Dad2three
Gold Member
Pretty sure he was being sarcastic? You know since AS Obama came into office he was losing 700,000+ jobs a month? Anyone else that was happening too?
The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?
- Thread starter U2Edge
- Start date
Pretty sure he was being sarcastic? You know since AS Obama came into office he was losing 700,000+ jobs a month? Anyone else that was happening too?
U2Edge
Gold Member
- Sep 15, 2012
- 5,342
- 1,259
- 130
- Thread starter
- #902
Perhaps thanks to the labor force participation rate which is the lowest its been since 1978. If the labor force participation rate was still at 66% like it was under Bush, the unemployment rate would be 10% at the moment. Right now the labor force participation rate is 62.7% for the last month reported which is December 2014. That is where the labor force participation rate was in February 1978. For 82 out of 96 of Bush's months in office, the labor force participation rate was ABOVE 66%.
Obama has 24 months left. Its not exactly clear where things will end up. Trends whether up or down don't necessarily continue. Things can change. Even so, 6 months from now, he will still be at the bottom of this list for sure.
LoneLaugher
Diamond Member
More AWESOME reasoning! You are so awesome!
If your water gets fucked up, you can sue Keystone and the seventy-five per cent of the pipe used to build Keystone XL in the U.S. would come from North American mills
Calgary, Alberta –February 17, 2012– TransCanada Corporation (TSX, NYSE: TRP) (TransCanada) confirmed today the vast majority of the pipe for Keystone XL would be manufactured in North America. In addition, the company intends to purchase approximately 90 per cent of all other goods for the $7.6 billion project from companies on the continent.
“Seventy-five per cent of the pipe used to build Keystone XL in the U.S. would come from North American mills, including half made by U.S. workers in Arkansas,” said Alex Pourbaix, TransCanada’s president, Energy and Oil Pipelines. “In addition, we have already sourced goods for the pipeline valued at approximately $800 million from U.S. manufacturers.”
We estimate 821,000 tons of high strength line pipe will be used on the project in Canada and the U.S. TransCanada has estimated it will use 660,000 tons of steel for the U.S. portion of the Keystone XL pipeline. The following are the line pipe mills who are manufacturing the pipe:
· Welspun - Little Rock, Arkansas, USA 332,800 tons 50%
· Evraz – Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada 156,266 tons 24%
· ILVA – Italy 103,147 tons 16%
· Welspun - India 69,457 tons 10%
It is important to understand pipeline companies do not purchase raw steel. Rather, we purchase sophisticated manufactured products such as high strength steel pipe and pumps that are fabricated from steel and other metals. It is the responsibility of the manufacturers of these products to source the necessary raw materials and to produce a product that meets all relevant regulations, codes and our internal specifications.
Media Advisory - 75 Per Cent of Keystone XL Pipe would be Made in North America
I get it, it really does't matter what the UE rate is as long as Obama is President.
LoneLaugher
Diamond Member
Is that what you get? Cool. I look at the direction of the rate. It's nosediving. That's the opposite of skyrocketing. I'm sure you will agree that nosediving is much better.
Motherfucking DISINGENUOUS nutters are boring me to death.
As long as the Labor Participation Rate continues to go down the UE rate will continue to go down. Simple math, fool!
LoneLaugher
Diamond Member
And that means nothing.
That is what I said. As long as Obama is President, the UE rate means nothing.
Ernie S.
Diamond Member
What that means is that UE benefits have run out for millions. Many of those are on Medicare and food stamps. Those that have found work are working multiple part time jobs.
Dad2three
Gold Member
'
Not that old meme AGAIN
Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":
Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.
But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.
In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002
The incredible shrinking labor force - The Washington Post
OBAMA 7+ MILLION NET PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS IN 6 YEARS (11+ MILLION AFTER FEB 2010) AFTER DUBYA LOST 1+ MILLION, LOL
Dad2three
Gold Member
Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":
Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.
But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.
In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002.
The incredible shrinking labor force - The Washington Post
MaryL
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #913
Obama is the worst in my lifetime. Going back to the Eisenhower administration. Obama is proving himself quite the crypto communist. He is obviously out of touch with American culture, growing up the spawn of a interracial train wreck and living in Hawaii and Indonesia attending Muslim schools... Yeah, we can ALL relate to that. Shame on you people for voting for this man. Shame on YOU.
Dad2three
Gold Member
Here's What Obama's 'Part-Time America' Really Looks Like
The president's critics love this talking point. But since 2010, full-time jobs are up 7.6 million, and part-time jobs have declined by more than 900,000.
Here s What Obama s Part-Time America Really Looks Like - The Atlantic
The Spectacular Myth of Obama's Part-Time America—in 5 Graphs
The Spectacular Myth of Obama s Part-Time America mdash in 5 Graphs - The Atlantic
Dad2three
Gold Member
jasonnfree
Gold Member
- May 23, 2012
- 10,512
- 2,336
- 280
So now we're averaging the unemployment rate out over a period of years? Of course the average looks bad since Obama entered office with the worst economy the country had since the great depression. Can't raise the Titanic that easily you know.
U2Edge
Gold Member
- Sep 15, 2012
- 5,342
- 1,259
- 130
- Thread starter
- #917
Total number of people employed in the United States per year:
2000: 135,215,000
2001: 135,043,000
2002: 136,485,000
2003: 137,739,000
2004: 139,248,000
2005: 141,674,000
2006: 144,427,000
2007: 146,016,000
2008: 145,368,000
2009: 139,881,000
2010: 139,069,000
2011: 139,873,000
2012: 142,469,000
2000: 135,215,000
2001: 135,043,000
2002: 136,485,000
2003: 137,739,000
2004: 139,248,000
2005: 141,674,000
2006: 144,427,000
2007: 146,016,000
2008: 145,368,000
2009: 139,881,000
2010: 139,069,000
2011: 139,873,000
2012: 142,469,000
U2Edge
Gold Member
- Sep 15, 2012
- 5,342
- 1,259
- 130
- Thread starter
- #918
YEP, the same way your GPA was calculated in school. Every month of data counts, especially since the economy can make many swings up and down over a 96 month/8 year period. The only accurate way to look at things is to look at all the data and find the average. Simply looking at the first month and last month of a 96 month administration will not tell you very much, just like looking at your first week in College and your last week in College won't tell anyone very much either.
U2Edge
Gold Member
- Sep 15, 2012
- 5,342
- 1,259
- 130
- Thread starter
- #919
If the labor force participation rate was still at 66% or higher as it was for 82 out of 96 months that Bush was President, the unemployment rate for December 2014 would be 10.33% instead of 5.6%. A labor force participation rate of only 62.7% makes a huge difference when compared with 66%. Your talking about roughly 8 to 10 million people.
Lakhota
Diamond Member
The president who inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression is?
Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs, Growth And Investing - Forbes
Last edited:
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Tennessee prepares to execute Oscar Smith, 3 years after last-minute reprieve- Started by Mack The Finger
- Replies: 0
-
TREASON, Insurrection SEDITION AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES = Trump Party
- Started by merrill
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
