Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You're talking about the Unemployent Insurance claims...a different report, by a different agency, where it was falsely alleged that California and other states were left out. The reporter was mistaken and was corrected.Most of the seasonal hiring is done in October, actually. November is never as big.Obviously I did since I used that exact phrase. Try reading my post again.But total part time only went up 137,000
And remember...many of those part time for economic reasons are people who have full time jobs, but had a slow week.
I guess you couldn't read "ECONOMIC REASONS" ADDED... As I said LYING LEFTIES!
Oh, so you think a SLOW WEEK is the reason? A MONTH before the biggest RETAIL SALES of the year! LOLOL!
But let's look: The survey reference week was 8-14 November. Breaking down those working part time for economic reasons into 2 groups:
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week due to slow business went from 3,251,000 to 3,466,000. A change of +215,000
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week because they could not find a full time job went from 2,173,000 to 2,215,000. A change of +42,000
Table A-8. Employed persons by class of worker and part-time status
So yes, it was mostly slow business.
Sorry, it appears to me just ANOTHER CASE of the REGIME manipulation of facts! Now YOU might disagree, but we have found out that many times what they report, especially former unemployed numbers FAILED to include California and 1 or 2 other states Unemployed in their published numbers...do YOU not remember this?
You're talking about the Unemployent Insurance claims...a different report, by a different agency, where it was falsely alleged that California and other states were left out. The reporter was mistaken and was corrected.Most of the seasonal hiring is done in October, actually. November is never as big.Obviously I did since I used that exact phrase. Try reading my post again.I guess you couldn't read "ECONOMIC REASONS" ADDED... As I said LYING LEFTIES!
Oh, so you think a SLOW WEEK is the reason? A MONTH before the biggest RETAIL SALES of the year! LOLOL!
But let's look: The survey reference week was 8-14 November. Breaking down those working part time for economic reasons into 2 groups:
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week due to slow business went from 3,251,000 to 3,466,000. A change of +215,000
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week because they could not find a full time job went from 2,173,000 to 2,215,000. A change of +42,000
Table A-8. Employed persons by class of worker and part-time status
So yes, it was mostly slow business.
Sorry, it appears to me just ANOTHER CASE of the REGIME manipulation of facts! Now YOU might disagree, but we have found out that many times what they report, especially former unemployed numbers FAILED to include California and 1 or 2 other states Unemployed in their published numbers...do YOU not remember this?
I added it late CALIFORNIA BLASTS BUSINESS INSIDER: The Jobless Report Was Correct, Our Economy Is Improving!You're talking about the Unemployent Insurance claims...a different report, by a different agency, where it was falsely alleged that California and other states were left out. The reporter was mistaken and was corrected.Most of the seasonal hiring is done in October, actually. November is never as big.Obviously I did since I used that exact phrase. Try reading my post again.
Oh, so you think a SLOW WEEK is the reason? A MONTH before the biggest RETAIL SALES of the year! LOLOL!
But let's look: The survey reference week was 8-14 November. Breaking down those working part time for economic reasons into 2 groups:
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week due to slow business went from 3,251,000 to 3,466,000. A change of +215,000
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week because they could not find a full time job went from 2,173,000 to 2,215,000. A change of +42,000
Table A-8. Employed persons by class of worker and part-time status
So yes, it was mostly slow business.
Sorry, it appears to me just ANOTHER CASE of the REGIME manipulation of facts! Now YOU might disagree, but we have found out that many times what they report, especially former unemployed numbers FAILED to include California and 1 or 2 other states Unemployed in their published numbers...do YOU not remember this?
Really, Do you have a link to that?
I added it late CALIFORNIA BLASTS BUSINESS INSIDER: The Jobless Report Was Correct, Our Economy Is Improving!You're talking about the Unemployent Insurance claims...a different report, by a different agency, where it was falsely alleged that California and other states were left out. The reporter was mistaken and was corrected.Most of the seasonal hiring is done in October, actually. November is never as big.Oh, so you think a SLOW WEEK is the reason? A MONTH before the biggest RETAIL SALES of the year! LOLOL!
But let's look: The survey reference week was 8-14 November. Breaking down those working part time for economic reasons into 2 groups:
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week due to slow business went from 3,251,000 to 3,466,000. A change of +215,000
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week because they could not find a full time job went from 2,173,000 to 2,215,000. A change of +42,000
Table A-8. Employed persons by class of worker and part-time status
So yes, it was mostly slow business.
Sorry, it appears to me just ANOTHER CASE of the REGIME manipulation of facts! Now YOU might disagree, but we have found out that many times what they report, especially former unemployed numbers FAILED to include California and 1 or 2 other states Unemployed in their published numbers...do YOU not remember this?
Really, Do you have a link to that?
As always, when confronted with the facts the Right clings to their lies.I added it late CALIFORNIA BLASTS BUSINESS INSIDER: The Jobless Report Was Correct, Our Economy Is Improving!You're talking about the Unemployent Insurance claims...a different report, by a different agency, where it was falsely alleged that California and other states were left out. The reporter was mistaken and was corrected.Most of the seasonal hiring is done in October, actually. November is never as big.
But let's look: The survey reference week was 8-14 November. Breaking down those working part time for economic reasons into 2 groups:
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week due to slow business went from 3,251,000 to 3,466,000. A change of +215,000
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week because they could not find a full time job went from 2,173,000 to 2,215,000. A change of +42,000
Table A-8. Employed persons by class of worker and part-time status
So yes, it was mostly slow business.
Sorry, it appears to me just ANOTHER CASE of the REGIME manipulation of facts! Now YOU might disagree, but we have found out that many times what they report, especially former unemployed numbers FAILED to include California and 1 or 2 other states Unemployed in their published numbers...do YOU not remember this?
Really, Do you have a link to that?
Again, I would expect this from a OBUMA REGIME friendly, and Gov. Brown influenced California Labor Dept.
As always, when confronted with the facts the Right clings to their lies.I added it late CALIFORNIA BLASTS BUSINESS INSIDER: The Jobless Report Was Correct, Our Economy Is Improving!You're talking about the Unemployent Insurance claims...a different report, by a different agency, where it was falsely alleged that California and other states were left out. The reporter was mistaken and was corrected.Sorry, it appears to me just ANOTHER CASE of the REGIME manipulation of facts! Now YOU might disagree, but we have found out that many times what they report, especially former unemployed numbers FAILED to include California and 1 or 2 other states Unemployed in their published numbers...do YOU not remember this?
Really, Do you have a link to that?
Again, I would expect this from a OBUMA REGIME friendly, and Gov. Brown influenced California Labor Dept.
Why did you even ask for a link, then, when you knew that there was nothing that would change your opinion?I added it late CALIFORNIA BLASTS BUSINESS INSIDER: The Jobless Report Was Correct, Our Economy Is Improving!You're talking about the Unemployent Insurance claims...a different report, by a different agency, where it was falsely alleged that California and other states were left out. The reporter was mistaken and was corrected.Most of the seasonal hiring is done in October, actually. November is never as big.
But let's look: The survey reference week was 8-14 November. Breaking down those working part time for economic reasons into 2 groups:
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week due to slow business went from 3,251,000 to 3,466,000. A change of +215,000
The number of people who worked fewer than 35 hours that week because they could not find a full time job went from 2,173,000 to 2,215,000. A change of +42,000
Table A-8. Employed persons by class of worker and part-time status
So yes, it was mostly slow business.
Sorry, it appears to me just ANOTHER CASE of the REGIME manipulation of facts! Now YOU might disagree, but we have found out that many times what they report, especially former unemployed numbers FAILED to include California and 1 or 2 other states Unemployed in their published numbers...do YOU not remember this?
Really, Do you have a link to that?
Again, I would expect this from a OBUMA REGIME friendly, and Gov. Brown influenced California Labor Dept.
The results are in ...
5.0% unemployment.
211,000 jobs added.
197,000 jobs added in the private sector, extending the unprecedented streak of growth to 69 consecutive months.
Discouraged folks dropped by 71,000.
Folks not in the labor force but still want a job fell to 5.6 million.
All in all .... not too bad.
G'head, brain-dead cons .... let's hear your whines about the labor force participation rate.
All trends which started under your hero, Bush.The results are in ...
5.0% unemployment.
211,000 jobs added.
197,000 jobs added in the private sector, extending the unprecedented streak of growth to 69 consecutive months.
Discouraged folks dropped by 71,000.
Folks not in the labor force but still want a job fell to 5.6 million.
All in all .... not too bad.
G'head, brain-dead cons .... let's hear your whines about the labor force participation rate.
lower income, worst recovery since Great Depression, 2% GDP, 46 million on food stamps, Fed afraid to raise interest rates above 0% for first time in 100 years, and $500 billion/yr stimulative deficit spending is not too bad.
Obviously, you have to be stupid, bigoted, and liberal to defend such obvious failure.
All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
Why did you even ask for a link, then, when you knew that there was nothing that would change your opinion?I added it late CALIFORNIA BLASTS BUSINESS INSIDER: The Jobless Report Was Correct, Our Economy Is Improving!You're talking about the Unemployent Insurance claims...a different report, by a different agency, where it was falsely alleged that California and other states were left out. The reporter was mistaken and was corrected.Sorry, it appears to me just ANOTHER CASE of the REGIME manipulation of facts! Now YOU might disagree, but we have found out that many times what they report, especially former unemployed numbers FAILED to include California and 1 or 2 other states Unemployed in their published numbers...do YOU not remember this?
Really, Do you have a link to that?
Again, I would expect this from a OBUMA REGIME friendly, and Gov. Brown influenced California Labor Dept.
I've already seen you welch on a bet. Why would anybody in their right mind, ever bet you again?All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??
I've already seen you welch on a bet. Why would anybody in their right mind, ever bet you again?All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??
Notice the hypocrisy of the Right, they have anointed themselves to say who is a "hero" to others, but don't you dare take the same liberties with them!!!All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??
Barry's a hero to liberals just like FDR was
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??Notice the hypocrisy of the Right, they have anointed themselves to say who is a "hero" to others, but don't you dare take the same liberties with them!!!All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??
Barry's a hero to liberals just like FDR was
Notice the hypocrisy of the Right, they have anointed themselves to say who is a "hero" to others, but don't you dare take the same liberties with them!!!All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??
Barry's a hero to liberals just like FDR was
You are so STUPID my post went right over your head!dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??Notice the hypocrisy of the Right, they have anointed themselves to say who is a "hero" to others, but don't you dare take the same liberties with them!!!All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??
Barry's a hero to liberals just like FDR was
What part of; no one is going to bet a welcher like you, do you need explained to you?I've already seen you welch on a bet. Why would anybody in their right mind, ever bet you again?All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000 in a legally binding bet. Bet??
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero show us where or admit to being a fool too stupid to be hereWhat part of; no one is going to bet a welcher like you, do you need explained to you?I've already seen you welch on a bet. Why would anybody in their right mind, ever bet you again?All trends which started under your hero, Bush.
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??
dear stupid liberal. If I said Bush was my hero I'll pay you $10,000 in a legally binding bet. Bet??
