This doesn't surprise you, does it? Read the gruesome details @ 73% of Jobs Created In Last Five Months are Government Jobs
73% of Jobs Created in Last Five Months Government Jobs
- Thread starter longknife
- Start date
This doesn't surprise you, does it? Read the gruesome details @ 73% of Jobs Created In Last Five Months are Government Jobs
ABikerSailor
Diamond Member
Yeah..............sure..................like Breitbart TV is a credible source.
Can you come up with a real source with facts, Butterknife?
boedicca
Uppity Water Nymph from the Land of Funk
- Feb 12, 2007
- 59,734
- 24,709
- 2,290
One hazards to guess that most of those gubmint jobs were created in the Death Spiral States.
...Two factors determine whether a state makes this elite list of fiscal hellholes. The first is whether it has more takers than makers. A taker is someone who draws money from the government, as an employee, pensioner or welfare recipient. A maker is someone gainfully employed in the private sector.
Let us give those takers the benefit of our sympathy and assume that every single one of them is a deserving soul. This person is either genuinely needy or a dedicated public servant or the recipient of a well-earned pension.
But what happens when these needy types outnumber the providers? Taxes get too high. Prosperous citizens decamp. Employers decamp. That just makes matters worse for the taxpayers left behind.
Let’s say you are a software entrepreneur with 100 on your payroll. If you stay in San Francisco, your crew will support 139 takers. In Texas, they would support only 82. Austin looks very attractive.
Ranked on the taker/maker ratio, our 11 death spiral states range from New Mexico, with 1.53 takers for every maker, down to Ohio, with a 1-to-1 ratio....
Do You Live In A Death Spiral State? - Forbes
...Two factors determine whether a state makes this elite list of fiscal hellholes. The first is whether it has more takers than makers. A taker is someone who draws money from the government, as an employee, pensioner or welfare recipient. A maker is someone gainfully employed in the private sector.
Let us give those takers the benefit of our sympathy and assume that every single one of them is a deserving soul. This person is either genuinely needy or a dedicated public servant or the recipient of a well-earned pension.
But what happens when these needy types outnumber the providers? Taxes get too high. Prosperous citizens decamp. Employers decamp. That just makes matters worse for the taxpayers left behind.
Let’s say you are a software entrepreneur with 100 on your payroll. If you stay in San Francisco, your crew will support 139 takers. In Texas, they would support only 82. Austin looks very attractive.
Ranked on the taker/maker ratio, our 11 death spiral states range from New Mexico, with 1.53 takers for every maker, down to Ohio, with a 1-to-1 ratio....
Do You Live In A Death Spiral State? - Forbes
depotoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 9, 2012
- 40,721
- 13,434
- 2,280
July 2012
non-adjusted Total Government adjusted
20,676,000................................21,928.000
Nov 2012
22,438,000................................21,962,000
Difference
1.7 million................................34,000
rather a strange difference in the non-adjusted numbers, isn't it?
So either way, there has been much hiring in government one way or the other.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_08032012.pdf
Oddball
Unobtanium Member
So much for that "austerity" swill.
Mr Natural
Diamond Member
- Aug 23, 2009
- 25,395
- 13,069
- 1,415
Hey, a job's a job.
If the so called, "job creators" aren't stepping up then, somebody has to fill in the void.
If the so called, "job creators" aren't stepping up then, somebody has to fill in the void.
boedicca
Uppity Water Nymph from the Land of Funk
- Feb 12, 2007
- 59,734
- 24,709
- 2,290
^^^ The heartbreak of economic illiteracy on parade.
For his next trick, he'll suggest that the gubmint print $1M bills and give one to everyone in the U.S. (except for the evul millionaire-billionaires who make more than $250K per year).
For his next trick, he'll suggest that the gubmint print $1M bills and give one to everyone in the U.S. (except for the evul millionaire-billionaires who make more than $250K per year).
Oddball
Unobtanium Member
Well, except when leftist turd snobs denigrate the service sector as "burger flipper jobs".
oldfart
Older than dirt
Ths might be interesting if it were true. Your source Breitbart provides no source for his numbers and it clearly is not the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Either admit it is a damn lie and you have been fooled, or provide the actual numbers and BLS sourcing for this claim.
BLS time series for Table B-1
2012--Seasonally adusted total non-farm employment (in thousands)
June--133,063
July--133,244
Aug--133,436
Sept--133,568
Oct--133,706(P)
Nov--133,852(P)
Increase Nov over June: 789,000
2012--Seasonally adusted total government employment (in thousands)
June--21,928
July--21,946
Aug--22,004
Sept--22,014
Oct--21,963(P)
Nov--21,962(P)
Increase Nov over June: 34,000
P : preliminary
Rshermr
VIP Member
Yeah, but Breitbart gives the conservatives that troll this site the information that they WANT, and to hell with facts. Kind of hard to fathom the need to believe, at all costs, the things that you want to believe.
But nice job of laying down the actual numbers. Most will understand that the BLS provides actual and impartial number, while Breitbart just provides dogma, truth be damned. I suspect that most of the con tools will run and hide at this point. Or simply stoop to insults, which is their want when they are cornered.
depotoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 9, 2012
- 40,721
- 13,434
- 2,280
why not include the non-adjusted figures as well? They show a growth from July to now of 1.7 million.
oldfart
Older than dirt
The unadjusted numbers are in the same table, but you know that. I usually stick with the seasonally adjusted. The kicker is that federal employment has dropped 1,200 since June. But for people who get their statistics out of Cacker Jack boxes, does it make any difference?
oldfart
Older than dirt
Now that you mention it, it is awfully quiet out there. I guess the original poster and the other "intellectuals" specialize in intellectual cowardice, since when the get bamboozled they can't bring themselves to admit it.
Oh, and to those who got caught with their pants down, the take-away should be that when a statistic looks wrong, try checking it out before embarrassing yourself, at least if you want to ever be taken seariously by, you know, people who actually try to have some integrity.
- Thread starter
- #15
Well then, just what "facts" in the original post were wrong?
Are you saying that the percentage is wrong? Or that government jobs DID NOT increase over the private sector?
If you're gonna spout your libturd stuff and claim Breitbart is lying - give us some facts and non-Huffpost "facts."
Are you saying that the percentage is wrong? Or that government jobs DID NOT increase over the private sector?
If you're gonna spout your libturd stuff and claim Breitbart is lying - give us some facts and non-Huffpost "facts."
boedicca
Uppity Water Nymph from the Land of Funk
- Feb 12, 2007
- 59,734
- 24,709
- 2,290
The following, combined with Massive Amounts of Student Loan Debt, demonstrates why younger adults are truly fluxored; the number of employed workers between 25-54 is back to 1997 levels. Truly shocking.
When people think of the conventional battery of options the BLS applies to fudge the monthly payrolls number, the labor force participation is the first thing that comes mind: after all the thesis is that old workers are increasingly dropping out of the labor force and retiring. Nothing could be further from the truth as can be seen in this chart of workers aged 55-69, i.e. the prime retirement age. But perhaps a far more important secular issue is the complete lack of pickup in the prime worker demographic, those aged 25-54, which in November dropped by 400k to 94 MM. This is a level first breached in April 1997, in other words in the past 15 years not a single incremental job has been gained in this most productive and lucrative of age groups!...
Number Of Workers Aged 25-54 Back To April 1997 Levels | ZeroHedge
When people think of the conventional battery of options the BLS applies to fudge the monthly payrolls number, the labor force participation is the first thing that comes mind: after all the thesis is that old workers are increasingly dropping out of the labor force and retiring. Nothing could be further from the truth as can be seen in this chart of workers aged 55-69, i.e. the prime retirement age. But perhaps a far more important secular issue is the complete lack of pickup in the prime worker demographic, those aged 25-54, which in November dropped by 400k to 94 MM. This is a level first breached in April 1997, in other words in the past 15 years not a single incremental job has been gained in this most productive and lucrative of age groups!...
Number Of Workers Aged 25-54 Back To April 1997 Levels | ZeroHedge
Rshermr
VIP Member
Longknife, you poor retarded con tool, I just do not know what can help you to understand.
But first, the statistics are from BLS. Now I know you think that BLS stands for Huff Post. But it actually does not. BLS is (now try to concentrate, longknife) the gov agency that tracks unemployment. It stands for B = Bureau of L = Labor S = Statistics, And the BLS is something that you may not understand, so maybe you have a dictionary. That is non partisan. Look that up. Now, Breitbart, on the other hand, is just the opposite of BLS. It is PARTISAN, as in bat shit crazy con tool web site.
And, now, you seem to be having some trouble with arithmatic. So, try to understand. Gov jobs increased by 34,000. Total jobs increased by 789,000, So, now is the test. Which is bigger, Longknife? Is it 34,000, or is it 789,000. Now concentrate, because if you get this one wrong, we have to go back to the start. The CORRECT answer is 789,000. Which would mean, Longknife, that 34,000 is the smaller number. And that, my poor ignorant con tool, would mean that your question is just plain stupid. And it means that, yes, Longknife, government jobs DID NOT increase over the private sector?
I have made an attempt to educate you. But I think I am the wrong person. You need an elementary school teacher. One that specializes in first grade.
oldfart
Older than dirt
All of them. The claim is not substantiated by the data published in the source it is attributed to. Show me anything in the BLS statistics that supports the claim in the orginal post.
I copied the BLS statistics for June through November 2012 for total employment and government employment. Did you read them? BTW, federal goverment employment actually decreased over the five months on an unadjusted basis, so even the direction of change was wrong.
FACT: Breitbart lied and the BLS statistics prove it. He attributed the statistics to the BLS. There is no wriggle room there. My only source on this was the BLS. Again, did you read my post?
Do you know how to access the BLS website? Do you need a "libturd" to show you how? Do you have a problem with the concept that the United States government publishes economic statistics that people can actually look up and verify when someone makes an outlandish claim and attributes it to the same agency?
EdwardBaiamonte
Platinum Member
- Nov 23, 2011
- 34,612
- 2,174
- 1,100
we need the libturd to go away since he lacks the IQ to participate on ideological grounds, and thus prefers to annoy us with nit picking as his only alternative. What problem causes you to derive so much please from trivia??
Do you think it isn't obvious that you avoid substance when you should be seeking it. Its just like a liberal-right? No ideology just blind dumb Nazi like self assurance.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
IDFG warns people to be cautious as black bears emerge from hibernation- Started by tyroneweaver
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
