Gallup Finds Unemployment Rises For Fourth Week In A Row, Cautions On BLS Data

[Full-Auto]

Yes. He ignored the part where I said "they dont hide it, they simply dont announce it"

And since most people go by what theyhear on the news...and the administration is well aware of this......they announce what they want the people to hear and dont announce what the people will not want to hear.

And that was the point I was making.

You made it well. He refuses to acknowledge your point because he refuses to criticize The Lightbringer.

Man, that really stepped on Carby's toes. He negged me.

Tag the little bitch back. Let me add that back for you. Just because.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The important figure to look at is the net change in jobs created or lost.

When Obama took office, the economy was losing 800,000 per month. We're gaining around 150,000 a month today. That's a change of nearly a million jobs a month.

Is it enough?

No. More is needed.

That's why we need a different Congress: one that will be part of the solution, or get out of the way.

How many TOTAL jobs have been lost or gained since Obama was inaugurated?
4,303,000 jobs (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were LOST from the time Obama took office until the "trough" of the recession in early 2010. That's a decrease of 3.2%.
1,886,000 jobs (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were CREATED from the "trough" of the recession until now, August, 2011. That's an increase of 1.5%.
In total, 2,417,000 jobs (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were LOST from the time Obama took office until now, August 2011. That's a decrease of 1.8%.
We have experienced 11 months WITHOUT job losses since September 2010. We have added 821,000 jobs during those 11 months.

Molly's Middle America: Private and Government Jobs Lost and Gained Under Obama: Through August 2011

As of Feb. 1, 2009 there were 110,260,000 private sector jobs in the US.

As of Nov. 1, 2011 there were 109,719,000.

That's a difference of 541,000 jobs, not 2.4 million.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/USPRIV.txt

Those are the official numbers.

Do you hold Obama accountable for job losses in February of 2009?

If so, why?

 

[daveman]

What I linked to was BLS NEWS RELEASE. jeezus christ.

Then you shouldn't have any trouble finding a media outlet publicizing that release, huh?

Why? The charge was that the BLS didn't publicize the data.

No, the charge was that the people have to find the data on their own.

You know, exactly like you did.

 

[daveman]

You made it well. He refuses to acknowledge your point because he refuses to criticize The Lightbringer.

Man, that really stepped on Carby's toes. He negged me.

When you lie about me you get negged.

Then show me a post of yours criticizing Obama. And no, saying he's not far left enough is not criticism.

 

[Jarhead]

The agency involved (BLS) puts it out in its public news release which you can subscribe to. Why would anyone else, who is simply referencing the report, have any obligation to reiterate the entire contents?

They dont.
Which is my point.

Dam sure they would if it were positive news for the administration.
And that too is my point.

You said Fox News didn't report it.

So your contention is that Fox News, by not reporting certain numbers from the depths of the BLS news release,

is biased in favor of Obama.

You're making idiots look smart.

No child. That is not what I did.
I accurately stated that the news media only gives the numbers people expect to hear. They do not give the in depth numbers...primarily becuase it can be too confusing for many of the audience. It has nothing to do with media bias and show me where I mentioned media bias.
My point is.....whereas the media has the right to say what they want, the administration has the responsibility to make sure the people know exactly what is going on. If they are going to talk positively about the unemployment numbers, they have the responsibility to explain them as they know them.
You are acting like a child. You seem to not want to engage in an honest debate. My guess is you fear the outcome. Children run from fear.....

 

[Jarhead]

Then you shouldn't have any trouble finding a media outlet publicizing that release, huh?

Why? The charge was that the BLS didn't publicize the data.

No, the charge was that the people have to find the data on their own.

You know, exactly like you did.

Children run from fear. NYCarbineer is afraid to have an honest debate. He feels the need to avoid the topic at hand. You know....like children do.
Oh yeah...and the negative rep? Sort of like a child will do...."You are an idiot and I can get you back with a negative rep"

I mean...really?

Ya gotta be kidding me.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Having control of one half of one branch, this is the best they can do

Don't fret, come next election when the Papa Obama and the rest of the Democrats
get kicked out, they will be able to do the real work

Yaah we saw how well that happened when the repubs controlled it all for a while.
It caused the voters to elect Obama.

Dems had control since 2007. Obama inherited problems that he and his fellow Dems were largely responsible for creating.

What specifically did the Democratic Congress do in 2007 that caused the recession?

 

[Jarhead]

Yaah we saw how well that happened when the repubs controlled it all for a while.
It caused the voters to elect Obama.

Dems had control since 2007. Obama inherited problems that he and his fellow Dems were largely responsible for creating.

What specifically did the Democratic Congress do in 2007 that caused the recession?

Nothing at all.
Congress did not cause the recession.

I suggest you read up a little on economics and then re-join the debate.

FYI....the recession was not the problem. We have had many a recession over the years. They suck. But they are an essential part of an economy.

 

[Conservative]

Yaah we saw how well that happened when the repubs controlled it all for a while.
It caused the voters to elect Obama.

Dems had control since 2007. Obama inherited problems that he and his fellow Dems were largely responsible for creating.

What specifically did the Democratic Congress do in 2007 that caused the recession?

nothing... it was all BUSH'S fault, remember?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Dems had control since 2007. Obama inherited problems that he and his fellow Dems were largely responsible for creating.

What specifically did the Democratic Congress do in 2007 that caused the recession?

Nothing at all.
Congress did not cause the recession.

I suggest you read up a little on economics and then re-join the debate.

FYI....the recession was not the problem. We have had many a recession over the years. They suck. But they are an essential part of an economy.

Once again, why are you saying that to me instead of the other poster that BLAMED Congress for the recession?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why? The charge was that the BLS didn't publicize the data.

No, the charge was that the people have to find the data on their own.

You know, exactly like you did.

Children run from fear. NYCarbineer is afraid to have an honest debate. He feels the need to avoid the topic at hand. You know....like children do.
Oh yeah...and the negative rep? Sort of like a child will do...."You are an idiot and I can get you back with a negative rep"

I mean...really?

Ya gotta be kidding me.

Let's review the facts:

editec said:

the government has been telling us essantially the same thing for quite some time.

You replied:

No they havent. They are making the people find that out on their own.
Yes, they dont hide that information...they simply dont announce it.


YOU are wrong. The BLS, which is part of the GOVERNMENT, publicly releases ALL the data, as I proved to you 50 posts ago.

You initially admitted you were wrong. You should have stuck with that,.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What specifically did the Democratic Congress do in 2007 that caused the recession?

Nothing at all.
Congress did not cause the recession.

I suggest you read up a little on economics and then re-join the debate.

FYI....the recession was not the problem. We have had many a recession over the years. They suck. But they are an essential part of an economy.

Once again, why are you saying that to me instead of the other poster that BLAMED Congress for the recession?

Doesn't to much congressional over sight hinder the private sector by slowing it down with to many regulations by not making it profitable to keep working?

 

[pinqy]

My point is.....whereas the media has the right to say what they want, the administration has the responsibility to make sure the people know exactly what is going on.

Which is done every month in the press release. What more do you think should be done?

If they are going to talk positively about the unemployment numbers, they have the responsibility to explain them as they know them..

Except most of the politicians, including the President, who speak about the numbers don't know them very well as they are not experts in the field.

 

[Jarhead]

My point is.....whereas the media has the right to say what they want, the administration has the responsibility to make sure the people know exactly what is going on.

Which is done every month in the press release. What more do you think should be done?

If they are going to talk positively about the unemployment numbers, they have the responsibility to explain them as they know them..

Except most of the politicians, including the President, who speak about the numbers don't know them very well as they are not experts in the field.

So you give a pass to a President becuas ehe does not understand the numbers?
The man asked us for permission to borrow a trillion dollars so he can fix the numbers....and you say he is not an expert on them so he should not have to explain them to me?
The man says he gets advice from top economists...yet he doesnt have the wherewithall to ask them to explain the numbers so he can properly articulate to the american people what is actually going on?
I find your response very partisan.

 

[Jarhead]

No, the charge was that the people have to find the data on their own.

You know, exactly like you did.

Children run from fear. NYCarbineer is afraid to have an honest debate. He feels the need to avoid the topic at hand. You know....like children do.
Oh yeah...and the negative rep? Sort of like a child will do...."You are an idiot and I can get you back with a negative rep"

I mean...really?

Ya gotta be kidding me.

Let's review the facts:

editec said:

the government has been telling us essantially the same thing for quite some time.

You replied:

No they havent. They are making the people find that out on their own.
Yes, they dont hide that information...they simply dont announce it.


YOU are wrong. The BLS, which is part of the GOVERNMENT, publicly releases ALL the data, as I proved to you 50 posts ago.

You initially admitted you were wrong. You should have stuck with that,.

you see...

to you..."releasing the numbers is all that is necessary"

And I agree.

However....

If you are going to have your press secretary ORALLY discuss SOME of the data that appears to be good news, then you should also have him OPRALLY discuss the data that counters that news.

Otherwise, you are misleading the public.

Which was the point I was making all along.

You just refuse to understand it.

That is your fault.

Carry on. I'm losing patience with you.

 

[daveman]

No, the charge was that the people have to find the data on their own.

You know, exactly like you did.

Children run from fear. NYCarbineer is afraid to have an honest debate. He feels the need to avoid the topic at hand. You know....like children do.
Oh yeah...and the negative rep? Sort of like a child will do...."You are an idiot and I can get you back with a negative rep"

I mean...really?

Ya gotta be kidding me.

Let's review the facts:

editec said:

the government has been telling us essantially the same thing for quite some time.

You replied:

No they havent. They are making the people find that out on their own.
Yes, they dont hide that information...they simply dont announce it.


YOU are wrong. The BLS, which is part of the GOVERNMENT, publicly releases ALL the data, as I proved to you 50 posts ago.

You initially admitted you were wrong. You should have stuck with that,.

Yeah. The BLS releases numbers that make Obama look good, and the Dem-enabling media shout it from the rooftops.

To get any BLS data that show anything less than a rosy picture, you have to go get the numbers yourself. Oh, and you'll need internet access.

You contend that's exactly the same.

 

[pinqy]

My point is.....whereas the media has the right to say what they want, the administration has the responsibility to make sure the people know exactly what is going on.

Which is done every month in the press release. What more do you think should be done?

If they are going to talk positively about the unemployment numbers, they have the responsibility to explain them as they know them..

Except most of the politicians, including the President, who speak about the numbers don't know them very well as they are not experts in the field.

So you give a pass to a President becuas ehe does not understand the numbers?

No, that's not what I said. I was asking why you think it's the responsibility of someone who does not understand the numbers well, not being an expert in the field, to explain them again in addition to the already released information explained by actual experts.

The man asked us for permission to borrow a trillion dollars so he can fix the numbers....and you say he is not an expert on them so he should not have to explain them to me?

Barack Obama: BA in Political Science, Columbia University.
JD Harvard Law School.
What about those make him an expert in economics or statistics?

The man says he gets advice from top economists...yet he doesnt have the wherewithall to ask them to explain the numbers so he can properly articulate to the american people what is actually going on?

I'm sure he does. But why is it his responsibility, or any President's, when it's already been done by actual experts?

I find your response very partisan.

Why? My response is equally true for any president of any party, with the exception of fictional president Josiah Bartlett as played by Martin Sheen in "The West Wing" who was an economics professor.

Again, you keep avoiding a straight answer: What EXACTLY do you think an administration should do beyond the press release? And what makes you think that any duplication would receive any more attention from the media?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Children run from fear. NYCarbineer is afraid to have an honest debate. He feels the need to avoid the topic at hand. You know....like children do.
Oh yeah...and the negative rep? Sort of like a child will do...."You are an idiot and I can get you back with a negative rep"

I mean...really?

Ya gotta be kidding me.

Let's review the facts:

editec said:

the government has been telling us essantially the same thing for quite some time.

You replied:

No they havent. They are making the people find that out on their own.
Yes, they dont hide that information...they simply dont announce it.


YOU are wrong. The BLS, which is part of the GOVERNMENT, publicly releases ALL the data, as I proved to you 50 posts ago.

You initially admitted you were wrong. You should have stuck with that,.

Yeah. The BLS releases numbers that make Obama look good, and the Dem-enabling media shout it from the rooftops.

To get any BLS data that show anything less than a rosy picture, you have to go get the numbers yourself. Oh, and you'll need internet access.

You contend that's exactly the same.

I recommend you go read the BLS release I linked to, and then show us what they hid.

 

[pinqy]

Yeah. The BLS releases numbers that make Obama look good, and the Dem-enabling media shout it from the rooftops.

To get any BLS data that show anything less than a rosy picture, you have to go get the numbers yourself. .

And your evidence is what? Please give examples of differing press releases where any data set is talked about when it's good and not mentioned when it's bad. Archived news releases 1994-2011

You won't find any BLS news release that says anything positive or negative...they just report the data.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They dont.
Which is my point.

Dam sure they would if it were positive news for the administration.
And that too is my point.

You said Fox News didn't report it.

So your contention is that Fox News, by not reporting certain numbers from the depths of the BLS news release,

is biased in favor of Obama.

You're making idiots look smart.

No child. That is not what I did.

So you deny saying this?

Becuase I watch ABC Nightly News and I watch Fox News. And netiher reported what was in the link you offered.

Couple that with the above where you say dam sure they would if it were positive news for the administration, and,

you're accusing Fox News of covering for Obama.

Which is idiocy.