Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
fuck off.They said that only 130,000 jobs were added and 25,000 of them were government jobs.
Can’t wait to see how Donald Trump spins that.
130,000 jobs created is less than expected.
Jobs boosted by census hiring.
Trade war affecting jobs.
Hiring likely slowed in August as the US-China trade war raged | Markets Insider
says the pouty-faced assmuncher who cries WAH TRUMP WAH at every manufactured opportunity.fuck off.They said that only 130,000 jobs were added and 25,000 of them were government jobs.
Can’t wait to see how Donald Trump spins that.
How about if you go from 4.5% to 3.7%?As the nation closes on full employment, the number of jobs created has to be smaller.
If you go from 10% unemployment to 5% unemployment, you have to create a certain number of jobs.
To go from 5% unemployment to 2.5% unemployment, do you have to create the same number of jobs as you did to go from 10% to 5%? No! It is only half as many, assuming a static state.
To go from 2.5% unemployment to 1.25% unemployment, the number of jobs needed to be created is smaller than before.
It is a concept well explained by calculus in that the changes as you approach a limit will be smaller and smaller, each and every time.
If you start off at the goal line and go half way to the goal line on the other end of a football filed, will you ever reach it?
The answer is "no:.
As the nation closes on full employment, the number of jobs created has to be smaller.
If you go from 10% unemployment to 5% unemployment, you have to create a certain number of jobs.
To go from 5% unemployment to 2.5% unemployment, do you have to create the same number of jobs as you did to go from 10% to 5%? No! It is only half as many, assuming a static state.
To go from 2.5% unemployment to 1.25% unemployment, the number of jobs needed to be created is smaller than before.
It is a concept well explained by calculus in that the changes as you approach a limit will be smaller and smaller, each and every time.
If you start off at the goal line and go half way to the goal line on the other end of a football filed, will you ever reach it?
The answer is "no:.
Oh, so we've created 130,000 more jobs and this I'd supposedly BAD NEWS???130,000 jobs created is less than expected.
Jobs boosted by census hiring.
Trade war affecting jobs.
Hiring likely slowed in August as the US-China trade war raged | Markets Insider
Oh, so we've created 130,000 more jobs and this I'd supposedly BAD NEWS???130,000 jobs created is less than expected.
Jobs boosted by census hiring.
Trade war affecting jobs.
Hiring likely slowed in August as the US-China trade war raged | Markets Insider
I see simple thought processes still elude you.Over 29 months Obama added almost 1 million more jobs than Trump
Trump entered office on January 20, 2017, and starting with February 2017 he has been President for 29 months. Total job growth during that time has been 5.613 million or 194,000 per month with those results being helped by the tax cut.
Working back from January 2017, Obama’s last month in office, there had been 6.423 million jobs added or 221,000 per month. The difference for the 29 months is 810,000 more jobs or 27,000 more per month than Trump.
Trump Is Falling Almost 1 Million Jobs Short Vs. Obama
4%? 5%? Maybe even 6%?
I don’t think we’re going to be reaching 6% anytime soon.
and people who are not educating themselves for such high paying jobs, want more for jobs that are soon to be replaced by machines/automation.As the nation closes on full employment, the number of jobs created has to be smaller.
If you go from 10% unemployment to 5% unemployment, you have to create a certain number of jobs.
To go from 5% unemployment to 2.5% unemployment, do you have to create the same number of jobs as you did to go from 10% to 5%? No! It is only half as many, assuming a static state.
To go from 2.5% unemployment to 1.25% unemployment, the number of jobs needed to be created is smaller than before.
It is a concept well explained by calculus in that the changes as you approach a limit will be smaller and smaller, each and every time.
If you start off at the goal line and go half way to the goal line on the other end of a football filed, will you ever reach it?
The answer is "no:.
Yep, you're right.
The other consideration is that as frictional unemployed workers find jobs, the pool of available labor that is QUALIFIED for job openings becomes smaller, which explains why we have a persistently high number of job openings as shown on JOLTS (7.3 million at last count).
Employers have jobs available, they are just having a hard time finding qualified people to fill them.
Correct. You would be criticizing Obama based on the fact that he didn't get 200,000 or that the number was below expectations.Oh, so we've created 130,000 more jobs and this I'd supposedly BAD NEWS???130,000 jobs created is less than expected.
Jobs boosted by census hiring.
Trade war affecting jobs.
Hiring likely slowed in August as the US-China trade war raged | Markets Insider
I know I would have because we were no where near full employment with full time jobs.Correct. You would be criticizing Obama based on the fact that he didn't get 200,000 or that the number was below expectations.Oh, so we've created 130,000 more jobs and this I'd supposedly BAD NEWS???130,000 jobs created is less than expected.
Jobs boosted by census hiring.
Trade war affecting jobs.
Hiring likely slowed in August as the US-China trade war raged | Markets Insider
and people who are not educating themselves for such high paying jobs, want more for jobs that are soon to be replaced by machines/automation.As the nation closes on full employment, the number of jobs created has to be smaller.
If you go from 10% unemployment to 5% unemployment, you have to create a certain number of jobs.
To go from 5% unemployment to 2.5% unemployment, do you have to create the same number of jobs as you did to go from 10% to 5%? No! It is only half as many, assuming a static state.
To go from 2.5% unemployment to 1.25% unemployment, the number of jobs needed to be created is smaller than before.
It is a concept well explained by calculus in that the changes as you approach a limit will be smaller and smaller, each and every time.
If you start off at the goal line and go half way to the goal line on the other end of a football filed, will you ever reach it?
The answer is "no:.
Yep, you're right.
The other consideration is that as frictional unemployed workers find jobs, the pool of available labor that is QUALIFIED for job openings becomes smaller, which explains why we have a persistently high number of job openings as shown on JOLTS (7.3 million at last count).
Employers have jobs available, they are just having a hard time finding qualified people to fill them.
flipping a burger is not a $15 an hour job. an EMT paramedic is around that or even a little less per an hour. which takes more skill and education?
Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) / Paramedic Hourly Pay | PayScale
