So we are to believe that we are in an economic recovery?

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Indeed...wait until the unemployment numbers are re-crunched say...February?

It will go above 9 %...and be right about 9.5%...again...

I predicted 2 months ago that Obama would claim temp seasonal jobs as a victory and that the numbers would go back up in Jan or Feb but that thread was ignored.

The temp/seasonal jobs are adjusted for in reporting the UE number by the Dept. of Labor.

That's probably why the thread was ignored.

You actually believe their numbers? 5 million positions have disappeared, countless people who have given up but want to work are no longer counted. The numbers are fixed.

 

[G.T.]

I predicted 2 months ago that Obama would claim temp seasonal jobs as a victory and that the numbers would go back up in Jan or Feb but that thread was ignored.

The temp/seasonal jobs are adjusted for in reporting the UE number by the Dept. of Labor.

That's probably why the thread was ignored.

You actually believe their numbers? 5 million positions have disappeared, countless people who have given up but want to work are no longer counted. The numbers are fixed.

I do not believe they are fixed, n'or CAN they be perfect. That's why they calculate a margin of error, etc.

If you look into how these things work, the skepticism sometimes cedes.

We're all skeptics about things we don't have a thorough knowledge of, and that's understandable.

What's not understandable is just shrugging and going "ppfffttt...rigged!" to yourself, when not actually looking too far into how the number is tallied, etc.

When you say something like Obama would claim seasonal temp jobs as a victory, it shows that you, at the very least, never went on the DOL website and researched how they come up with the UE number, or else you wouldn't say such a thing. There's no other real explanation, except that maybe you do know how it's calculated and are trolling?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The temp/seasonal jobs are adjusted for in reporting the UE number by the Dept. of Labor.

That's probably why the thread was ignored.

You actually believe their numbers? 5 million positions have disappeared, countless people who have given up but want to work are no longer counted. The numbers are fixed.

I do not believe they are fixed, n'or CAN they be perfect. That's why they calculate a margin of error, etc.

If you look into how these things work, the skepticism sometimes cedes.

We're all skeptics about things we don't have a thorough knowledge of, and that's understandable.

What's not understandable is just shrugging and going "ppfffttt...rigged!" to yourself, when not actually looking too far into how the number is tallied, etc.

When you say something like Obama would claim seasonal temp jobs as a victory, it shows that you, at the very least, never went on the DOL website and researched how they come up with the UE number, or else you wouldn't say such a thing. There's no other real explanation, except that maybe you do know how it's calculated and are trolling?

I have researched it a bit in recent weeks. Prior to that I was oblivious to the process. And when I say fixed I don't mean intentionaly cheated. I just mean the numbers leave out too many factors therefore imo they are not accurate. I believe the real UE number currently is between 11 and 12 percent.

 

[The T]

There's an article in yesterday's USA Today that salwes for the holiday shopping season were "disappointing". Yeah, the people believe that we're onj our way to recovery all right.

Looks like the wheels on the left wing propaganda wagon are stuck in the mud again.

Indeed...wait until the unemployment numbers are re-crunched say...February?

It will go above 9 %...and be right about 9.5%...again...

I predicted 2 months ago that Obama would claim temp seasonal jobs as a victory and that the numbers would go back up in Jan or Feb but that thread was ignored.

And I predicted that Republicans will be blamed for our ills...and it began last week...it will be the #1 mantra and excuse for Obama and the Statists throughout 2012

 

[bitterlyclingin]

Maine has 453,000 +/- welfare recipients and only 445,000+/- taxpayers. See my post on an Obama state of mind. If Obama can achieve the same feat in another 25 states, he'll be made president for life, guaranteed. Just like his friend, Hugo.
Eddy Lampert had a good idea at the time, sell off the former Kmart locations as the retailer exited from bankruptcy and pocket the proceeds getting rich quick in the process. Only he ran head on into the beginnings of a real estate depression, so he cut the quality of the goods he was selling in the retail operation to keep up the profitability. When you'd relied on Sears quality most of your life and the 60 month warranteed Die Hard batteries all suddenly started failing after 30 months of use, you begin looking elsewhere. The same thing was happening to the rest of the product mix. Anybody remember WT Grant or Caldor? Or Enron? Funny things happen to people's seemingly secure jobs when you travel "Asset Light" like most retailers do. Even the wooden skids that the retail goods come in on off the delivery trucks are rented, let alone the pallet jacks.
Then you have Harry Reid's (D-NV) belief that all of the new regulations the Democrats have saddled the economy with are actually job creating by forcing businesses to hire additional people to deal with the additional regulatory burden. Harry was obviously engrossed in a strenuous game of pocket pool with himself when his kindergarten teacher was reading the story of the straw that broke the camel's back to his class.
How about housing prices? They're down again for another year. Some people just won't sell when they're faced with a loss. Whats the definition of the money supply? The quantity times the velocity or some such thing like that? What's the velocity of the money tied up in an unsold house? Zero! Whats the product of any quantity times zero! Still zero! If you want a symbol for the albatross around the economy's neck, its housing.

 

[The T]

I predicted 2 months ago that Obama would claim temp seasonal jobs as a victory and that the numbers would go back up in Jan or Feb but that thread was ignored.

The temp/seasonal jobs are adjusted for in reporting the UE number by the Dept. of Labor.

That's probably why the thread was ignored.

You actually believe their numbers? 5 million positions have disappeared, countless people who have given up but want to work are no longer counted. The numbers are fixed.

Of course they're fixed. All administrations do it. Government does it...they lie to us all the time...and both sides do it.

 

[Zander]

 

[AVG-JOE]

So we are to believe that we are in an economic recovery?

Dooooooooood!

With enough means of production under your control, an income of $7 Million 5 years ago that hasn't acquired enough to now be dragging in $1o Million has been managed by a fool.

Life ROCKS!!

 

[G.T.]

The temp/seasonal jobs are adjusted for in reporting the UE number by the Dept. of Labor.

That's probably why the thread was ignored.

You actually believe their numbers? 5 million positions have disappeared, countless people who have given up but want to work are no longer counted. The numbers are fixed.

Of course they're fixed. All administrations do it. Government does it...they lie to us all the time...and both sides do it.

Then I suppose you never USE the unemployment numbers to bash Obama with, seeing as they're fixed and all. Who knows, maybe we're all as a Country just doing lovely and Obama WANTS it to stay up around 9% to make it fixed so he looks bad!

People don't think.

 

[G.T.]

You actually believe their numbers? 5 million positions have disappeared, countless people who have given up but want to work are no longer counted. The numbers are fixed.

I do not believe they are fixed, n'or CAN they be perfect. That's why they calculate a margin of error, etc.

If you look into how these things work, the skepticism sometimes cedes.

We're all skeptics about things we don't have a thorough knowledge of, and that's understandable.

What's not understandable is just shrugging and going "ppfffttt...rigged!" to yourself, when not actually looking too far into how the number is tallied, etc.

When you say something like Obama would claim seasonal temp jobs as a victory, it shows that you, at the very least, never went on the DOL website and researched how they come up with the UE number, or else you wouldn't say such a thing. There's no other real explanation, except that maybe you do know how it's calculated and are trolling?

I have researched it a bit in recent weeks. Prior to that I was oblivious to the process. And when I say fixed I don't mean intentionaly cheated. I just mean the numbers leave out too many factors therefore imo they are not accurate. I believe the real UE number currently is between 11 and 12 percent.

So instead of being around 4 - 6% under most of Bush's term, it was really 6-8%?

Or was it a different formula/fix back then?

How about historically? Is it always 2-ish percent higher than reported? If so, I guess then if you adjust ALL of the unemployment numbers, ever, this way, things measure up -- - --- the same as if we looked at it with the currently reported numbers. (in comparison to each other, that is)

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So we are to believe that we are in an economic recovery?

No, not if you’re a partisan rightist hack.

Sears closing 100 stores has more to do with Wal*Mart and Home Depot/Lowe’s than the economy.

Otherwise:

The Post Hoc Fallacy is committed whenever one reasons to a causal conclusion based solely on the supposed cause preceding its "effect". Of course, it is a necessary condition of causation that the cause precede the effect, but it is not a sufficient condition. Thus, post hoc evidence may suggest the hypothesis of a causal relationship, which then requires further testing, but it is never sufficient evidence on its own.

Post Hoc also manifests itself as a bias towards jumping to conclusions based upon coincidences.

Logical Fallacy: Post Hoc

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So we are to believe that we are in an economic recovery?

No, not if you’re a partisan rightist hack.

Sears closing 100 stores has more to do with Wal*Mart and Home Depot/Lowe’s than the economy.

Otherwise:

The Post Hoc Fallacy is committed whenever one reasons to a causal conclusion based solely on the supposed cause preceding its "effect". Of course, it is a necessary condition of causation that the cause precede the effect, but it is not a sufficient condition. Thus, post hoc evidence may suggest the hypothesis of a causal relationship, which then requires further testing, but it is never sufficient evidence on its own.

Post Hoc also manifests itself as a bias towards jumping to conclusions based upon coincidences.

Logical Fallacy: Post Hoc

I think it is Dick Cheney and Halliburton's fault as well.

 

[The T]

You actually believe their numbers? 5 million positions have disappeared, countless people who have given up but want to work are no longer counted. The numbers are fixed.

Of course they're fixed. All administrations do it. Government does it...they lie to us all the time...and both sides do it.

Then I suppose you never USE the unemployment numbers to bash Obama with, seeing as they're fixed and all. Who knows, maybe we're all as a Country just doing lovely and Obama WANTS it to stay up around 9% to make it fixed so he looks bad!

People don't think.

You sure don't.

 

[G.T.]

Of course they're fixed. All administrations do it. Government does it...they lie to us all the time...and both sides do it.

Then I suppose you never USE the unemployment numbers to bash Obama with, seeing as they're fixed and all. Who knows, maybe we're all as a Country just doing lovely and Obama WANTS it to stay up around 9% to make it fixed so he looks bad!

People don't think.

You sure don't.

Insults versus pointed verses. Weak.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I wonder if these people know that refrigerators put the iceman out of business?

 

[G.T.]

So we are to believe that we are in an economic recovery?

No, not if you’re a partisan rightist hack.

Sears closing 100 stores has more to do with Wal*Mart and Home Depot/Lowe’s than the economy.

Otherwise:

The Post Hoc Fallacy is committed whenever one reasons to a causal conclusion based solely on the supposed cause preceding its "effect". Of course, it is a necessary condition of causation that the cause precede the effect, but it is not a sufficient condition. Thus, post hoc evidence may suggest the hypothesis of a causal relationship, which then requires further testing, but it is never sufficient evidence on its own.

Post Hoc also manifests itself as a bias towards jumping to conclusions based upon coincidences.

Logical Fallacy: Post Hoc

I think it is Dick Cheney and Halliburton's fault as well.

That's a horrendous comeback, or what they call a non sequitor.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I do not believe they are fixed, n'or CAN they be perfect. That's why they calculate a margin of error, etc.

If you look into how these things work, the skepticism sometimes cedes.

We're all skeptics about things we don't have a thorough knowledge of, and that's understandable.

What's not understandable is just shrugging and going "ppfffttt...rigged!" to yourself, when not actually looking too far into how the number is tallied, etc.

When you say something like Obama would claim seasonal temp jobs as a victory, it shows that you, at the very least, never went on the DOL website and researched how they come up with the UE number, or else you wouldn't say such a thing. There's no other real explanation, except that maybe you do know how it's calculated and are trolling?

I have researched it a bit in recent weeks. Prior to that I was oblivious to the process. And when I say fixed I don't mean intentionaly cheated. I just mean the numbers leave out too many factors therefore imo they are not accurate. I believe the real UE number currently is between 11 and 12 percent.

So instead of being around 4 - 6% under most of Bush's term, it was really 6-8%?

Or was it a different formula/fix back then?

How about historically? Is it always 2-ish percent higher than reported? If so, I guess then if you adjust ALL of the unemployment numbers, ever, this way, things measure up -- - --- the same as if we looked at it with the currently reported numbers. (in comparison to each other, that is)

Except that those extra 2% are actually people desperate for change. I will be one of them soon if things don't change. My business is down DRASTICALLY. It's bad enough that its winter but now no one is hiring. 50 contractors for every 8 jobs available to bid. Prices have been cut so drastically in attempts to gain customers I'm no longer employing anyone full time. I guess all these "hey look its going great" threads from the left just really irritate the hell out of me because its not reality. Unless of course your in an unaffected industry. It's so easy for those not effected to sit behind their desks and make absurd claims while looking through rose colored glasses. Then they claim that my disdain is because I want failure for Obama at any cost. Yea, right.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

No, not if you’re a partisan rightist hack.

Sears closing 100 stores has more to do with Wal*Mart and Home Depot/Lowe’s than the economy.

Otherwise:

I think it is Dick Cheney and Halliburton's fault as well.

That's a horrendous comeback, or what they call a non sequitor.

Uhm, it isn't a comeback as the thought wasn't directed at me. Therefore, it was just an addition to the thread where I illustrate the abusurdity of the idea, with absurdity.

 

[G.T.]

I have researched it a bit in recent weeks. Prior to that I was oblivious to the process. And when I say fixed I don't mean intentionaly cheated. I just mean the numbers leave out too many factors therefore imo they are not accurate. I believe the real UE number currently is between 11 and 12 percent.

So instead of being around 4 - 6% under most of Bush's term, it was really 6-8%?

Or was it a different formula/fix back then?

How about historically? Is it always 2-ish percent higher than reported? If so, I guess then if you adjust ALL of the unemployment numbers, ever, this way, things measure up -- - --- the same as if we looked at it with the currently reported numbers. (in comparison to each other, that is)

Except that those extra 2% are actually people desperate for change. I will be one of them soon if things don't change. My business is down DRASTICALLY. It's bad enough that its winter but now no one is hiring. 50 contractors for every 8 jobs available to bid. Prices have been cut so drastically in attempts to gain customers I'm no longer employing anyone full time. I guess all these "hey look its going great" threads from the left just really irritate the hell out of me because its not reality. Unless of course your in an unaffected industry. It's so easy for those not effected to sit behind their desks and make absurd claims while looking through rose colored glasses. Then they claim that my disdain is because I want failure for Obama at any cost. Yea, right.

hey well i personally never said things were peachy....its just no reason to get irrational & ignore study, is all.

 

[G.T.]

I think it is Dick Cheney and Halliburton's fault as well.

That's a horrendous comeback, or what they call a non sequitor.

Uhm, it isn't a comeback as the thought wasn't directed at me. Therefore, it was just an addition to the thread where I illustrate the abusurdity of the idea, with absurdity.

cept it wasnt absurd...those are sears & kmarts' competitors - in tools & cheesey clothing. what he said was relevant, your comeback - wasnt.