Jobless Claims in U.S. Fall to Match Lowest Level Since 1973

[danielpalos]

you said 2007 was an odd year while I used it because it is the year before the recession that is frequently used as a base line from which to measure the recession and recovery.

You use it because it is DISHONEST to use a BUBBLE based number as a baseline, and no other reason. Honest people use the bottom of the recession not the top of a bubble as the reference point to measure recession and recovery, as you well know.

just the right claiming to believe in the morals of a "gospel Truth", with nothing but fallacy at their disposal.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I could go for that in some cases but not generally. If a factory were to relocate abroad they should certainly have a stake in those employees left in the cold. That sort of hit to a single region can be catastrophic to the local economy and the employer should at minimum offset those costs.

why not that form of equality before the law for labor and not just capitalists? the concept of employment at will does not distinguish.

Employers need the flexibility to fire or trade- up employees. I believe it would be an unnecessary burden on the good actors. The bad actors should be penalized. Good behavior should be rewarded.

It's not an employee's fault if their job is eliminated.

not sure what you mean; why would an employer need the expense of trading up employees if the "bad actors" prefer unemployment compensation and being good capitalists, instead of bad actors who may have to lie for a job?

What?

i got it right the first time; are you just clueless and Causeless? only shills do that.

You're point isn't clear.

 

[danielpalos]

why not that form of equality before the law for labor and not just capitalists? the concept of employment at will does not distinguish.

Employers need the flexibility to fire or trade- up employees. I believe it would be an unnecessary burden on the good actors. The bad actors should be penalized. Good behavior should be rewarded.

It's not an employee's fault if their job is eliminated.

not sure what you mean; why would an employer need the expense of trading up employees if the "bad actors" prefer unemployment compensation and being good capitalists, instead of bad actors who may have to lie for a job?

What?

i got it right the first time; are you just clueless and Causeless? only shills do that.

You're point isn't clear.

there is no appeal to ignorance of a federal doctrine and our own State laws regarding the concept of employment at will.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Employers need the flexibility to fire or trade- up employees. I believe it would be an unnecessary burden on the good actors. The bad actors should be penalized. Good behavior should be rewarded.

It's not an employee's fault if their job is eliminated.

not sure what you mean; why would an employer need the expense of trading up employees if the "bad actors" prefer unemployment compensation and being good capitalists, instead of bad actors who may have to lie for a job?

What?

i got it right the first time; are you just clueless and Causeless? only shills do that.

You're point isn't clear.

there is no appeal to ignorance of a federal doctrine and our own State laws regarding the concept of employment at will.

What is your point??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

not sure what you mean; why would an employer need the expense of trading up employees if the "bad actors" prefer unemployment compensation and being good capitalists, instead of bad actors who may have to lie for a job?

What?

i got it right the first time; are you just clueless and Causeless? only shills do that.

You're point isn't clear.

there is no appeal to ignorance of a federal doctrine and our own State laws regarding the concept of employment at will.

What is your point??

daniel is retarded, he never has a point and does not speak English as a first language.,

 

[danielpalos]

not sure what you mean; why would an employer need the expense of trading up employees if the "bad actors" prefer unemployment compensation and being good capitalists, instead of bad actors who may have to lie for a job?

What?

i got it right the first time; are you just clueless and Causeless? only shills do that.

You're point isn't clear.

there is no appeal to ignorance of a federal doctrine and our own State laws regarding the concept of employment at will.

What is your point??

Solving simple poverty by solving for Capitalism's, natural rate of unemployment on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

 

[danielpalos]

What?

i got it right the first time; are you just clueless and Causeless? only shills do that.

You're point isn't clear.

there is no appeal to ignorance of a federal doctrine and our own State laws regarding the concept of employment at will.

What is your point??

daniel is retarded, he never has a point and does not speak English as a first language.,

just a shill with out a clue or a Cause, dear?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

there are only 2.5 million more full time jobs among the working age population now than in 2007 yet the population in that group is up 18 million!! That means 90% of the new jobs are part time jobs. Thats how you get only 5.1% unemployed.

First of all, Obama did not start in 2007.

In 2009 there were 115,818,000 FT jobs and there are 121,839,000 now, more than ever in the history of this still GREAT country and an increase of over 6 million FT jobs.
In 2009 there were 26,377,000 PT jobs and there are 26,969,000 an increase of less than 6 hundred thousand, hardly 90% of the jobs created since Obama took office.

That's how you expose a Right-wing lie!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

there are only 2.5 million more full time jobs among the working age population now than in 2007 yet the population in that group is up 18 million!! That means 90% of the new jobs are part time jobs. Thats how you get only 5.1% unemployed.

First of all, Obama did not start in 2007.

In 2009 there were 115,818,000 FT jobs and there are 121,839,000 now, more than ever in the history of this still GREAT country and an increase of over 6 million FT jobs.
In 2009 there were 26,377,000 PT jobs and there are 26,969,000 an increase of less than 6 hundred thousand, hardly 90% of the jobs created since Obama took office.

That's how you expose a Right-wing lie!

View attachment 53212

Govt chart showing that % of full time workers is less now than it was before recession. More evidence showing that Barry's FDR/Obama recovery is worst since Great Depression and helping to explain why most Americans think we are on the wrong track!!

 

[edthecynic]

there are only 2.5 million more full time jobs among the working age population now than in 2007 yet the population in that group is up 18 million!! That means 90% of the new jobs are part time jobs. Thats how you get only 5.1% unemployed.

First of all, Obama did not start in 2007.

In 2009 there were 115,818,000 FT jobs and there are 121,839,000 now, more than ever in the history of this still GREAT country and an increase of over 6 million FT jobs.
In 2009 there were 26,377,000 PT jobs and there are 26,969,000 an increase of less than 6 hundred thousand, hardly 90% of the jobs created since Obama took office.

That's how you expose a Right-wing lie!

View attachment 53212

Govt chart showing that % of full time workers is less now than it was before recession. More evidence showing that Barry's FDR/Obama recovery is worst since Great Depression and helping to explain why most Americans think we are on the wrong track!!

But it doesn't support your LIE that "90% of the new jobs are PT jobs."

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

there are only 2.5 million more full time jobs among the working age population now than in 2007 yet the population in that group is up 18 million!! That means 90% of the new jobs are part time jobs. Thats how you get only 5.1% unemployed.

First of all, Obama did not start in 2007.

In 2009 there were 115,818,000 FT jobs and there are 121,839,000 now, more than ever in the history of this still GREAT country and an increase of over 6 million FT jobs.
In 2009 there were 26,377,000 PT jobs and there are 26,969,000 an increase of less than 6 hundred thousand, hardly 90% of the jobs created since Obama took office.

That's how you expose a Right-wing lie!

View attachment 53212

Govt chart showing that % of full time workers is less now than it was before recession. More evidence showing that Barry's FDR/Obama recovery is worst since Great Depression and helping to explain why most Americans think we are on the wrong track!!

But it doesn't support your LIE that "90% of the new jobs are PT jobs."

depends how you count but either way having fewer full time jobs 8 years into
a recovery is deplorable liberal pure ignorance!!

 

[danielpalos]

there are only 2.5 million more full time jobs among the working age population now than in 2007 yet the population in that group is up 18 million!! That means 90% of the new jobs are part time jobs. Thats how you get only 5.1% unemployed.

First of all, Obama did not start in 2007.

In 2009 there were 115,818,000 FT jobs and there are 121,839,000 now, more than ever in the history of this still GREAT country and an increase of over 6 million FT jobs.
In 2009 there were 26,377,000 PT jobs and there are 26,969,000 an increase of less than 6 hundred thousand, hardly 90% of the jobs created since Obama took office.

That's how you expose a Right-wing lie!

View attachment 53212

Govt chart showing that % of full time workers is less now than it was before recession. More evidence showing that Barry's FDR/Obama recovery is worst since Great Depression and helping to explain why most Americans think we are on the wrong track!!

why not end the capital gains distinction whenever there is more than one percent unemployment?

 

[edthecynic]

there are only 2.5 million more full time jobs among the working age population now than in 2007 yet the population in that group is up 18 million!! That means 90% of the new jobs are part time jobs. Thats how you get only 5.1% unemployed.

First of all, Obama did not start in 2007.

In 2009 there were 115,818,000 FT jobs and there are 121,839,000 now, more than ever in the history of this still GREAT country and an increase of over 6 million FT jobs.
In 2009 there were 26,377,000 PT jobs and there are 26,969,000 an increase of less than 6 hundred thousand, hardly 90% of the jobs created since Obama took office.

That's how you expose a Right-wing lie!

View attachment 53212

Govt chart showing that % of full time workers is less now than it was before recession. More evidence showing that Barry's FDR/Obama recovery is worst since Great Depression and helping to explain why most Americans think we are on the wrong track!!

But it doesn't support your LIE that "90% of the new jobs are PT jobs."

depends how you count but either way having fewer full time jobs 8 years into
a recovery is deplorable liberal pure ignorance!!

No, it depends only on how YOU lie.
And we are not 8 (EIGHT) years into a recovery, just another of YOUR lies.
And there were 115.8 million full time jobs when Bush left office and there are 121.8 million FT jobs now, that is 6 million more, not "fewer" as YOU lie yet again.
That's 3 (THREE) deplorable lies by deplorable YOU in 1 (ONE) deplorable sentence.

 

[danielpalos]

Edward really is that special; he is such a dear.

 

[anotherlife]

Jobless claims fall, because after a year of joblessness you are no more eligible to claim. What is so mysterious about this?

Apart from this, in 21st century America, considering that the entire national economy is upon 3rd party deals instead of market forces, most people can't expect to work for money that would be enough to pay for rent and utilities.

Like in the 3rd world, you have no choice but to steal from your employer if you want to survive after the time you spend with that employer daily.

 

[edthecynic]

Jobless claims fall, because after a year of joblessness you are no more eligible to claim. What is so mysterious about this?

The mystery is how you can be so stupid as to swallow that bullshit!

 

[anotherlife]

Jobless claims fall, because after a year of joblessness you are no more eligible to claim. What is so mysterious about this?

The mystery is how you can be so stupid as to swallow that bullshit!

It is a statistical fact, that a significant and observable % of Americans are this "stupid". In other words, the more technology is used to replace you, the stupider you get.

 

[Indeependent]

Jobless claims fall, because after a year of joblessness you are no more eligible to claim. What is so mysterious about this?

It's a fact; that's why we have 6 formulas...to cover the bull.

 

[pinqy]

Jobless claims fall, because after a year of joblessness you are no more eligible to claim. What is so mysterious about this?

The mystery is why you think that's true. And we're talking about initial claims.

 

[anotherlife]

Jobless claims fall, because after a year of joblessness you are no more eligible to claim. What is so mysterious about this?

The mystery is why you think that's true. And we're talking about initial claims.

Well, then there is no difference, at least mathematically. This means that there can be only so many initial claims as the number of employees in the country. Once you have fired all of them, there will not be any more initial claims, so you can report an economic recovery. Good enough?