was because of all the temporary census worker jobs. They hired 200,000+ people. The number 2 reason is the only sector to increase employment was the government worker sector.

So lets be honest here. Unemployment fell because of a ginormous temporary government project and because the government increase hiring. Aka government spending adding to the largest budget deficit in World History is the cause of this "good" news!

This would be like saying. I have $1 million dollars in the bank, too bad I used to have $100 million just yesterday!

Correction. It is like saying I made $1 million dollars this year. Too bad it cost me $100 million to make that $1 million.

 

[Jarhead]

I heard all over the radio why unemployment fell. The number 1 reason was because of all the temporary census worker jobs. They hired 200,000+ people. The number 2 reason is the only sector to increase employment was the government worker sector.

So lets be honest here. Unemployment fell because of a ginormous temporary government project and because the government increase hiring. Aka government spending adding to the largest budget deficit in World History is the cause of this "good" news!

This would be like saying. I have $1 million dollars in the bank, too bad I used to have $100 million just yesterday!

Correction. It is like saying I made $1 million dollars this year. Too bad it cost me $100 million to make that $1 million.

Correction:

It is like saying "I made a million dollars this year and I only lost 100 million dollars doing it." (notice the spin to make it like it is good news)

 

[Jarhead]

Because it obviously is. Why did Bush NOT know we were in a recession while he was POTUS?

What do you mean he was not aware? He most certainly was aware and thus the failed attempt of a tax rebate early in 2008. Why did it did not work? Most people do not spend in a recession, thus why a recession. His was but a political mopve to enhance the GOP voter base. Sort of what the stimulus is all about...and I can explain it in detail if you ask. And someone like you, who is not swayed by typical talking points may actually agree with it when I lay it out.

My question was really meant to say "why does Obama continually say "a few more months" every "few more months".
If the recovery takes 8 years, is he going to say "see, I told you give it time!"

I guess we will have to wait and see at the end of his second term...

And if he only makes it through one term will his farewell speech include:

"please, my Fellow Americans. Give it more time. GIVE IT MORE TIME!"