Employment Report

[thereisnospoon]

Can you support that?

Look in subsequent post.
I find it incredible that some of you have never heard of or choose to ignore this data.

Not that......this:

To my knowledge, no.

according to this definition, U-6 DOES NOT include retirees..
U-6 Unemployment Rate - What Does It Mean?
supporting source...
Portal Seven | U6 Unemployment Rate

"The U6 unemployment rate counts not only people without work seeking full-time employment (the more familiar U-3 rate), but also counts "marginally attached workers and those working part-time for economic reasons." Note that some of these part-time workers counted as employed by U-3 could be working as little as an hour a week. And the "marginally attached workers" include those who have gotten discouraged and stopped looking, but still want to work. The age considered for this calculation is 16 years and over"...

IMO It would be illogical and a grand deception on the part of the BLS to include retired persons as part of the work force.
I think this pretty much settles the issue.
U-6 is the most accurate table of unemployment stats.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Those "no longer looking for work" are the baby boomer retirees that Ed's referring to as retired.

The "no longer looking for work" are the people who just gave up looking and those that their benefits have expired.

Labor Force Characteristics (CPS)

Not in the labor force
Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.

Lying bullshit!

No..You don't get to say "LIE" without explaining yourself.
Come up with some facts. Drive by whiney posts are not tolerated.
Come back when you are prepared to discuss the subject. Instead of just crying about it.
Portal Seven | U6 Unemployment Rate
Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

Maybe there are others who will let you get away with your shit, not me.
The current percentage of unemployed workers according to the BLS is 14.7%...14.6 seasonally adjusted.

The highlighted part is a pure lie, believed by fools and parroted by idiots.

And nobody uses the U-6 rate for Republican presidents. And the U-6 rate is the UNDERemployment rate, so you are lying again when you say it is "the percentage of unemployed workers."

Your post is emotional pap. You don;t like the facts, so you attempt to persuade others to dismiss them as you have.
Shit stinks worse when the truth does not fit your template. There is no lie. Only that you are seeing something you do not want to see. Disappointment is a part of life. Deal with it.
You are no longer part of this discussion. Stand down.

 

[Pinocchio]

Despite House tea party obstructionism to sabotage the economy .....

 

[edthecynic]

Labor Force Characteristics (CPS)

Not in the labor force
Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.

No..You don't get to say "LIE" without explaining yourself.
Come up with some facts. Drive by whiney posts are not tolerated.
Come back when you are prepared to discuss the subject. Instead of just crying about it.
Portal Seven | U6 Unemployment Rate
Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

Maybe there are others who will let you get away with your shit, not me.
The current percentage of unemployed workers according to the BLS is 14.7%...14.6 seasonally adjusted.

The highlighted part is a pure lie, believed by fools and parroted by idiots.

And nobody uses the U-6 rate for Republican presidents. And the U-6 rate is the UNDERemployment rate, so you are lying again when you say it is "the percentage of unemployed workers."

Your post is emotional pap. You don;t like the facts, so you attempt to persuade others to dismiss them as you have.
Shit stinks worse when the truth does not fit your template. There is no lie. Only that you are seeing something you do not want to see. Disappointment is a part of life. Deal with it.
You are no longer part of this discussion. Stand down.

You lied, you got caught lying, your lie was exposed in an earlier post including a link, and you are too dishonest to admit you got caught lying.

But you will keep lying because you know nothing else.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The highlighted part is a pure lie, believed by fools and parroted by idiots.

And nobody uses the U-6 rate for Republican presidents. And the U-6 rate is the UNDERemployment rate, so you are lying again when you say it is "the percentage of unemployed workers."

Your post is emotional pap. You don;t like the facts, so you attempt to persuade others to dismiss them as you have.
Shit stinks worse when the truth does not fit your template. There is no lie. Only that you are seeing something you do not want to see. Disappointment is a part of life. Deal with it.
You are no longer part of this discussion. Stand down.

You lied, you got caught lying, your lie was exposed in an earlier post including a link, and you are too dishonest to admit you got caught lying.

But you will keep lying because you know nothing else.

SO the BLS lied. Ok...
..You are wrong. The facts I have presented are spot on and not in dispute.
You on the other hand have this undying need to piss into the wind.
Yes, Eddie.,.....anything not fitting the liberal template is a lie. Ok, dude.
Your very existence is a lie.
Not once have you presented a thing that disputes the BLS and other sites...You got NOTHING.....
Douchebag.,...The link from the BLS says very clearly that retired persons are NOT PART OF THE LABOR FORCE.
They are not counted as "having just left the labor force"
The U-6 counts those who are looking for work and have stopped looking for work.
A retiree does not look for work...
You are even a failure at grasping for straws.

 

[pinqy]

Does the " no longer looking fo work" include those who have retired from the workforce?

To my knowledge, no.
Those once counted were drawing unemployment and have exhausted those benefits. Once that occurs, the person is no longer counted as unemployed if he or she does not find employment. Consequently, the person for purposes of counting the unemployed, no longer counts in the BLS figures.

Absolutely untrue. Please give your source, it's certainly not from BLS.

Perhaps you should read the Technical Note where it says

People are classified as unemployed if they meet all of the following
criteria: they had no employment during the reference week; they were
available for work at that time; and they made specific efforts to find
employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference
week. Persons laid off from a job and expecting recall need not be
looking for work to be counted as unemployed. The unemployment data
derived from the household survey in no way depend upon the eligibility
for or receipt of unemployment insurance benefits.

 

[edthecynic]

Does the " no longer looking fo work" include those who have retired from the workforce?

Those "no longer looking for work" are the baby boomer retirees that Ed's referring to as retired.

The "no longer looking for work" are the people who just gave up looking and those that their benefits have expired.

Labor Force Characteristics (CPS)

Not in the labor force
Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.

Does the " no longer looking fo work" include those who have retired from the workforce?

To my knowledge, no.
Those once counted were drawing unemployment and have exhausted those benefits. Once that occurs, the person is no longer counted as unemployed if he or she does not find employment. Consequently, the person for purposes of counting the unemployed, no longer counts in the BLS figures.
This is why I pay no attention to the U-3 rate which is the one reported. The U-6 which is ACTUAL number of unemployed is a much better figure to use.
Because this number(U-6) is roughly double the U-3 it is not used because it is a political landmine. Americans just do not want to see large numbers they perceive as being bad news. In the minds of most people "8" is a MUCH smaller amount than "14"..

Your post is emotional pap. You don;t like the facts, so you attempt to persuade others to dismiss them as you have.
Shit stinks worse when the truth does not fit your template. There is no lie. Only that you are seeing something you do not want to see. Disappointment is a part of life. Deal with it.
You are no longer part of this discussion. Stand down.

You lied, you got caught lying, your lie was exposed in an earlier post including a link, and you are too dishonest to admit you got caught lying.

But you will keep lying because you know nothing else.

SO the BLS lied. Ok...
..You are wrong. The facts I have presented are spot on and not in dispute.
You on the other hand have this undying need to piss into the wind.
Yes, Eddie.,.....anything not fitting the liberal template is a lie. Ok, dude.
Your very existence is a lie.
Not once have you presented a thing that disputes the BLS and other sites...You got NOTHING.....
Douchebag.,...The link from the BLS says very clearly that retired persons are NOT PART OF THE LABOR FORCE.
They are not counted as "having just left the labor force"
The U-6 counts those who are looking for work and have stopped looking for work.
A retiree does not look for work...
You are even a failure at grasping for straws.

When caught lying CON$ simply lie some more, including pretending they were arguing my position and I was arguing theirs. Notice the liar was arguing that "not in the labor force" did NOT include retirees. Meister had pointed out that I said it did, and I posted a link to the BLS that confirmed that retirees, along with students, stay at home moms, etc., were not part of the labor force.

Now you have switched to my position and attack me for your position, a common tactic for dishonest CON$ in verbal arguments. Unfortunately that kind of bullshit does not work on a messageboard because you can go back and show what was actually said and by whom, but the tactic is so ingrained in lying CON$ that they can't stop themselves from using it even on a messageboard.

So I'm glad you finally agree that retirees are not in the labor force, but you are still wrong about the U-6 rate, that CON$ only use for Democratic presidents. The U-6 rate does not include retirees, as you falsely claim. It includes the unemployed plus some people who are employed but want more hours and the discouraged workers. Because it includes people who are working part time but would want more hours it is called the UNDERemployment rate and not an unemployment rate as you dishonestly call it, which I have already pointed out to you in a past post.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Those "no longer looking for work" are the baby boomer retirees that Ed's referring to as retired.

The "no longer looking for work" are the people who just gave up looking and those that their benefits have expired.

Labor Force Characteristics (CPS)

Not in the labor force
Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.

You lied, you got caught lying, your lie was exposed in an earlier post including a link, and you are too dishonest to admit you got caught lying.

But you will keep lying because you know nothing else.

SO the BLS lied. Ok...
..You are wrong. The facts I have presented are spot on and not in dispute.
You on the other hand have this undying need to piss into the wind.
Yes, Eddie.,.....anything not fitting the liberal template is a lie. Ok, dude.
Your very existence is a lie.
Not once have you presented a thing that disputes the BLS and other sites...You got NOTHING.....
Douchebag.,...The link from the BLS says very clearly that retired persons are NOT PART OF THE LABOR FORCE.
They are not counted as "having just left the labor force"
The U-6 counts those who are looking for work and have stopped looking for work.
A retiree does not look for work...
You are even a failure at grasping for straws.

When caught lying CON$ simply lie some more, including pretending they were arguing my position and I was arguing theirs. Notice the liar was arguing that "not in the labor force" did NOT include retirees. Meister had pointed out that I said it did, and I posted a link to the BLS that confirmed that retirees, along with students, stay at home moms, etc., were not part of the labor force.

Now you have switched to my position and attack me for your position, a common tactic for dishonest CON$ in verbal arguments. Unfortunately that kind of bullshit does not work on a messageboard because you can go back and show what was actually said and by whom, but the tactic is so ingrained in lying CON$ that they can't stop themselves from using it even on a messageboard.

So I'm glad you finally agree that retirees are not in the labor force, but you are still wrong about the U-6 rate, that CON$ only use for Democratic presidents. The U-6 rate does not include retirees, as you falsely claim. It includes the unemployed plus some people who are employed but want more hours and the discouraged workers. Because it includes people who are working part time but would want more hours it is called the UNDERemployment rate and not an unemployment rate as you dishonestly call it, which I have already pointed out to you in a past post.

You don't know what they **** you're doing.
The facts are clear. No amount of mind checkers is going to help you.
Unemployment numbers are what they are.
I cannot believe anyone would go this far into the hair splitting business to cheer lead for this President.
It is mind blowing how far in the bag you people are for Obama. It's like you worship the guy. That's scary.
I never stated nor implied U-6 includes retired persons. You made that up.
"Under- employment rate"????....Yeah, ok.
Go start the thread on that.....Crickets.

 

[GoneBezerk]

How stupid can someone be not to understand that 300K people quit trying to get a job while only 66K people found a job.

I guess if Obamination was on The Mall to feed his cult supporters and he was only able to feed 66K people while 300K gave up and went home....msnbc would call it a grand success.

 

[Full-Auto]

Those "no longer looking for work" are the baby boomer retirees that Ed's referring to as retired.

The "no longer looking for work" are the people who just gave up looking and those that their benefits have expired.

Labor Force Characteristics (CPS)

Not in the labor force
Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.

You lied, you got caught lying, your lie was exposed in an earlier post including a link, and you are too dishonest to admit you got caught lying.

But you will keep lying because you know nothing else.

SO the BLS lied. Ok...
..You are wrong. The facts I have presented are spot on and not in dispute.
You on the other hand have this undying need to piss into the wind.
Yes, Eddie.,.....anything not fitting the liberal template is a lie. Ok, dude.
Your very existence is a lie.
Not once have you presented a thing that disputes the BLS and other sites...You got NOTHING.....
Douchebag.,...The link from the BLS says very clearly that retired persons are NOT PART OF THE LABOR FORCE.
They are not counted as "having just left the labor force"
The U-6 counts those who are looking for work and have stopped looking for work.
A retiree does not look for work...
You are even a failure at grasping for straws.

When caught lying CON$ simply lie some more, including pretending they were arguing my position and I was arguing theirs. Notice the liar was arguing that "not in the labor force" did NOT include retirees. Meister had pointed out that I said it did, and I posted a link to the BLS that confirmed that retirees, along with students, stay at home moms, etc., were not part of the labor force.

Now you have switched to my position and attack me for your position, a common tactic for dishonest CON$ in verbal arguments. Unfortunately that kind of bullshit does not work on a messageboard because you can go back and show what was actually said and by whom, but the tactic is so ingrained in lying CON$ that they can't stop themselves from using it even on a messageboard.

So I'm glad you finally agree that retirees are not in the labor force, but you are still wrong about the U-6 rate, that CON$ only use for Democratic presidents. The U-6 rate does not include retirees, as you falsely claim. It includes the unemployed plus some people who are employed but want more hours and the discouraged workers. Because it includes people who are working part time but would want more hours it is called the UNDERemployment rate and not an unemployment rate as you dishonestly call it, which I have already pointed out to you in a past post.

You were punked pages back..

Do something democrats no longer seem capable of..


Take it like a man......

 

[edthecynic]

Labor Force Characteristics (CPS)

Not in the labor force
Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.

SO the BLS lied. Ok...
..You are wrong. The facts I have presented are spot on and not in dispute.
You on the other hand have this undying need to piss into the wind.
Yes, Eddie.,.....anything not fitting the liberal template is a lie. Ok, dude.
Your very existence is a lie.
Not once have you presented a thing that disputes the BLS and other sites...You got NOTHING.....
Douchebag.,...The link from the BLS says very clearly that retired persons are NOT PART OF THE LABOR FORCE.
They are not counted as "having just left the labor force"
The U-6 counts those who are looking for work and have stopped looking for work.
A retiree does not look for work...
You are even a failure at grasping for straws.

When caught lying CON$ simply lie some more, including pretending they were arguing my position and I was arguing theirs. Notice the liar was arguing that "not in the labor force" did NOT include retirees. Meister had pointed out that I said it did, and I posted a link to the BLS that confirmed that retirees, along with students, stay at home moms, etc., were not part of the labor force.

Now you have switched to my position and attack me for your position, a common tactic for dishonest CON$ in verbal arguments. Unfortunately that kind of bullshit does not work on a messageboard because you can go back and show what was actually said and by whom, but the tactic is so ingrained in lying CON$ that they can't stop themselves from using it even on a messageboard.

So I'm glad you finally agree that retirees are not in the labor force, but you are still wrong about the U-6 rate, that CON$ only use for Democratic presidents. The U-6 rate does not include retirees, as you falsely claim. It includes the unemployed plus some people who are employed but want more hours and the discouraged workers. Because it includes people who are working part time but would want more hours it is called the UNDERemployment rate and not an unemployment rate as you dishonestly call it, which I have already pointed out to you in a past post.

You don't know what they **** you're doing.
The facts are clear. No amount of mind checkers is going to help you.
Unemployment numbers are what they are.
I cannot believe anyone would go this far into the hair splitting business to cheer lead for this President.
It is mind blowing how far in the bag you people are for Obama. It's like you worship the guy. That's scary.
I never stated nor implied U-6 includes retired persons. You made that up.
"Under- employment rate"????....Yeah, ok.
Go start the thread on that.....Crickets.

Liar!

 

[thanatos144]

96,000 jobs created

368,000 jobs left the work force.
368,00-96,000= 272,000 jobs gone this month....



This is what you Obama zombies are cheering....Pathetic is the right word for what you zombies are.

 

[Papageorgio]

When caught lying CON$ simply lie some more, including pretending they were arguing my position and I was arguing theirs. Notice the liar was arguing that "not in the labor force" did NOT include retirees. Meister had pointed out that I said it did, and I posted a link to the BLS that confirmed that retirees, along with students, stay at home moms, etc., were not part of the labor force.

Now you have switched to my position and attack me for your position, a common tactic for dishonest CON$ in verbal arguments. Unfortunately that kind of bullshit does not work on a messageboard because you can go back and show what was actually said and by whom, but the tactic is so ingrained in lying CON$ that they can't stop themselves from using it even on a messageboard.

So I'm glad you finally agree that retirees are not in the labor force, but you are still wrong about the U-6 rate, that CON$ only use for Democratic presidents. The U-6 rate does not include retirees, as you falsely claim. It includes the unemployed plus some people who are employed but want more hours and the discouraged workers. Because it includes people who are working part time but would want more hours it is called the UNDERemployment rate and not an unemployment rate as you dishonestly call it, which I have already pointed out to you in a past post.

You don't know what they **** you're doing.
The facts are clear. No amount of mind checkers is going to help you.
Unemployment numbers are what they are.
I cannot believe anyone would go this far into the hair splitting business to cheer lead for this President.
It is mind blowing how far in the bag you people are for Obama. It's like you worship the guy. That's scary.
I never stated nor implied U-6 includes retired persons. You made that up.
"Under- employment rate"????....Yeah, ok.
Go start the thread on that.....Crickets.

Liar!

So well thought out the response and so intelligent, it seems to live up to your mental IQ. Good grief, is this all the left has, just say liar and it negates everything.

 

[edthecynic]

96,000 jobs created

368,000 jobs left the work force.
368,00-96,000= 272,000 jobs gone this month....



This is what you Obama zombies are cheering....Pathetic is the right word for what you zombies are.

How "pathetic" is it to not know the difference between a job and a worker?

 

[beretta304]

96,000 jobs created

368,000 jobs left the work force.
368,00-96,000= 272,000 jobs gone this month....



This is what you Obama zombies are cheering....Pathetic is the right word for what you zombies are.

I gave these asswipes the link to the BLS back on the first few replies. They are still mincing words and splitting hairs and can't admit that there are nowhere near enough jobs being created to replace those lost. They're also whining over retirees as if that's going to matter in the overall job picture.


The unemployment situation is no better now than it was 4 years ago in any appreciable measure. Then they switch gears and start with the blame Bush bullshit. Or they say Romney has no plan when the link to his plans have been posted in this forum a dozen times or more.

They're are running on empty and just like their hero can't take responsibility for their actions.


It isn't even worth debating them over it. They wouldn't know a fact if it bit them on their collective asses.


Whining Libs think they should be believed over the BLS who puts the numbers together.

edtheeggonface is perfect proof below. He thinks he hit a bonanza that's somehow going to change the job figures or show any appreciable improvement. He's been slapped all over the thread and he comes back for more. He doesn't even know what point he's trying to make any longer.

 

[Dick Tuck]

How stupid can someone be not to understand that 300K people quit trying to get a job while only 66K people found a job.

I guess if Obamination was on The Mall to feed his cult supporters and he was only able to feed 66K people while 300K gave up and went home....msnbc would call it a grand success.

How stupid are you to not differentiate people who retired, decided to be stay at home parents, or decided to go back to school? Are you really stupid enough to believe that those people who want and need work just gave up? Are you really this much of an idiot?

 

[Full-Auto]

96,000 jobs created

368,000 jobs left the work force.
368,00-96,000= 272,000 jobs gone this month....



This is what you Obama zombies are cheering....Pathetic is the right word for what you zombies are.

Hear hear...............

 

[Katzndogz]

If obama was an epidemic democrats would cheer the number who died because they were no longer sick.

 

[beretta304]

When caught lying CON$ simply lie some more, including pretending they were arguing my position and I was arguing theirs. Notice the liar was arguing that "not in the labor force" did NOT include retirees. Meister had pointed out that I said it did, and I posted a link to the BLS that confirmed that retirees, along with students, stay at home moms, etc., were not part of the labor force.

Now you have switched to my position and attack me for your position, a common tactic for dishonest CON$ in verbal arguments. Unfortunately that kind of bullshit does not work on a messageboard because you can go back and show what was actually said and by whom, but the tactic is so ingrained in lying CON$ that they can't stop themselves from using it even on a messageboard.

So I'm glad you finally agree that retirees are not in the labor force, but you are still wrong about the U-6 rate, that CON$ only use for Democratic presidents. The U-6 rate does not include retirees, as you falsely claim. It includes the unemployed plus some people who are employed but want more hours and the discouraged workers. Because it includes people who are working part time but would want more hours it is called the UNDERemployment rate and not an unemployment rate as you dishonestly call it, which I have already pointed out to you in a past post.

You don't know what they **** you're doing.
The facts are clear. No amount of mind checkers is going to help you.
Unemployment numbers are what they are.
I cannot believe anyone would go this far into the hair splitting business to cheer lead for this President.
It is mind blowing how far in the bag you people are for Obama. It's like you worship the guy. That's scary.
I never stated nor implied U-6 includes retired persons. You made that up.
"Under- employment rate"????....Yeah, ok.
Go start the thread on that.....Crickets.

Liar!

That's mighty convincing. Do you even have a clue what you are trying to prove any longer.

Keep telling yourself the jobs situation is improving.

 

[skookerasbil]

Like these guys have been pointing out for the past 30+ years and as James Carville said in '92, "Its the economy stupid!!"

Election model with 100% success rate for past 30 years predicts Romney victory | The Raw Story



No worries here..........