Unemployment under 5%. Lowest in 8 years. Thanks obama !

[dannyboys]

U6 (the real deal) is 9.9% Thanks for nothing Obungles

Would you prefer 14.2% U-6?

I suspect the real number is closer to 14%....only an Obama Butt licker is buying anything his administration is putting out there

Only some completely ignorant of government and economic indicators thinks the President has anything to do with economic statistics.

But if you think you have enough evidence to make your case, please share.

So when the LIBs constantly accuse BUSH of creating "the mess" these LIBs don't know what they are talking about right?
And when Obama takes credit for the bullshit phony employment numbers he didn't really have anything to do with the employment numbers right?
'Real' unemployment is more like 20% when the millions of people who have given up ever finding a job are counted.....as by any honest measure ought to be.

 

[edthecynic]

'Real' unemployment is more like 20% when the millions of people who have given up ever finding a job are counted

Bullshit!
There are only about 600,000 who have given up looking for work.

 

[dannyboys]

'Real' unemployment is more like 20% when the millions of people who have given up ever finding a job are counted

Bullshit!
There are only about 600,000 who have given up looking for work.

Where's the link asshole?
You're posting out of your ass.
Anyone can find the 'real' unemployment number on google.
Even Bernie Sanders says the 'real' percent is close to 10%

 

[pinqy]

U6 (the real deal) is 9.9% Thanks for nothing Obungles

Would you prefer 14.2% U-6?

I suspect the real number is closer to 14%....only an Obama Butt licker is buying anything his administration is putting out there

Only some completely ignorant of government and economic indicators thinks the President has anything to do with economic statistics.

But if you think you have enough evidence to make your case, please share.

So when the LIBs constantly accuse BUSH of creating "the mess" these LIBs don't know what they are talking about right?
And when Obama takes credit for the bullshit phony employment numbers he didn't really have anything to do with the employment numbers right?

Oh, Good Lord! I obviously meant that the President cannot MANIPULATE the data to say what he wants, not that the President has zero influence on the economy.

Real' unemployment is more like 20% when the millions of people who have given up ever finding a job are counted.....as by any honest measure ought to be.

To make it 30%, we're talking about adding 30 million people. The number of people who want a job, are available to work,and who looked for work in the last year but not last month and stopped looking because they believed they wouldn't find a job is 623,000 That raises the UE rate to 5.3% if you add them in.
Total people who want a job but not looking is 6,166,000. Adding them in would only make it 8.5%.

But people not trying to work can't be hired, obviously, so adding them in doesn't tell us anything about how hard it is to find a job. Which is why no one has ever done it for an official measure.

 

[edthecynic]

'Real' unemployment is more like 20% when the millions of people who have given up ever finding a job are counted

Bullshit!
There are only about 600,000 who have given up looking for work.

Where's the link asshole?

623,000 to be exact!

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[mikegriffith1]

But people not trying to work can't be hired, obviously, so adding them in doesn't tell us anything about how hard it is to find a job. Which is why no one has ever done it for an official measure.

Uh, so if people have stopped looking for a job because they've tried to find one but have given up hope because they can't find one, we shouldn't count them?! Really?

Ignoring those people gives a misleading picture of the employment situation, which of course is why liberals like to do exactly that. Gee, I thought you guys cared about the poor and the needy?

 

[Stephanie]

"The U.S. economy added only 151,000 jobs in January."

US population grows by 200,000 per month.

Math r hard.

Right? Look, all I'm saying is if anyone thinks the economy is in good shape, they're delusional with a CAPITAL D.

Job growth is anemic, debt is out of control, the markets have been propped up with runaway money printing... we're on our way to becoming the Wiemar Republic.

All anyone has to do is go state by state and look at the gains and losses in jobs and industries to find that out.

They rather lie to themselves and the public.

All you have to do is look at Flint, Michigan....that's how penny pincher Republicans want to run the country.........

As opposed to Libby run Illinois that is in the crapper? Sure.

don't forget Detroit, Baltimore.

 

[pinqy]

'Real' unemployment is more like 20% when the millions of people who have given up ever finding a job are counted

Bullshit!
There are only about 600,000 who have given up looking for work.

Where's the link asshole?
You're posting out of your ass.
Anyone can find the 'real' unemployment number on google.
Even Bernie Sanders says the 'real' percent is close to 10%

That number adds in all people who stopped looking in the last year but still want a job and are available regardless of why they stopped looking, and it adds in people who want to and are able to work full time but are working part time because their hours were cut or they can't find a full time job.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Based on Liberal logic, this is a jobless recovery. This coming from the same people that dubbed the term, "white Hispanic".

Actually the term "White Hispanic" is a term from the Census Bureau, not Liberals. Only GOP hate radio attributes the term as originating from Liberal media during the Zimmerman fiasco.

http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/rho.txt

Census Bureau.......that enclave of Conservative thinkers, right.

Look at the date of the census bureau report from the 1990s! The CON$ervoFascists claimed the term was invented in 2013 just for Zimmerman, remember.

CNN Labels Zimmerman 'White Hispanic' - Breitbart

The term “white Hispanic” was coined by the media after outlets wrongly labeled Zimmerman white

What difference does the date have to do with the term being created by liberals? 1900, 1990, or 2013. It makes no difference. It's a bullshit term and makes about as much sense as calling a black man with a white mother a 'white black'.

You are Right, lies make no difference to the Right when it is the Right telling them.
Thank you.

At the core, it came to creation by Liberals for convenience or agenda. Someone in government sought convenience by creating new classifications by putting "white" in front of Hispanic and culture uses it when necessary. It's a bullshit term that has no relevance. George Zimmerman is every bit Latino that Barack Obama is Black and that does not sit well with Liberals; hence, pull out the fabricated race to make Zimmerman less Latino.

 

[Mac1958]

The 4.9% rate is a great example of how individual economic stats can be completely misleading in a vacuum, and ESPECIALLY in a political context.

There remain several indicators that are potentially deflationary and problematic, such as the 151K jobs growth, 0.7% inflation, lower GDP estimates, productivity, China's troubles and a dangerously flattening bond yield curve.

There's also some good news, particularly steadily increasing incomes, growth in disposable income, car sales, oil prices that at some point will manifest in increased consumer spending, and it's clear that the consumer is in better shape than 2008.

Odds of a recession are less than 50/50 but they are there. Right now most are guessing we'll avoid it and see some moderate growth before the end of the year.

There is politically-based analysis of economic figures, and there is reality-based analysis of economic figures, and never the two shall meet.
.

 

[dannyboys]

'Real' unemployment is more like 20% when the millions of people who have given up ever finding a job are counted

Bullshit!
There are only about 600,000 who have given up looking for work.

Where's the link asshole?
You're posting out of your ass.
Anyone can find the 'real' unemployment number on google.
Even Bernie Sanders says the 'real' percent is close to 10%

That number adds in all people who stopped looking in the last year but still want a job and are available regardless of why they stopped looking, and it adds in people who want to and are able to work full time but are working part time because their hours were cut or they can't find a full time job.

Whatever. The fact is the number Obama's administration is telling people is a fucking lie!
It amazes me how there can be so many Obama ass-lickers who are willing to actually suspend their disbelief in reality because they will never except the 'First AA President' ended up setting back race relations decades, sat back and "led from behind", never saw a 'RED LINE' he didn't let people cross, allowed Iran to get billions of dollars to help them promote and fund terrorism and accelerate their nuclear bomb making program, is a total fucking Presidential disaster.
Of course what could we expect from the fucking 'OJ jury' who blocked voted for him and the fucking 'White Guilt' soccer moms fresh out of Liberal Indoctrination Centers AKA 'community colleges' where they learned how to tell the difference between a fifth century medieval pair of shoes compared to a sixth century medieval pair of shoes. And all this (cough) knowledge only cost them eighty K.

 

[Moonglow]

So what I am getting is, the bitchy, shitty attitude respondents, can't get a job?

 

[Muhammed]

Obama drops unemployment to pre GW #s . As he promised .

Good news for the country . Let's here conservatives make up shit like the numbers aren't true . Real unemployment is 137%! !


Unemployment falls to 4.9%, lowest in 8 years

Liar.

 

[Stephanie]

This has been the most corrupted, filled with liars, thieving of taxpayers money, LEAST transparent administration I've ever lived under. since I started voting with Jimmy Carter.

 

[Weatherman2020]

No, Jan 1, 2000 to Dec 31, 2000 is not one year.

Your bubble world may have 364 days, but the real world has 365.

That is probably the stupidest thing you've ever posted!

2000 is a leap year with 366 days,

Year 2000 Calendar

Don't feel bad, the left have destroyed the public education system. Understandable why you think 2015 minus 2000 = 17 and why you think someone born on Jan 1 will celebrate their birthday on Dec 31.

But you being proud of your lack of IQ is your cross to bear, no one else's.

 

[boedicca]

Flint has had a Democrat controlled government for decades. The city decided to switch to a cheaper water supply that ended up being tainted.

Peak Progressivism On Parade!

Another liar who leaves out that Snyder replaced their authority with his unelected "emergency managers" in 2012.

The problems in Flint began decades earlier under Democrat leaders who spent the city into oblivion so that it doesn't have the resources to maintain proper infrastructure.

THAT is the Reductio Ad Absurdum of your Progressive Policies, bub.

 

[boedicca]

U6 (the real deal) is 9.9% Thanks for nothing Obungles

Would you prefer 14.2% U-6?

I suspect the real number is closer to 14%....only an Obama Butt licker is buying anything his administration is putting out there

Only some completely ignorant of government and economic indicators thinks the President has anything to do with economic statistics.

But if you think you have enough evidence to make your case, please share.

That sounds great, except for the fact that the BLS is part of the Executive Branch.

And? Do you think the President is actually involved with the inner workings of all agencies?

Their survey methods are suspect;

Oh? What do you find suspect?

If you actually bothered to read through the data set, you'd see that without seasonal adjustment manipulation, the number of employed actually dropped by close to 700K and that the meager jobs being created are low wage.

And if you looked at the data set, you'd see that employment goes down every January by at least that amount. And nothing in the BLS data shows if the jobs are low wage or not. Since average hourly and weekly wages went up, your claim of low wage jobs is unsupported.

Obama doesn't need to be involved in "The Details" - he just has to blow the dog whistle for the Prog Operatives.

 

[pinqy]

Would you prefer 14.2% U-6?

I suspect the real number is closer to 14%....only an Obama Butt licker is buying anything his administration is putting out there

Only some completely ignorant of government and economic indicators thinks the President has anything to do with economic statistics.

But if you think you have enough evidence to make your case, please share.

That sounds great, except for the fact that the BLS is part of the Executive Branch.

And? Do you think the President is actually involved with the inner workings of all agencies?

Their survey methods are suspect;

Oh? What do you find suspect?

If you actually bothered to read through the data set, you'd see that without seasonal adjustment manipulation, the number of employed actually dropped by close to 700K and that the meager jobs being created are low wage.

And if you looked at the data set, you'd see that employment goes down every January by at least that amount. And nothing in the BLS data shows if the jobs are low wage or not. Since average hourly and weekly wages went up, your claim of low wage jobs is unsupported.

Obama doesn't need to be involved in "The Details" - he just has to blow the dog whistle for the Prog Operatives.

So, what, the head of BLS Office of Employment, Dr. Mike Horrigon, who joined BLS in 1986 under Reagan and served under every President since, is a "Prog Operative," obediently loyal to Obama? He was a sleeper agent? Government workers, like the military, take loyalty oaths to the CONSTITUTION, not the President

 

[boedicca]

I suspect the real number is closer to 14%....only an Obama Butt licker is buying anything his administration is putting out there

Only some completely ignorant of government and economic indicators thinks the President has anything to do with economic statistics.

But if you think you have enough evidence to make your case, please share.

That sounds great, except for the fact that the BLS is part of the Executive Branch.

And? Do you think the President is actually involved with the inner workings of all agencies?

Their survey methods are suspect;

Oh? What do you find suspect?

If you actually bothered to read through the data set, you'd see that without seasonal adjustment manipulation, the number of employed actually dropped by close to 700K and that the meager jobs being created are low wage.

And if you looked at the data set, you'd see that employment goes down every January by at least that amount. And nothing in the BLS data shows if the jobs are low wage or not. Since average hourly and weekly wages went up, your claim of low wage jobs is unsupported.

Obama doesn't need to be involved in "The Details" - he just has to blow the dog whistle for the Prog Operatives.

So, what, the head of BLS Office of Employment, Dr. Mike Horrigon, who joined BLS in 1986 under Reagan and served under every President since, is a "Prog Operative," obediently loyal to Obama? He was a sleeper agent? Government workers, like the military, take loyalty oaths to the CONSTITUTION, not the President

Scuze moi, but you really do not have a proper perspective of the growth of the regulatory UNIONIZED bureaucracy that is really just a SuperPAC for the Dems. They will do whatever is necessary to support the Prog Agenda in their wee little roles.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Would you prefer 14.2% U-6?

I suspect the real number is closer to 14%....only an Obama Butt licker is buying anything his administration is putting out there

Only some completely ignorant of government and economic indicators thinks the President has anything to do with economic statistics.

But if you think you have enough evidence to make your case, please share.

That sounds great, except for the fact that the BLS is part of the Executive Branch.

And? Do you think the President is actually involved with the inner workings of all agencies?

Their survey methods are suspect;

Oh? What do you find suspect?

If you actually bothered to read through the data set, you'd see that without seasonal adjustment manipulation, the number of employed actually dropped by close to 700K and that the meager jobs being created are low wage.

And if you looked at the data set, you'd see that employment goes down every January by at least that amount. And nothing in the BLS data shows if the jobs are low wage or not. Since average hourly and weekly wages went up, your claim of low wage jobs is unsupported.

Obama doesn't need to be involved in "The Details" - he just has to blow the dog whistle for the Prog Operatives.

You promised to show us the proper numbers from a proper source.

What happened?