Unemployment improves

[hjmick]

.2%!! Oooo, it sends a fucking tingle up my leg and a shiver down my spine.

 

[Charles_Main]

"Obama cooked the books."

Just getting it in for the right wingers start saying it.

if he was going to cook the books, he should have cooked them before unemployment exceeded 8%. that way he could credibly claim that the stimulus worked as advertised.

too little cooking, too late.

tant pis.

Was Obama even president when the unemployment rate was 8%?

yes he was lol.When obama was elected it was in the high 6 to 7% range, and he promised us all that if we passed his stimulus plan it would never exceed 8%.

However feel free to keep hiding your head in the sand and pretending this president has any credibility left on the subject.

As far as the small drop in unemployment. Any fool who can't see its because of the approaching holiday season is just that a fool.

 

[Meister]

Has Obama really done anything in his policies to make the unemployment better in the last month? Or, is it more likely that the recession is starting to wane in its natural cycle with the economy?

In the immortal word of Dogbert..."thoughts?"

Well....no thoughts on two good questions, I thought a lib would step forward with a good answer, but no answer speaks loudly for them.

 

[Polk]

Um...

Don't retail centers increase staff in Nov/Dec to cover for holiday shopping?

Could this account for the oh so exciting drop from 10.2% to 10.0% unemployment?

Exactly correct...anyone with half a brain knows the retail outlets and manufacturers gear up for the holiday season....but don't let the partisans like rightwinger, polk and Chris in on that fact...just let them continue to make fools out of themselves.

Except that the drop is the in the seasonally adjusted number. In simpler terms, BLS already accounts for that in the calculation.

 

[Polk]

Chris how is dropping 98,000 jobs last month an improvement....more unemployed people is a good sign? Employment Situation Summary

Losing 98,000 jobs in a month is a big improvement over losing 750,000, which is where we were at earlier this year.

It is a good sign that the rate dropped .2% last month back down to 10% unemployment. However some of that is due to a lot of people finally losing their extended unemployment benefits too.

Get back to me when we CREATE Jobs some month and i'll be right there with you celebrating a turn for the better.

Maybe next month will be the first month we have some JOB GROWTH. When we do actually have job growth we can celebrate.

Another part of it is that there are discouraged workers who are no longer counted because they've stopped actively looking for work, so the labor pool appears artificially small. Once the employment picture perks up, they'll start looking again, expanding the labor pool with more workers without jobs, raising the rate.

 

[edthecynic]

Um...

Don't retail centers increase staff in Nov/Dec to cover for holiday shopping?

Could this account for the oh so exciting drop from 10.2% to 10.0% unemployment?

Exactly correct...anyone with half a brain knows the retail outlets and manufacturers gear up for the holiday season....but don't let the partisans like rightwinger, polk and Chris in on that fact...just let them continue to make fools out of themselves.

And it's going to get more negative in January, we always have an uptick right before Christmas because retailers gear up for the season.

I tried to sneak that little fact onto the forum 2 months ago http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...ng-ease-unemployment.html?highlight=christmas

CON$ make up whatever crap FEELS good to their hateful nature.

Well, let's look at the Reagan Recession of 1982, the last time we had double digit unemployment, and see if unemployment declined in the run up to Christmas.

1982-08 9.80
1982-09 10.10
1982-10 10.40
1982-11 10.80

Well so much for that we ALWAYS have an uptick in employment before Christmas crapaganda. Looks like Reagan's tax cuts couldn't even help employment during the holiday "uptick."

 

[Polk]

if he was going to cook the books, he should have cooked them before unemployment exceeded 8%. that way he could credibly claim that the stimulus worked as advertised.

too little cooking, too late.

tant pis.

Was Obama even president when the unemployment rate was 8%?

the unemployment rate for january 2009 was 7.6%, up from 7.2% in december
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/07/business/economy/07jobs.html

"Back in early January, when Barack Obama was still President-elect, two of his chief economic advisers — leading proponents of a stimulus bill — predicted that the passage of a large economic-aid package would boost the economy and keep the unemployment rate below 8%. It hasn't quite worked out that way. Last month, the jobless rate in the U.S. hit 9.5%, the highest level it has reached since 1983.

The two advisers who wrote the paper, Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein, went on to land key jobs in the Obama Administration. Romer is the head of Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, and Bernstein is the chief economist and economic-policy adviser to Vice President Joe Biden. And the stimulus bill that both economists championed became law in mid-February."

Barack Obama's Stimulus Plan: Failing by Its Own Measure - TIME

At the time those estimates were made, the GDP estimates for the fourth quarter of 2008 were negative two percent. The real number turned out to be negative six.

 

[uscitizen]

Why argue economics with liberals? They think government creates jobs... right there you know they're fucking clueless.

Don't waste your time... look at that idiot Krugman who argues that CA's woes are because their taxes aren't high enough. Fucking idiots.

I seem to recall those on the right bragging on jobs Bush created?

And yes the govt does creat jobs. Most of the job growth for years has been either directly or indirectly connected to govt spending.

 

[Toro]

Has Obama really done anything in his policies to make the unemployment better in the last month? Or, is it more likely that the recession is starting to wane in its natural cycle with the economy?

It will have had some effect but probably more due to the easy monetary policy and natural cycle of the economy.

 

[Modbert]

This is good news considering it could of been a lot worse.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

This is good news considering it could of been a lot worse.

Indeed it could have been worse. I was expecting 75,000 to be the number, thankfully it was less.

I'm still holding out my praise for the month we hear "last month we CREATED more than 1 net job"

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Um...

Don't retail centers increase staff in Nov/Dec to cover for holiday shopping?

Could this account for the oh so exciting drop from 10.2% to 10.0% unemployment?

Exactly correct...anyone with half a brain knows the retail outlets and manufacturers gear up for the holiday season....but don't let the partisans like rightwinger, polk and Chris in on that fact...just let them continue to make fools out of themselves.

And it's going to get more negative in January, we always have an uptick right before Christmas because retailers gear up for the season.

I tried to sneak that little fact onto the forum 2 months ago http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...ng-ease-unemployment.html?highlight=christmas

CON$ make up whatever crap FEELS good to their hateful nature.

Well, let's look at the Reagan Recession of 1982, the last time we had double digit unemployment, and see if unemployment declined in the run up to Christmas.

1982-08 9.80
1982-09 10.10
1982-10 10.40
1982-11 10.80

Well so much for that we ALWAYS have an uptick in employment before Christmas crapaganda. Looks like Reagan's tax cuts couldn't even help employment during the holiday "uptick."

Thanks Ed....Carter really fucked this country up....but at least Reagan was man enough NOT to continually blame Carter for Carter's failed economic policy and for planting the seeds that grew into Al Qaeda which killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11.

Reagan was a man who became President
Obama is a lawyer who conned his way into the White House.

There is a difference edthecynic...but you are too blinded by partisan hatred to see it.

 

[Andrew2382]

If it drops another 3% it will finally get to the number that obama said we would peak at for passing his stimulus


hip hip

horray!

 

[pete]

Um...

Don't retail centers increase staff in Nov/Dec to cover for holiday shopping?

Could this account for the oh so exciting drop from 10.2% to 10.0% unemployment?

and let less go. Temp work. Yup

 

[edthecynic]

Exactly correct...anyone with half a brain knows the retail outlets and manufacturers gear up for the holiday season....but don't let the partisans like rightwinger, polk and Chris in on that fact...just let them continue to make fools out of themselves.

I tried to sneak that little fact onto the forum 2 months ago http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...ng-ease-unemployment.html?highlight=christmas

CON$ make up whatever crap FEELS good to their hateful nature.

Well, let's look at the Reagan Recession of 1982, the last time we had double digit unemployment, and see if unemployment declined in the run up to Christmas.

1982-08 9.80
1982-09 10.10
1982-10 10.40
1982-11 10.80

Well so much for that we ALWAYS have an uptick in employment before Christmas crapaganda. Looks like Reagan's tax cuts couldn't even help employment during the holiday "uptick."

Thanks Ed....Carter really fucked this country up....but at least Reagan was man enough NOT to continually blame Carter for Carter's failed economic policy and for planting the seeds that grew into Al Qaeda which killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11.

Reagan was a man who became President
Obama is a lawyer who conned his way into the White House.

There is a difference edthecynic...but you are too blinded by partisan hatred to see it.

Reagan became president in Jan of 1981 and unemployment was 7.5% and during Carter's entire term UE never exceeded 7.8%. TWO YEARS into Reagan's first term and more than a year after his tax cut "stimulus" UE reached 10.8%, which you CON$ still blame Carter for rather than Reagan's tax cuts! But don't dare blame Bush for anything that happened BEFORE Obama came into office let alone 2 years after Bush left!!!

And both attacks on the World trade Center were by Reagan's "freedom-fighters!"
9/11 is Reagan's foreign policy chickens coming home to roost!!!!!!!!

Reagan was a B actor who played president.

 

[Meister]

CON$ make up whatever crap FEELS good to their hateful nature.

Well, let's look at the Reagan Recession of 1982, the last time we had double digit unemployment, and see if unemployment declined in the run up to Christmas.

1982-08 9.80
1982-09 10.10
1982-10 10.40
1982-11 10.80

Well so much for that we ALWAYS have an uptick in employment before Christmas crapaganda. Looks like Reagan's tax cuts couldn't even help employment during the holiday "uptick."

Thanks Ed....Carter really fucked this country up....but at least Reagan was man enough NOT to continually blame Carter for Carter's failed economic policy and for planting the seeds that grew into Al Qaeda which killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11.

Reagan was a man who became President
Obama is a lawyer who conned his way into the White House.

There is a difference edthecynic...but you are too blinded by partisan hatred to see it.

Reagan became president in Jan of 1981 and unemployment was 7.5% and during Carter's entire term UE never exceeded 7.8%. TWO YEARS into Reagan's first term and more than a year after his tax cut "stimulus" UE reached 10.8%, which you CON$ still blame Carter for rather than Reagan's tax cuts! But don't dare blame Bush for anything that happened BEFORE Obama came into office let alone 2 years after Bush left!!!

And both attacks on the World trade Center were by Reagan's "freedom-fighters!"
9/11 is Reagan's foreign policy chickens coming home to roost!!!!!!!!

Reagan was a B actor who played president.

I suppose you wouldn't want to go through Carter's 1 term and highlight for us all that he did?
By the way, Ed...I blame Bush for a lot.
Somehow, I doubt you can do the same about Obama.

 

[Missourian]

And both attacks on the World trade Center were by Reagan's "freedom-fighters!"
9/11 is Reagan's foreign policy chickens coming home to roost!!!!!!!!

Reagan was a B actor who played president.

What did Reagan have to do with Saudi Arabia?

Mihdhar and Hazmi were also potential pilot hijackers, but did not do well in their initial pilot lessons in San Diego. Both were kept on as "muscle" hijackers, who would help overpower the passengers and crew, and allow the pilot hijackers to take control of the flights. In addition to Mihdhar and Hazmi, thirteen other muscle hijackers were selected in late 2000 or early 2001.

All were from Saudi Arabia, with the exception of Fayez Banihammad, who was from the United Arab Emirates.

Hijackers in the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

 

[Harry Dresden]

Chris

You need to stop this crap. We are not allowed to post positive economic stories on this board. It upsets the "Economy will fail" crowd

before you put your foot further in your mouth look at the numbers Employment Situation Summary

too late....this happened some 3,000 posts ago....

 

[Harry Dresden]

CON$ make up whatever crap FEELS good to their hateful nature.

geezus ....the real voice of intelect....hey mr Cynic correct me if im wrong....dont the Dems do the same thing?.....waiting for your cynical reply....

 

[edthecynic]

And both attacks on the World trade Center were by Reagan's "freedom-fighters!"
9/11 is Reagan's foreign policy chickens coming home to roost!!!!!!!!

Reagan was a B actor who played president.

What did Reagan have to do with Saudi Arabia?

Nice try at deflection.

As you well know, as part of the Reagan Doctrine, both the Blind Sheikh and OBL were supplied arms and Stinger missiles by St Ronnie in the Afghanistan war against Russia, even though he knew from Dana Rohrabacker that OBL wanted to kill Americans as much as he wanted to kill Russians. Thanks to Reagan OBL became a big hero among the terrorists.
Reagan owns 9/11.