More Economic GOOD NEWS: Employers add most jobs in 3 years in March

[uscitizen]

162,000 Jobs out of how many millions UNEMPLOYED.



and they trumpet this as being, GOOD NEWS.

GOOD FRIGGEN GRIEF.

Why not? Didn't the right do the same thing when Bush was president?
Remember jobless recovery?
I don't seem to recall the right complaining about that at the time.

(Bureau of Labor Statistics Data)

Republican White House republican Congress

.......Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 .. . . . . . 3.9
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 .. . . . . . 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 .. . . . . . 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 .. . . . . . 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 .. . . . . . 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 .. . . . . . 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 .. . . . . . 4.4

Republican White House & Democrat Congress

2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 .. . . . . . 5.0
2008 5.0 4.8 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.6 6.9 .. . . . . . 7.4

Democrat White House & Democrat Congress

2009 7.7 8.2 8.6 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.8 10.1 10.0 .. . . . 10.0
2010 9.7 9.7

Hmm compare that with the national debt chart and you will see a delayed response pattern. Govt spending does create jobs. with a bit of a lag of course.

Take your figures back to the Reagan presidency. You remember the greatest president ever?

 

[Si modo]

Why not? Didn't the right do the same thing when Bush was president?
Remember jobless recovery?
I don't seem to recall the right complaining about that at the time.

(Bureau of Labor Statistics Data)

Republican White House republican Congress

.......Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 .. . . . . . 3.9
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 .. . . . . . 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 .. . . . . . 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 .. . . . . . 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 .. . . . . . 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 .. . . . . . 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 .. . . . . . 4.4

Republican White House & Democrat Congress

2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 .. . . . . . 5.0
2008 5.0 4.8 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.6 6.9 .. . . . . . 7.4

Democrat White House & Democrat Congress

2009 7.7 8.2 8.6 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.8 10.1 10.0 .. . . . 10.0
2010 9.7 9.7

Hmm compare that with the national debt chart and you will see a delayed response pattern. Govt spending does create jobs. with a bit of a lag of course.

Unless that spending oppresses the private sector causing more job losses.

It's a sad day when the ratio of those employed by the government to the private sector grows so fast, mainly because the government produces no product.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That's good news?

Your standards are low.

Any improvement is good news. You can argue whether or not it should be at a faster pace, but you can't expect a million people back to work in one month.

The bigger question I would be asking is how many of those 123,000 got created merely because of government wealth redistribution. If it's a significant portion then this is not good news economically.

 

[Truthmatters]

I bet the store who takes their business doesnt care

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I do not expect us to get back to where we were before the house of cards collapsed.

Wait until the nation goes into bankruptcy or loses our AAA bond rating because of our debt. It will make the 1930s look like a walk in the park.

 

[Si modo]

That's good news?

Your standards are low.

Any improvement is good news. You can argue whether or not it should be at a faster pace, but you can't expect a million people back to work in one month.

The bigger question I would be asking is how many of those 123,000 got created merely because of government wealth redistribution. If it's a significant portion then this is not good news economically.

When jobs lost outweighs jobs gained, it is bad news in my book.

It's like someone telling me that a terminal cancer is only one type of cancer.

 

[Si modo]

I bet the store who takes their business doesnt care

I need a translation.

Or are you just telling us that you hate America again?

 

[uscitizen]

(Bureau of Labor Statistics Data)

Republican White House republican Congress

.......Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 .. . . . . . 3.9
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 .. . . . . . 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 .. . . . . . 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 .. . . . . . 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 .. . . . . . 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 .. . . . . . 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 .. . . . . . 4.4

Republican White House & Democrat Congress

2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 .. . . . . . 5.0
2008 5.0 4.8 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.6 6.9 .. . . . . . 7.4

Democrat White House & Democrat Congress

2009 7.7 8.2 8.6 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.8 10.1 10.0 .. . . . 10.0
2010 9.7 9.7

Hmm compare that with the national debt chart and you will see a delayed response pattern. Govt spending does create jobs. with a bit of a lag of course.

Unless that spending oppresses the private sector causing more job losses.

It's a sad day when the ratio of those employed by the government to the private sector grows so fast, mainly because the government produces no product.

the govt produces war.

And yes this is what happened during the bush presidency. Check how many govt jobs were created then vs private sector.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I bet the store who takes their business doesnt care

Of course they don't, but that's not really the issue. They could probably be getting more business if the government got out of the way and quit trying to manipulate everything.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That's good news?

Your standards are low.

Any improvement is good news. You can argue whether or not it should be at a faster pace, but you can't expect a million people back to work in one month.

The bigger question I would be asking is how many of those 123,000 got created merely because of government wealth redistribution. If it's a significant portion then this is not good news economically.

When jobs lost outweighs jobs gained, it is bad news in my book.

It's like someone telling me that a terminal cancer is only one type of cancer.

So you expected 8 million people to be rehired in March?

 

[Si modo]

Any improvement is good news. You can argue whether or not it should be at a faster pace, but you can't expect a million people back to work in one month.

The bigger question I would be asking is how many of those 123,000 got created merely because of government wealth redistribution. If it's a significant portion then this is not good news economically.

When jobs lost outweighs jobs gained, it is bad news in my book.

It's like someone telling me that a terminal cancer is only one type of cancer.

So you expected 8 million people to be rehired in March?

Huh?

No, I expected the news to be bad, and it is. Unemployment is still high, jobs are lost faster than gained - bad news, as I expected.

I have no intention of trying to spin it into something it is not.

I predict that the joblessness is just biding time until it goes into a second round of eruption with the ramifications of the healthcare bill.

 

[Si modo]

Hmm compare that with the national debt chart and you will see a delayed response pattern. Govt spending does create jobs. with a bit of a lag of course.

Unless that spending oppresses the private sector causing more job losses.

It's a sad day when the ratio of those employed by the government to the private sector grows so fast, mainly because the government produces no product.

the govt produces war.

And yes this is what happened during the bush presidency. Check how many govt jobs were created then vs private sector.

So, it's OK because Bush did it. Got it.

 

[Truthmatters]

List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When you examine this SM what do you take away from these historical facts?

 

[Si modo]

List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When you examine this SM what do you take away from these historical facts?

Why do you hate America?

 

[uscitizen]

Unless that spending oppresses the private sector causing more job losses.

It's a sad day when the ratio of those employed by the government to the private sector grows so fast, mainly because the government produces no product.

the govt produces war.

And yes this is what happened during the bush presidency. Check how many govt jobs were created then vs private sector.

So, it's OK because Bush did it. Got it.

Nope and I complained then too. Did you?
I am sure many of those complaining about Obama did not complain about the same thing when Bush was in office.

 

[Si modo]

the govt produces war.

And yes this is what happened during the bush presidency. Check how many govt jobs were created then vs private sector.

So, it's OK because Bush did it. Got it.

Nope and I complained then too. Did you? ....

Yeah. Both parties stink. We need party reform. That's why I like the Tea Party.

.... I am sure many of those complaining about Obama did not complain about the same thing when Bush was in office.

That's possible, but I didn't know anyone on USMB when GWB was around (except for some of my pals with whom I came here).

 

[Truthmatters]

So studing hisotry equates to hating America to you SM?

wow no wonder the Rs are so fucked up.

 

[Si modo]

So studing hisotry equates to hating America to you SM?

wow no wonder the Rs are so fucked up.

Why do you hate America? And, why do you hate education?

 

[uscitizen]

So, it's OK because Bush did it. Got it.

Nope and I complained then too. Did you? ....

Yeah. Both parties stink. We need party reform. That's why I like the Tea Party.

.... I am sure many of those complaining about Obama did not complain about the same thing when Bush was in office.

That's possible, but I didn't know anyone on USMB when GWB was around (except for some of my pals with whom I came here).

HUH? Tea Party?
90% of them will vote for whichever candidate the republicans prop up.

And I am not limiting my comment to USMB members.

 

[Si modo]

Nope and I complained then too. Did you? ....

Yeah. Both parties stink. We need party reform. That's why I like the Tea Party.

.... I am sure many of those complaining about Obama did not complain about the same thing when Bush was in office.

That's possible, but I didn't know anyone on USMB when GWB was around (except for some of my pals with whom I came here).

HUH? Tea Party?
90% of them will vote for whichever candidate the republicans prop up.

And I am not limiting my comment to USMB members.

Don't count on it.