Unemployment rates were made worse by Bush, not Obama!

[bigrebnc1775]

If you're not going to count those out of work but only those out AND looking, it's not a realistic calculation. If you don't want to count those out of work but aren't looking, do so but don't be surprised if the rest of us who look at reality consider you a dumbass. Because someone doesn't want to work doesn't mean they don't count as being out of work. They can have all the desire not to work they want, let them starve. You probably think they deserve welfare, too.

Absolute unadulterated idiocy. 94% of the folks you identify as "out of work" don't actually want to work. This is why your ignorance on the subject outweighs your opinion.

Only an idiot like you would think someone out of work because they can 't find a job and someone out of work because they don't want a job is different. The RESULT, and that's what matters, is they are UNEMPLOYED and that's what an unemployment rate is supposed to measure.

I'm willing to bet you think the taxpayers should support those that don't want to work. I'll take your failure to respond to my claim that you do as proof that you do.

So were you bitching about Bush's 50% unemployment rate according to your standard?[/QUOTE

Never reached that level except to retards like you.

Never reached that level except to retards like you.

When you include Bush's 80 million not in the labor force as out of work unemployed, as you say should be done, in addition to those who make up the U-6 rate you get a 50% unemployment rate for Bush.

You're such a dumb ass obama holds the record for not participating in the work force it has never been this high not even close

Yeah, he broke Bush II's record, who broke Clinton's record, who broke Bush I's record who broke St Ronnie's record, and the next president will break Obama's record, no matter which Party they belong to and the following president will break that record also.

It is a meaningless record for a worthless stat, but it is all the worthless Right has.

Stop deflecting

 

[edthecynic]

Absolute unadulterated idiocy. 94% of the folks you identify as "out of work" don't actually want to work. This is why your ignorance on the subject outweighs your opinion.

Only an idiot like you would think someone out of work because they can 't find a job and someone out of work because they don't want a job is different. The RESULT, and that's what matters, is they are UNEMPLOYED and that's what an unemployment rate is supposed to measure.

I'm willing to bet you think the taxpayers should support those that don't want to work. I'll take your failure to respond to my claim that you do as proof that you do.

So were you bitching about Bush's 50% unemployment rate according to your standard?[/QUOTE

Never reached that level except to retards like you.

Never reached that level except to retards like you.

When you include Bush's 80 million not in the labor force as out of work unemployed, as you say should be done, in addition to those who make up the U-6 rate you get a 50% unemployment rate for Bush.

You're such a dumb ass obama holds the record for not participating in the work force it has never been this high not even close

Yeah, he broke Bush II's record, who broke Clinton's record, who broke Bush I's record who broke St Ronnie's record, and the next president will break Obama's record, no matter which Party they belong to and the following president will break that record also.

It is a meaningless record for a worthless stat, but it is all the worthless Right has.

Stop deflecting

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Only an idiot like you would think someone out of work because they can 't find a job and someone out of work because they don't want a job is different. The RESULT, and that's what matters, is they are UNEMPLOYED and that's what an unemployment rate is supposed to measure.

I'm willing to bet you think the taxpayers should support those that don't want to work. I'll take your failure to respond to my claim that you do as proof that you do.

So were you bitching about Bush's 50% unemployment rate according to your standard?[/QUOTE

Never reached that level except to retards like you.

When you include Bush's 80 million not in the labor force as out of work unemployed, as you say should be done, in addition to those who make up the U-6 rate you get a 50% unemployment rate for Bush.

You're such a dumb ass obama holds the record for not participating in the work force it has never been this high not even close

Yeah, he broke Bush II's record, who broke Clinton's record, who broke Bush I's record who broke St Ronnie's record, and the next president will break Obama's record, no matter which Party they belong to and the following president will break that record also.

It is a meaningless record for a worthless stat, but it is all the worthless Right has.

Stop deflecting

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

 

[edthecynic]

So were you bitching about Bush's 50% unemployment rate according to your standard?[/QUOTE

Never reached that level except to retards like you.

You're such a dumb ass obama holds the record for not participating in the work force it has never been this high not even close

Yeah, he broke Bush II's record, who broke Clinton's record, who broke Bush I's record who broke St Ronnie's record, and the next president will break Obama's record, no matter which Party they belong to and the following president will break that record also.

It is a meaningless record for a worthless stat, but it is all the worthless Right has.

Stop deflecting

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You're such a dumb ass obama holds the record for not participating in the work force it has never been this high not even close

Yeah, he broke Bush II's record, who broke Clinton's record, who broke Bush I's record who broke St Ronnie's record, and the next president will break Obama's record, no matter which Party they belong to and the following president will break that record also.

It is a meaningless record for a worthless stat, but it is all the worthless Right has.

Stop deflecting

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

 

[Conservative Kelsey]

Starting in Jan. 20, 2001, at the beginning of George W. Bush’s administration, the rate was 2.4 percent, but by the time he left in January 2009 it had reached 7 percent. The rate now is 5.9% and is on track to get even lower.

Very misleading information. Unemployment was in the 4% to 5% during the majority of Bush's presidency.

 

[JQPublic1]

Starting in Jan. 20, 2001, at the beginning of George W. Bush’s administration, the rate was 2.4 percent, but by the time he left in January 2009 it had reached 7 percent. The rate now is 5.9% and is on track to get even lower.

Very misleading information. Unemployment was in the 4% to 5% during the majority of Bush's presidency.

You appear to be confused. The op has been updated times but here is one of the latest updates:

The Unemployment Rate When Obama Took Office:

• For the record, when Obama took office in January 2009, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers was 7.8%, with 12,079,000 people reporting themselves as unemployedand actively looking. 142,153,000 people were working in January 2009.* (These numbers are adjusted slightly since original publication as the Bureau of Labor Statistics updates its numbers. The original January 2009 unemployment rate reported by the BLS in February 2009 was 7.6%)
• In "raw" numbers not adjusted for seasonal variance, the unemployment rate was 8.5% with 13,009,000 people reporting themselves as unemployed and actively looking for work. 140,436,000 people were working in numbers not adjusted for seasonal variance.

The Unemployment Rate at its Peak:

• At the "trough" (bottom in terms of jobs) of the recession in late 2009/early 2010, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers climbed to 10.0% in October 2009 with15,382,000 people (out of a labor force of 153,887,000) reporting themselves as unemployed. 138,421,000 were working in October 2009; however, the lowest number of people working was reported in December 2009, when 138,025,000people (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were working.
• In "raw" numbers not adjusted for seasonal variance, the unemployment rate reached a peak of 10.6% in January 2010 with 16,147,000(out of a labor force of 152,957,000) reporting themselves as unemployed and actively looking for work. Only 136,809,000were working (in "raw" unadjusted numbers) in January 2010.

The Unemployment Rate NOW:

• Now, in September 2014, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers is 5.9%, with 9,262,000 (out of a large labor force of 155,862,000) unemployed and actively looking for work. 146,600,000 people are working now. (Last month 146,368,000 were working. This is an increase of 232,000people working in seasonally adjusted numbers.) The unemployment rate decreased 0.2% to 5.9% as the number of unemployed decreased by 80,000. The labor force DECREASED by 64,000 people in September. We have 524,000more people in the labor force than we did in September 2013, 2,189,000more people are employed than a year ago, and 1,665,000fewer people are unemployed than we were unemployed a year ago in September 2013. (The unemployment rate has now decreased 1.1% in the year since September 2013.)

The op is not about Bush's average UE, it's about the UE he passed onto Obama. The opening sentence of the above document clearly points that out!

 

[edthecynic]

Starting in Jan. 20, 2001, at the beginning of George W. Bush’s administration, the rate was 2.4 percent, but by the time he left in January 2009 it had reached 7 percent. The rate now is 5.9% and is on track to get even lower.

Very misleading information. Unemployment was in the 4% to 5% during the majority of Bush's presidency.

Only after he "fudged" the numbers when he moved 10 million people to the "not in labor force" category (and he didn't have Boomers retiring). Bush's "REAL" rate was 27%.

 

[edthecynic]

Yeah, he broke Bush II's record, who broke Clinton's record, who broke Bush I's record who broke St Ronnie's record, and the next president will break Obama's record, no matter which Party they belong to and the following president will break that record also.

It is a meaningless record for a worthless stat, but it is all the worthless Right has.

Stop deflecting

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

 

[JQPublic1]

Stop deflecting

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

It won't matter to us and our contemporaries because the next republican presidency probably won't occur for several decades!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Stop deflecting

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

How so at 62.8 percent, the participation rate matches the lowest since March 1978.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

It won't matter to us and our contemporaries because the next republican presidency probably won't occur for several decades!

when you dream son you might as well dream big. you still don't get it. obamacare has been moved back so many times the effect hasn't hit yet. democrats will be lucky to be alive much less running for politics.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Starting in Jan. 20, 2001, at the beginning of George W. Bush’s administration, the rate was 2.4 percent, but by the time he left in January 2009 it had reached 7 percent. The rate now is 5.9% and is on track to get even lower.

Very misleading information. Unemployment was in the 4% to 5% during the majority of Bush's presidency.

You appear to be confused. The op has been updated times but here is one of the latest updates:

The Unemployment Rate When Obama Took Office:

• For the record, when Obama took office in January 2009, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers was 7.8%, with 12,079,000 people reporting themselves as unemployedand actively looking. 142,153,000 people were working in January 2009.* (These numbers are adjusted slightly since original publication as the Bureau of Labor Statistics updates its numbers. The original January 2009 unemployment rate reported by the BLS in February 2009 was 7.6%)
• In "raw" numbers not adjusted for seasonal variance, the unemployment rate was 8.5% with 13,009,000 people reporting themselves as unemployed and actively looking for work. 140,436,000 people were working in numbers not adjusted for seasonal variance.

The Unemployment Rate at its Peak:

• At the "trough" (bottom in terms of jobs) of the recession in late 2009/early 2010, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers climbed to 10.0% in October 2009 with15,382,000 people (out of a labor force of 153,887,000) reporting themselves as unemployed. 138,421,000 were working in October 2009; however, the lowest number of people working was reported in December 2009, when 138,025,000people (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were working.
• In "raw" numbers not adjusted for seasonal variance, the unemployment rate reached a peak of 10.6% in January 2010 with 16,147,000(out of a labor force of 152,957,000) reporting themselves as unemployed and actively looking for work. Only 136,809,000were working (in "raw" unadjusted numbers) in January 2010.

The Unemployment Rate NOW:

• Now, in September 2014, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers is 5.9%, with 9,262,000 (out of a large labor force of 155,862,000) unemployed and actively looking for work. 146,600,000 people are working now. (Last month 146,368,000 were working. This is an increase of 232,000people working in seasonally adjusted numbers.) The unemployment rate decreased 0.2% to 5.9% as the number of unemployed decreased by 80,000. The labor force DECREASED by 64,000 people in September. We have 524,000more people in the labor force than we did in September 2013, 2,189,000more people are employed than a year ago, and 1,665,000fewer people are unemployed than we were unemployed a year ago in September 2013. (The unemployment rate has now decreased 1.1% in the year since September 2013.)

The op is not about Bush's average UE, it's about the UE he passed onto Obama. The opening sentence of the above document clearly points that out!

It's amazing how they can cooked those numbers and you'll believe it.

 

[edthecynic]

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

How so at 62.8 percent, the participation rate matches the lowest since March 1978.

Well, there you go again, changing what you said, only this time you disproved yourself no matter which way you spin it. You said Obama set the "not in labor force" record and I pointed out that the not in labor force has grown with population for every president since the data was kept starting 1947 and therefore every president leaves office as the new record holder.

You now have shifted from the total not in the labor force "record" to the LPR, but then you admit the LPR was lower before 1978 so then you were lying when you said Obama was the record holder if you are now claiming you meant LPR when you said the total not in labor force record.

Weasel your way out of this dilemma you have put yourself in!

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
Set the start date for 1947

 

[Faun]

Stop deflecting

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

If a Republican becomes president, then you can expect them to accept the fact that retiring baby boomers are driving down that rate.

 

[Faun]

Funny how you hypocrites never attacked Reagan every time he set a new "not participating" record. And not a peep as both Bushes set new "not participating" records.

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

How so at 62.8 percent, the participation rate matches the lowest since March 1978.

That chart shows it began dropping in 2001 ... how come you righties never talked about it until around 2009?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

How so at 62.8 percent, the participation rate matches the lowest since March 1978.

Well, there you go again, changing what you said, only this time you disproved yourself no matter which way you spin it. You said Obama set the "not in labor force" record and I pointed out that the not in labor force has grown with population for every president since the data was kept starting 1947 and therefore every president leaves office as the new record holder.

You now have shifted from the total not in the labor force "record" to the LPR, but then you admit the LPR was lower before 1978 so then you were lying when you said Obama was the record holder if you are now claiming you meant LPR when you said the total not in labor force record.

Weasel your way out of this dilemma you have put yourself in!

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
Set the start date for 1947

Dumb ass obama supporter I haven;'t changed a damn thing.
Lying sack of shit.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Once again obama holds the record shut the **** you you skank dipshit.

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

How so at 62.8 percent, the participation rate matches the lowest since March 1978.

That chart shows it began dropping in 2001 ... how come you righties never talked about it until around 2009?

Sorry buba obama has a record low have not seen this since 1973 DON'T LIKE IT? I DON'T GIVE A **** YOU SUPPORTED THIS NOW DEAL WITH IT.

 

[Faun]

A record as significant as when Reagan held it and when Bush held it.

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

How so at 62.8 percent, the participation rate matches the lowest since March 1978.

That chart shows it began dropping in 2001 ... how come you righties never talked about it until around 2009?

Sorry buba obama has a record low have not seen this since 1973 DON'T LIKE IT? I DON'T GIVE A **** YOU SUPPORTED THIS NOW DEAL WITH IT.

So no answer to my question, in other words. No worries, rightie, your refusal to address my question just answered for you.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

obama hold's that record alone.

Every president holds that record as the population grows. The next GOP president will hold it but suddenly it won't matter again.

How so at 62.8 percent, the participation rate matches the lowest since March 1978.

That chart shows it began dropping in 2001 ... how come you righties never talked about it until around 2009?

Sorry buba obama has a record low have not seen this since 1973 DON'T LIKE IT? I DON'T GIVE A **** YOU SUPPORTED THIS NOW DEAL WITH IT.

So no answer to my question, in other words. No worries, rightie, your refusal to address my question just answered for you.

C A N Y O U C O M P R E H E N D T H I S?
"Sorry buba obama has a record low have not seen this since 1973 DON'T LIKE IT? I DON'T GIVE A **** YOU SUPPORTED THIS NOW DEAL WITH IT"
What ever you have to say about Bush is irrelevant because the fact is this obama has a record low have not seen this since 1973
THE END.