Unemployment rates were made worse by Bush, not Obama!

[Faun]

Dumb ass I take it you can't read?

Dumb ass I take it you can't read?

Not only can I read, I can understand. Ed was talking about record level, not rate.

Can you explain the difference between a level and a rate?

Level is the actual number
Rate is a percentage.
For what we're talking about…
The population level is 248,446,000 people
The employment level is 146,600,00 people
The unemployment level is 9,262,000 people.
The labor force is employed plus unemployed, so the labor force level is 155,862,000
The Not in the Labor Force level is 92,584,000

The labor force participation rate is 155,862,000/248,446,000=.627=62.7%

The employment-population ratio is 146,600,000/248,446,000=.59=59%

And the unemployment rate is 9,262,000/155,862,000=.059=5.9%

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

What on Earth does that have to do with my post?
I was giving the definitions and used the September 2014 numbers as an example. No idea why you think t was comparing anything to Bush.

That fucker is thee most brain-dead poster here. If she were still alive today, you could get a more lucid reply from Teri Schiavo than you will ever get that rightard.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dumb ass I take it you can't read?

Dumb ass I take it you can't read?

Not only can I read, I can understand. Ed was talking about record level, not rate.

Can you explain the difference between a level and a rate?

Level is the actual number
Rate is a percentage.
For what we're talking about…
The population level is 248,446,000 people
The employment level is 146,600,00 people
The unemployment level is 9,262,000 people.
The labor force is employed plus unemployed, so the labor force level is 155,862,000
The Not in the Labor Force level is 92,584,000

The labor force participation rate is 155,862,000/248,446,000=.627=62.7%

The employment-population ratio is 146,600,000/248,446,000=.59=59%

And the unemployment rate is 9,262,000/155,862,000=.059=5.9%

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

What on Earth does that have to do with my post?
I was giving the definitions and used the September 2014 numbers as an example. No idea why you think t was comparing anything to Bush.

See this is what I am talking about you don't know what in the hell you are talking about.
You weren't giving a fucking definition you were trying to show cause why obama had a 5.9 unemployment rate.
Bush had 5.8 and had more people in the work force than that piece of shit you have been defending.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Not only can I read, I can understand. Ed was talking about record level, not rate.

Can you explain the difference between a level and a rate?

Level is the actual number
Rate is a percentage.
For what we're talking about…
The population level is 248,446,000 people
The employment level is 146,600,00 people
The unemployment level is 9,262,000 people.
The labor force is employed plus unemployed, so the labor force level is 155,862,000
The Not in the Labor Force level is 92,584,000

The labor force participation rate is 155,862,000/248,446,000=.627=62.7%

The employment-population ratio is 146,600,000/248,446,000=.59=59%

And the unemployment rate is 9,262,000/155,862,000=.059=5.9%

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

What on Earth does that have to do with my post?
I was giving the definitions and used the September 2014 numbers as an example. No idea why you think t was comparing anything to Bush.

That fucker is thee most brain-dead poster here. If she were still alive today, you could get a more lucid reply from Teri Schiavo than you will ever get that rightard.

But only if you were not a stupid fucking obama supporter your support of him makes me ten times smarter than you dumb ass.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

Yet another lie!!!

When Bush had a fake 5.8% UE rate, the "real" rate was much higher , there were 154,469,000 in the workforce. There are 155,862,000 now.

No lies ed only you can be dumb enough to try and pull a lie off

 

[Ellipsis]

Starting in Jan. 20, 2001, at the beginning of George W. Bush’s administration, the rate was 2.4 percent, but by the time he left in January 2009 it had reached 7 percent. The rate now is 5.9% and is on track to get even lower.

Bad fiscal policy supported by the office of the President.

 

[The Rabbi]

He was over 20% wrong. That's unacceptable except to ass kissers like you. He's a liar and you're willing to accept it.

Aww, poor, Bush voter ...

es·ti·mate

1 : the act of appraising or valuing : calculation 2 : an opinion or judgment of the nature, character, or quality of a person or thing <had a high estimate of his abilities> 3 a : a rough or approximate calculation b : a numerical value obtained from a statistical sample and assigned to a population parameter

But it wasnt even a rough estimate. It was simply a lie.

Now you want us to believe that a United States President is going to stand up there ,knowing the political consequences of lying, and undermine his chances of being a two-termer? Nah! Obama was just given the wrong information. Or, he expected the GOP to keep the promise of more jobs if the tax cuts for the
Wealthy stayed in place.

If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period.
Yeah, tell me about it.


So if Obama got the wrong information, who got fired? I mean it isnt like there is one guy giving him advice or information. It goes through many hands before ending up on his desk and they discuss it etc.
As for the GOP, the Dems controlled both Houses of Congress. The GOP was powerless to stop anything.

If I remember correctly Obama kept a number of Republicans in his administration. His naivete showed when he allowed the GOP to take advantage of his desire for bipartisanship. While he may have intended to keep his enemies close so he could keep his eye on them, it is clear now that their designs were to undermine his presidency from the start.

I notice you keep avoiding the fact that the tax cuts for the rich and the GOPs promise of job creation
may have had a deeper impact on Obama's thinking than you care to admit.

That's like totally irrelevent. A complete non response. And of course wrong.
The Republicans kept were Gates at Defense. There wasnt a single Republican on his economic team. So that's a lie.
Obama never allowed the GOP to take any advantage at all. His porkulus bill passed with very few GOP votes,none on the House as I recall. So that's a lie
There wwere no "tax cuts for the rich." That meme is old and discredited. There were tax cuts across the board. Tax cuts Democrats voted to extend.
You have no idea what Obama's thinking was. You're making shit up.
IOW, another total fraud of a posting from someone who doesnt know his ass from a hole i the ground.

 

[Faun]

Can you explain the difference between a level and a rate?

Level is the actual number
Rate is a percentage.
For what we're talking about…
The population level is 248,446,000 people
The employment level is 146,600,00 people
The unemployment level is 9,262,000 people.
The labor force is employed plus unemployed, so the labor force level is 155,862,000
The Not in the Labor Force level is 92,584,000

The labor force participation rate is 155,862,000/248,446,000=.627=62.7%

The employment-population ratio is 146,600,000/248,446,000=.59=59%

And the unemployment rate is 9,262,000/155,862,000=.059=5.9%

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

What on Earth does that have to do with my post?
I was giving the definitions and used the September 2014 numbers as an example. No idea why you think t was comparing anything to Bush.

That fucker is thee most brain-dead poster here. If she were still alive today, you could get a more lucid reply from Teri Schiavo than you will ever get that rightard.

But only if you were not a stupid fucking obama supporter your support of him makes me ten times smarter than you dumb ass.

Only in your defective brain. Let's not forget, your Bush voter. That makes you the dumbest fucking creature on the face of the planet. Hell, you're so embarrassed about supporting Bush, you won't even say how many times you've voted for him, including primaries. Probably more than the 2 I cast for Obama.

 

[Faun]

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

Yet another lie!!!

When Bush had a fake 5.8% UE rate, the "real" rate was much higher , there were 154,469,000 in the workforce. There are 155,862,000 now.

No lies ed only you can be dumb enough to try and pull a lie off

Of course you lied. It's right there for everyone to read. You falsely claimed there were more people in the workforce then than there are now. And as the numbers prove, that is patently false.

 

[BluesLegend]

Unemployment rates were made worse by Bush, not Obama!

Even if this were true, which would require ignoring Dem control of congress during those final two years of Bush 2nd term, I thought Obama was some kind of liberal genius he's had 6 years shouldn't he should have fixed all this shit by now?

 

[The Rabbi]

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

Yet another lie!!!

When Bush had a fake 5.8% UE rate, the "real" rate was much higher , there were 154,469,000 in the workforce. There are 155,862,000 now.

No lies ed only you can be dumb enough to try and pull a lie off

Of course you lied. It's right there for everyone to read. You falsely claimed there were more people in the workforce then than there are now. And as the numbers prove, that is patently false.

There are about the same number people working today as the day Bush left office. Somehow that's supposed to be some sort of accomplishment for Obama.

 

[Siete]

Not only can I read, I can understand. Ed was talking about record level, not rate.

Can you explain the difference between a level and a rate?

Level is the actual number
Rate is a percentage.
For what we're talking about…
The population level is 248,446,000 people
The employment level is 146,600,00 people
The unemployment level is 9,262,000 people.
The labor force is employed plus unemployed, so the labor force level is 155,862,000
The Not in the Labor Force level is 92,584,000

The labor force participation rate is 155,862,000/248,446,000=.627=62.7%

The employment-population ratio is 146,600,000/248,446,000=.59=59%

And the unemployment rate is 9,262,000/155,862,000=.059=5.9%

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

What on Earth does that have to do with my post?
I was giving the definitions and used the September 2014 numbers as an example. No idea why you think t was comparing anything to Bush.

That fucker is thee most brain-dead poster here. If she were still alive today, you could get a more lucid reply from Teri Schiavo than you will ever get that rightard.

Teri is capable of understanding , RW's not so much. Nothing, and I mean nothing makes a damn bit of difference if they land on a talking point.

 

[The Rabbi]

Can you explain the difference between a level and a rate?

Level is the actual number
Rate is a percentage.
For what we're talking about…
The population level is 248,446,000 people
The employment level is 146,600,00 people
The unemployment level is 9,262,000 people.
The labor force is employed plus unemployed, so the labor force level is 155,862,000
The Not in the Labor Force level is 92,584,000

The labor force participation rate is 155,862,000/248,446,000=.627=62.7%

The employment-population ratio is 146,600,000/248,446,000=.59=59%

And the unemployment rate is 9,262,000/155,862,000=.059=5.9%

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

What on Earth does that have to do with my post?
I was giving the definitions and used the September 2014 numbers as an example. No idea why you think t was comparing anything to Bush.

That fucker is thee most brain-dead poster here. If she were still alive today, you could get a more lucid reply from Teri Schiavo than you will ever get that rightard.

Teri is capable of understanding , RW's not so much. Nothing, and I mean nothing makes a damn bit of difference if they land on a talking point.

That's projection right there.

 

[BluesLegend]

Obama's economy sure sucks for college grads.

 

[Siete]

silly RW asshats are going to be lost in the abyss of their empty skulls when Obama leaves office ... their entire life will vanish.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama's economy sure sucks for college grads.

Virtually all the groups who supported Obama the most in 2008 have suffered the most from his policies.
College kids. Blacks. White women. They are all much worse off today.
Hope N Change. Hope ya like it!

 

[BluesLegend]

Obama's economy sure sucks for college grads.

Virtually all the groups who supported Obama the most in 2008 have suffered the most from his policies.
College kids. Blacks. White women. They are all much worse off today.
Hope N Change. Hope ya like it!

Their half baked ideas failed, in epic fashion. Maybe voters have learned their lesson.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

Yet another lie!!!

When Bush had a fake 5.8% UE rate, the "real" rate was much higher , there were 154,469,000 in the workforce. There are 155,862,000 now.

No lies ed only you can be dumb enough to try and pull a lie off

Of course you lied. It's right there for everyone to read. You falsely claimed there were more people in the workforce then than there are now. And as the numbers prove, that is patently false.

Bull shit puck ass bitch I unlike you don't lie go fucking die.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Unemployment June 2008 5.8%
2014 Sept 5.9%

now look closely
June 2008 66.1%
September 2014 62.7%

Now fuck off

 

[pinqy]

Unemployment June 2008 5.8%
2014 Sept 5.9%

now look closely
June 2008 66.1%
September 2014 62.7%

Now fuck off

You are showing a larger PERCENT of th population in the labor force, not larger number of people.
In July 2008 (not June) when the UE rate was 5.8%, there were 8,937,000 unemployed, 154,464 ,000 in the labor force, and a population of 233,864,000
So 8 937,000/154,464,000 = 5.8% and 154,464,000/233,864,000=66.1%

For September, unemployment was 9,262,000, labor force was 155,862,000, and population was 248,446,000
9,262,000/155,862,000=5.9% and 155,862,000/248,446,000=62.7%

The number of people in the labor force is higher, but as a percent of the population, it's lower.

 

[Faun]

When Bush had 5.8% unemployment more people were in the workforce so spin that shit somewhere else.

Yet another lie!!!

When Bush had a fake 5.8% UE rate, the "real" rate was much higher , there were 154,469,000 in the workforce. There are 155,862,000 now.

No lies ed only you can be dumb enough to try and pull a lie off

Of course you lied. It's right there for everyone to read. You falsely claimed there were more people in the workforce then than there are now. And as the numbers prove, that is patently false.

Bull shit puck ass bitch I unlike you don't lie go fucking die.

What a nut case you are, gramps. Careful you don't pop an aneurysm!

Your nuttiness aside, yes, you did lie. You said there were more people in the workforce when Bush had 5.8% unemployment than now. That's a bald-faced lie.

Then: 154,469,000
Now: 155,862,000

I don't care how senile you are, 156 million is still more than 154 million.