Trump's admin has a problem - unemployment is too damn low.

[FA_Q2]

As this article from forbes explains low unemployment is a problem for Trump, he ran on painting a bleak picture of America and promised to fix it. But of course reality of standard U3 4.5% unemployment with probably around 4.0% bottom out will not make for a great turn around story.

So what are the honest folks at the new administration to do? Well they take their cue from their leader and begin by denying that there is any such thing as objective measure of unemployment.

Trump spent more than a year on the campaign trail using a variety of statistics to falsely claim that up to 42 percent of American people were unemployed. That stat was widely denounced for including all people “not in the workforce,” including retirees and stay-at-home parents.

When asked to commit to a particular, objective, well defined measure of unemployment Trump's press secretary Sean Spicer could not, and instead provided this piece of completely un-quantifiable measure:

“for too long it’s been about stats, ... about what number we are looking at, as opposed to what face we are looking at.”

So in this way Trump's administration can talk about whatever "face" it feels like, unbound by broad reality of what is actually going on with unemployment in America.

The White House Press Secretary Pivots From Attacking The Press To Gaslighting Them

The (clown) show must go on.

Oh look at the far left drones using far left hack sites for their "facts"..

Here is a little dose of reality!

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Link broken and that graph does not speak for itself as it does not describe the data that you are trying to convey.

 

[CowboyTed]

Not according the U6 its not.

Obama inherited a 15.1% U6 Unemployment and it is now at 9.2....

The record low for U6 is 6.8... in Late Clinton time... U3 at the time was 3.8...

Trump has much to move on in U6 either...

 

[AntonToo]

As this article from forbes explains low unemployment is a problem for Trump, he ran on painting a bleak picture of America and promised to fix it. But of course reality of standard U3 4.5% unemployment with probably around 4.0% bottom out will not make for a great turn around story.

So what are the honest folks at the new administration to do? Well they take their cue from their leader and begin by denying that there is any such thing as objective measure of unemployment.

Trump spent more than a year on the campaign trail using a variety of statistics to falsely claim that up to 42 percent of American people were unemployed. That stat was widely denounced for including all people “not in the workforce,” including retirees and stay-at-home parents.

When asked to commit to a particular, objective, well defined measure of unemployment Trump's press secretary Sean Spicer could not, and instead provided this piece of completely un-quantifiable measure:

“for too long it’s been about stats, ... about what number we are looking at, as opposed to what face we are looking at.”

So in this way Trump's administration can talk about whatever "face" it feels like, unbound by broad reality of what is actually going on with unemployment in America.

The White House Press Secretary Pivots From Attacking The Press To Gaslighting Them

The (clown) show must go on.

Oh look at the far left drones using far left hack sites for their "facts"..

Here is a little dose of reality!

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Read the thread before throwing in your two cents.

LFPR decline is baked into demographics until 2030-40's, nothing Trump will do to change that unless he suddenly picks up a very aggressive pro-immigration policy.

 

[sartre play]

For the last 35 years the cost of every thing has gone up, wages have not kept pace. no matter who is in power. hence the anger, we work harder for no real gain.

 

[AntonToo]

For the last 35 years the cost of every thing has gone up, wages have not kept pace. no matter who is in power. hence the anger, we work harder for no real gain.

This is not true.

Real median income is currently same as it was in early 2000s when it topped out.

 

[AntonToo]

As this article from forbes explains low unemployment is a problem for Trump, he ran on painting a bleak picture of America and promised to fix it. But of course reality of standard U3 4.5% unemployment with probably around 4.0% bottom out will not make for a great turn around story.

So what are the honest folks at the new administration to do? Well they take their cue from their leader and begin by denying that there is any such thing as objective measure of unemployment.

Trump spent more than a year on the campaign trail using a variety of statistics to falsely claim that up to 42 percent of American people were unemployed. That stat was widely denounced for including all people “not in the workforce,” including retirees and stay-at-home parents.

When asked to commit to a particular, objective, well defined measure of unemployment Trump's press secretary Sean Spicer could not, and instead provided this piece of completely un-quantifiable measure:

“for too long it’s been about stats, ... about what number we are looking at, as opposed to what face we are looking at.”

So in this way Trump's administration can talk about whatever "face" it feels like, unbound by broad reality of what is actually going on with unemployment in America.

The White House Press Secretary Pivots From Attacking The Press To Gaslighting Them

The (clown) show must go on.

It's not about the numbers so much as its about the quality & substance of the jobs that drive those numbers.

If America sees a substantial uptick in their wallets as a result of the Gop, y'all are fucked

America has seen a 5% increase in their wallets in 2015, which brought it back up to pre-recession level in real terms. I didn't see you credit Obama.

Obama had the same power Trump has which is to say, not a lot outside of executive orders. This is why in my response to you I cited the GOP & not Trump.

That's not how it works. Congress pretty much can't pass anything President doesn't want to pass. Obama passed stimulus and extended most tax cuts expiring in 2012, he also had influence over monetary policy.

Then you should be thanking the GOP congress that was in charge when the uptick took place. Consumer confidence rose when the gop stopped Obama dead in his tracks.

Yea? What did they do?

Hold 50 repeal Obamacare votes?

 

[pinqy]

Ah, you're still looking for a silver bullet stat. I told you there isn't one, you have to look at everything together to get a better picture.

You are correct. And the LFPR can put things in perspective. But it does NOT give better information about the labor market than the UE rate, or the employment population ratio.

LFPR is clearly correlated with a growing economy, but no, it by itself doesn't establish that. You're right in that non-point

It's really not. The LFPR went steadily up for 52 years, and has been going down for 16.

 

[AntonToo]

What I'm looking for is a rational answer on how to measure economic success or failure, as acceptable to you.

You say a set of metrics? Ok no problem, can you list them please?

You have to look at all of them to get a full picture. GDP, UE, LFPR, teenage employment, welfare stats, consumer spending, consumer confidence, under employment, discouraged workers, corporate profits, balance of trade, stock market growth, housing prices, interest rates, etc.

All of them and more are a piece of the picture.

In your case, you focused on "jobs." UE is low, sure. But labor participation, underemployment, discouraged workers, teen unemployment and other indicators are very bad.

Will Trump solve it? Dunno. Obama only continued to make it worse because of his anti-employment policies

Teenage unemployment is very bad? Really?

They are spending more time in school (as they should, something I would think you'd agree with) and therefore lower participation rate.

Discouraged workers are part of U6 measure:

Today there are 426,000 such people, pretty much what it was at the height of real estate bubble.

So you think that 50% inner city unemployment is because those kids are in school instead of working?

....Those that are in school, by definition, are not unemployed. Unemployed are those that are looking for a job.

Is there data you base your " 50%" assertion on or do you again simply pull these numbers out of your behind?

Teenagers should be in school, getting their secondary and higher/professional education, not working.

Nearly half of young black men in Chicago out of work, out of school: report

Form your link:

Forty-seven percent of 20- to 24-year-old black men in Chicago, and 44 percent in Illinois, were out of school and out of work in 2014, compared with 20 percent of Hispanic men and 10 percent of white men in the same age group, according to the report from the University of Illinois at Chicago's Great Cities Institute.

Ok so to get your 50% 47% you did the following:

cherry picked a single city in all of America,
cherry picked race,
chery picked age 20-24.

Bravo sir! You are totally not making shit up.

 

[AntonToo]

MediMatters = Soros/Clintons

Fake news.

Idiot, are you actually denying that administration refuses to commit to any objective measures of unemployment?

You cannot just categorically say "I don't like this source" and think you won the argument. It is Trump grade stupidity and intellectual laziness ...and it looks like it is contagious.

94,000,000 Americans out of the workforce.....we have a population of around 330,000,000.....do the math.

How will you get grandpa and his great grand son into workforce?

Why the fuck should we care about this ridiculous math?

 

[kaz]

You have to look at all of them to get a full picture. GDP, UE, LFPR, teenage employment, welfare stats, consumer spending, consumer confidence, under employment, discouraged workers, corporate profits, balance of trade, stock market growth, housing prices, interest rates, etc.

All of them and more are a piece of the picture.

In your case, you focused on "jobs." UE is low, sure. But labor participation, underemployment, discouraged workers, teen unemployment and other indicators are very bad.

Will Trump solve it? Dunno. Obama only continued to make it worse because of his anti-employment policies

Teenage unemployment is very bad? Really?

They are spending more time in school (as they should, something I would think you'd agree with) and therefore lower participation rate.

Discouraged workers are part of U6 measure:

Today there are 426,000 such people, pretty much what it was at the height of real estate bubble.

So you think that 50% inner city unemployment is because those kids are in school instead of working?

....Those that are in school, by definition, are not unemployed. Unemployed are those that are looking for a job.

Is there data you base your " 50%" assertion on or do you again simply pull these numbers out of your behind?

Teenagers should be in school, getting their secondary and higher/professional education, not working.

Nearly half of young black men in Chicago out of work, out of school: report

Form your link:

Forty-seven percent of 20- to 24-year-old black men in Chicago, and 44 percent in Illinois, were out of school and out of work in 2014, compared with 20 percent of Hispanic men and 10 percent of white men in the same age group, according to the report from the University of Illinois at Chicago's Great Cities Institute.

Ok so to get your 50% 47% you did the following:

cherry picked a single city in all of America,
cherry picked race,
chery picked age 20-24.

Bravo sir! You are totally not making shit up.

I gave you an example. And 47% of 20-24 could scare the shit out of you

 

[AntonToo]

Teenage unemployment is very bad? Really?

They are spending more time in school (as they should, something I would think you'd agree with) and therefore lower participation rate.

Discouraged workers are part of U6 measure:

Today there are 426,000 such people, pretty much what it was at the height of real estate bubble.

So you think that 50% inner city unemployment is because those kids are in school instead of working?

....Those that are in school, by definition, are not unemployed. Unemployed are those that are looking for a job.

Is there data you base your " 50%" assertion on or do you again simply pull these numbers out of your behind?

Teenagers should be in school, getting their secondary and higher/professional education, not working.

Nearly half of young black men in Chicago out of work, out of school: report

Form your link:

Forty-seven percent of 20- to 24-year-old black men in Chicago, and 44 percent in Illinois, were out of school and out of work in 2014, compared with 20 percent of Hispanic men and 10 percent of white men in the same age group, according to the report from the University of Illinois at Chicago's Great Cities Institute.

Ok so to get your 50% 47% you did the following:

cherry picked a single city in all of America,
cherry picked race,
chery picked age 20-24.

Bravo sir! You are totally not making shit up.

I gave you an example. And 47% of 20-24 could scare the shit out of you

What scares the shit out of me is that you have trouble understanding that carefully cherry picked sample is not a proper representative for national economy. What you are doing is lying to maintain a loser argument.

We have a country full of people with very poor analytical skills, and gross misunderstandings about economic state of our country making what adds up to very important decisions.

75% of Trump voters thought employment got worse under Obama. Hell if I thought that was true I'd be desperate enough to vote for a ridiculous pussy grabber too.

 

[kaz]

So you think that 50% inner city unemployment is because those kids are in school instead of working?

....Those that are in school, by definition, are not unemployed. Unemployed are those that are looking for a job.

Is there data you base your " 50%" assertion on or do you again simply pull these numbers out of your behind?

Teenagers should be in school, getting their secondary and higher/professional education, not working.

Nearly half of young black men in Chicago out of work, out of school: report

Form your link:

Forty-seven percent of 20- to 24-year-old black men in Chicago, and 44 percent in Illinois, were out of school and out of work in 2014, compared with 20 percent of Hispanic men and 10 percent of white men in the same age group, according to the report from the University of Illinois at Chicago's Great Cities Institute.

Ok so to get your 50% 47% you did the following:

cherry picked a single city in all of America,
cherry picked race,
chery picked age 20-24.

Bravo sir! You are totally not making shit up.

I gave you an example. And 47% of 20-24 could scare the shit out of you

What scares the shit out of me is that you have trouble understanding that carefully cherry picked example is not a good metric for national statistics.

We have a country full of people with very poor analytical skills, and gross misunderstandings about economic state of our country making what adds up to very important decisions.

75% of Trump voters thought employment got worse under Obama. Hell if I thought that was true I'd be desperate enough to vote for a ridiculous pussy grabber too.

Yes, you're ignoring a national catastrophe which you cause with your stupid minimum wage because you want to bicker over numbers. In Chicago, you concede 47% of 20-24 are unemployed, and all you can say is 47%<50% and it's one city, so that's not a problem. You're a moral abyss

 

[Tom Horn]

All the graphs and charts somebody got paid by somebody else to come up with don't mean anything when a person who stops looking for a job is no longer considered unemployed.

 

[AntonToo]

....Those that are in school, by definition, are not unemployed. Unemployed are those that are looking for a job.

Is there data you base your " 50%" assertion on or do you again simply pull these numbers out of your behind?

Teenagers should be in school, getting their secondary and higher/professional education, not working.

Nearly half of young black men in Chicago out of work, out of school: report

Form your link:

Forty-seven percent of 20- to 24-year-old black men in Chicago, and 44 percent in Illinois, were out of school and out of work in 2014, compared with 20 percent of Hispanic men and 10 percent of white men in the same age group, according to the report from the University of Illinois at Chicago's Great Cities Institute.

Ok so to get your 50% 47% you did the following:

cherry picked a single city in all of America,
cherry picked race,
chery picked age 20-24.

Bravo sir! You are totally not making shit up.

I gave you an example. And 47% of 20-24 could scare the shit out of you

What scares the shit out of me is that you have trouble understanding that carefully cherry picked example is not a good metric for national statistics.

We have a country full of people with very poor analytical skills, and gross misunderstandings about economic state of our country making what adds up to very important decisions.

75% of Trump voters thought employment got worse under Obama. Hell if I thought that was true I'd be desperate enough to vote for a ridiculous pussy grabber too.

Yes, you're ignoring a national catastrophe which you cause with your stupid minimum wage because you want to bicker over numbers

20-24 year old black males (forgot that you cherry picked sex too) in Chicago is not a NATIONAL problem, it is a problem in Chicago.

It is a REAL problem, but not representative of what is going on generally in America.

And the reason why you suddenly and VERY SPECIFICALLY care about Chicago's blacks is because they FIT YOUR FALSE THESIS.

 

[AntonToo]

All the graphs and charts somebody got paid by somebody else to come up with don't mean anything when a person who stops looking for a job is no longer considered unemployed.

Will this always be your thought-free safe-space answer mr.snowflake?

 

[Tom Horn]

All the graphs and charts somebody got paid by somebody else to come up with don't mean anything when a person who stops looking for a job is no longer considered unemployed.

Will this always be your thought-free safe-space answer mr.snowflake?

You're the snowflake shit-for-brains and lying is your safe-space. Stealing our descriptions of your ilk doesn't change who the whining turds are.

 

[AntonToo]

All the graphs and charts somebody got paid by somebody else to come up with don't mean anything when a person who stops looking for a job is no longer considered unemployed.

Will this always be your thought-free safe-space answer mr.snowflake?

You're the snowflake shit-for-brains and lying is your safe-space. Stealing our descriptions of your ilk doesn't change who the whining turds are.

You gotta admit, no thought required for your position - any data or finding you don't like is fake, everything you do like is real.

Very easy, very safe. You like.

 

[kaz]

Nearly half of young black men in Chicago out of work, out of school: report

Form your link:

Forty-seven percent of 20- to 24-year-old black men in Chicago, and 44 percent in Illinois, were out of school and out of work in 2014, compared with 20 percent of Hispanic men and 10 percent of white men in the same age group, according to the report from the University of Illinois at Chicago's Great Cities Institute.

Ok so to get your 50% 47% you did the following:

cherry picked a single city in all of America,
cherry picked race,
chery picked age 20-24.

Bravo sir! You are totally not making shit up.

I gave you an example. And 47% of 20-24 could scare the shit out of you

What scares the shit out of me is that you have trouble understanding that carefully cherry picked example is not a good metric for national statistics.

We have a country full of people with very poor analytical skills, and gross misunderstandings about economic state of our country making what adds up to very important decisions.

75% of Trump voters thought employment got worse under Obama. Hell if I thought that was true I'd be desperate enough to vote for a ridiculous pussy grabber too.

Yes, you're ignoring a national catastrophe which you cause with your stupid minimum wage because you want to bicker over numbers

20-24 year old black males (forgot that you cherry picked sex too) in Chicago is not a NATIONAL problem, it is a problem in Chicago.

It is a REAL problem, but not representative of what is going on generally in America.

And the reason why you suddenly and VERY SPECIFICALLY care about Chicago's blacks is because they FIT YOUR FALSE THESIS.

I gave you an example. So you seriously believe it's completely different in other urban areas? So if I can show you it isn't just Chicago, you'll admit that we have a major crisis here Obama and the Democrats did nothing about or even acknowledge for eight years? What do you say?

 

[AntonToo]

Form your link:

Forty-seven percent of 20- to 24-year-old black men in Chicago, and 44 percent in Illinois, were out of school and out of work in 2014, compared with 20 percent of Hispanic men and 10 percent of white men in the same age group, according to the report from the University of Illinois at Chicago's Great Cities Institute.

Ok so to get your 50% 47% you did the following:

cherry picked a single city in all of America,
cherry picked race,
chery picked age 20-24.

Bravo sir! You are totally not making shit up.

I gave you an example. And 47% of 20-24 could scare the shit out of you

What scares the shit out of me is that you have trouble understanding that carefully cherry picked example is not a good metric for national statistics.

We have a country full of people with very poor analytical skills, and gross misunderstandings about economic state of our country making what adds up to very important decisions.

75% of Trump voters thought employment got worse under Obama. Hell if I thought that was true I'd be desperate enough to vote for a ridiculous pussy grabber too.

Yes, you're ignoring a national catastrophe which you cause with your stupid minimum wage because you want to bicker over numbers

20-24 year old black males (forgot that you cherry picked sex too) in Chicago is not a NATIONAL problem, it is a problem in Chicago.

It is a REAL problem, but not representative of what is going on generally in America.

And the reason why you suddenly and VERY SPECIFICALLY care about Chicago's blacks is because they FIT YOUR FALSE THESIS.

I gave you an example. So you seriously believe it's completely different in other urban areas? So if I can show you it isn't just Chicago, you'll admit that we have a major crisis here Obama and the Democrats did nothing about or even acknowledge for eight years? What do you say?

You gave me a highly bias sample pretending to be national statistics.

It's a type of a lie.

 

[pinqy]

I gave you an example. And 47% of 20-24 could scare the shit out of you

What scares the shit out of me is that you have trouble understanding that carefully cherry picked example is not a good metric for national statistics.

We have a country full of people with very poor analytical skills, and gross misunderstandings about economic state of our country making what adds up to very important decisions.

75% of Trump voters thought employment got worse under Obama. Hell if I thought that was true I'd be desperate enough to vote for a ridiculous pussy grabber too.

Yes, you're ignoring a national catastrophe which you cause with your stupid minimum wage because you want to bicker over numbers

20-24 year old black males (forgot that you cherry picked sex too) in Chicago is not a NATIONAL problem, it is a problem in Chicago.

It is a REAL problem, but not representative of what is going on generally in America.

And the reason why you suddenly and VERY SPECIFICALLY care about Chicago's blacks is because they FIT YOUR FALSE THESIS.

I gave you an example. So you seriously believe it's completely different in other urban areas? So if I can show you it isn't just Chicago, you'll admit that we have a major crisis here Obama and the Democrats did nothing about or even acknowledge for eight years? What do you say?

You gave me a highly bias sample pretending to be national statistics.

It's a type of a lie.

Well, if we go to the national statistics, we can look at Blacks age 20-24 not enrolled in school and not working (32%), or Black men age 16-24 not enrolled in school (37%)
That's not working, not unemployed.