Unemployment rates were made worse by Bush, not Obama!

[pinqy]

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.

The average participation rate in 1973 was 60.8%, while the Current rate is 62.7%

 

[Faun]

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.

I comprehend that the LFPR only became a problem for the brain-dead right once a Democrat became president. Prior to that, y'all didn't give two shits that the rate had been dropping.

At any rate, you can't even explain how the LFPR is a negative indicator on the economy, so what difference does it make?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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.

The average participation rate in 1973 was 60.8%, while the Current rate is 62.7%

Shut the **** up you lying sack of shit. Here's another one.
Labor Force Participation Hits Record Low for Americans in Their 20s CNS News
the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

You fucked up obama supporters need to shut the **** up with your lies.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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.

I comprehend that the LFPR only became a problem for the brain-dead right once a Democrat became president. Prior to that, y'all didn't give two shits that the rate had been dropping.

At any rate, you can't even explain how the LFPR is a negative indicator on the economy, so what difference does it make?

You don't comprehend a god damn thing are you digest is talking points fro your dumb ass handlers
And why do I call them dumb ass, because they send an idiot like you out to spread their message

 

[Faun]

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.

The average participation rate in 1973 was 60.8%, while the Current rate is 62.7%

Shut the **** up you lying sack of shit. Here's another one.
Labor Force Participation Hits Record Low for Americans in Their 20s CNS News
the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

You fucked up obama supporters need to shut the **** up with your lies.

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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.

The average participation rate in 1973 was 60.8%, while the Current rate is 62.7%

Shut the **** up you lying sack of shit. Here's another one.
Labor Force Participation Hits Record Low for Americans in Their 20s CNS News
the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

You fucked up obama supporters need to shut the **** up with your lies.

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

 

[Faun]

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.

The average participation rate in 1973 was 60.8%, while the Current rate is 62.7%

Shut the **** up you lying sack of shit. Here's another one.
Labor Force Participation Hits Record Low for Americans in Their 20s CNS News
the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

You fucked up obama supporters need to shut the **** up with your lies.

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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.

The average participation rate in 1973 was 60.8%, while the Current rate is 62.7%

Shut the **** up you lying sack of shit. Here's another one.
Labor Force Participation Hits Record Low for Americans in Their 20s CNS News
the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

You fucked up obama supporters need to shut the **** up with your lies.

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

Get over it obama has the record 92 BILLION Americans are not working A RECORD

 

[Faun]

The average participation rate in 1973 was 60.8%, while the Current rate is 62.7%

Shut the **** up you lying sack of shit. Here's another one.
Labor Force Participation Hits Record Low for Americans in Their 20s CNS News
the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

You fucked up obama supporters need to shut the **** up with your lies.

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

Get over it obama has the record 92 BILLION Americans are not working A RECORD

92 BILLION, huh? This is why you shouldn't post and smoke crack at the same time.

At any rate, 94% of those who are not in the labor force don't want to work.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Shut the **** up you lying sack of shit. Here's another one.
Labor Force Participation Hits Record Low for Americans in Their 20s CNS News
the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

You fucked up obama supporters need to shut the **** up with your lies.

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

Get over it obama has the record 92 BILLION Americans are not working A RECORD

So? 94% of them don't want to work.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

92 MILLION CHERISH THIS MOMENT OBAMA HAS A RECORD. It will never happen again unless you idiots help elect another moron.
I'll be back to kick your dumb ass some more

 

[pinqy]

The average participation rate in 1973 was 60.8%, while the Current rate is 62.7%

Shut the **** up you lying sack of shit. Here's another one.
Labor Force Participation Hits Record Low for Americans in Their 20s CNS News
the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

You fucked up obama supporters need to shut the **** up with your lies.

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

Get over it obama has the record 92 BILLION Americans are not working A RECORD

So, out of 315 million people in the U.S. there are 92 billion not working. That's 29,000% of the US…and 13 times the world population

 

[Faun]

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

Get over it obama has the record 92 BILLION Americans are not working A RECORD

So? 94% of them don't want to work.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

92 MILLION CHERISH THIS MOMENT OBAMA HAS A RECORD. It will never happen again unless you idiots help elect another moron.
I'll be back to kick your dumb ass some more

Really, that record won't be broken if a Republican is elected???

Well let's look at it historically, before I give my vote to the Republican candidate in 2016 ...

From what I see, the BLS has been tracking "not in the labor force" since 1975 (at least that's as far back as their data goes). Let's take a look at all the Republican presidents since then, shall we?

Ford, he had a record high of 60,480,000 during his presidency ....
Reagan broke the record when it hit 63,324,000 in 1984....
Bush Sr. broke that record with 65,562,000 in his last month in office ...
Bush Jr. shattered the record with 80,529,000 by the end of his presidency...

... so no, I have zero faith you are speaking honestly or truthfully.

 

[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!

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

And what analytical methodology did you employ to arrive at that conclusion? Surely you didn't use the "cooked" numbers of Limbaugh, Hannity or the Heritage Foundation, did you?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist." -- Hal Lewis, not part of the 97%

US physics professor Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life 8211 Telegraph Blogs

 

[edthecynic]

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.

If it was lower before 1973, then it is not a "RECORD" low.

 

[edthecynic]

Moron, those 92.6 million people include 86½ million people who don't want to work. People like housewives who are finically supported by their husbands (or visa-versa), people like teenagers in high school who are financially supported by their parents, people like retiring baby boomers who are financially supported by their life-savings and social security. Only a flaming imbecile of the highest magnitude would scream that people who don't want to work should be considered in the unemployment rate.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

Get over it obama has the record 92 BILLION Americans are not working A RECORD

So? 94% of them don't want to work.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

92 MILLION CHERISH THIS MOMENT OBAMA HAS A RECORD. It will never happen again unless you idiots help elect another moron.
I'll be back to kick your dumb ass some more

BULLSHIT!

A new "record" will happen again and again! No matter who is president as long as the population keeps growing each president will leave office with the new record, as has happened with EVERY president since they started keeping track in 1947.

 

[edthecynic]

No it does not dumb ass. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's still a lie.

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

Get over it obama has the record 92 BILLION Americans are not working A RECORD

So? 94% of them don't want to work.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

92 MILLION CHERISH THIS MOMENT OBAMA HAS A RECORD. It will never happen again unless you idiots help elect another moron.
I'll be back to kick your dumb ass some more

Really, that record won't be broken if a Republican is elected???

Well let's look at it historically, before I give my vote to the Republican candidate in 2016 ...

From what I see, the BLS has been tracking "not in the labor force" since 1975 (at least that's as far back as their data goes). Let's take a look at all the Republican presidents since then, shall we?

Ford, he had a record high of 60,480,000 during his presidency ....
Reagan broke the record when it hit 63,324,000 in 1984....
Bush Sr. broke that record with 65,562,000 in his last month in office ...
Bush Jr. shattered the record with 80,529,000 by the end of his presidency...

... so no, I have zero faith you are speaking honestly or truthfully.

Actually, the pattern you point out goes back to 1947.

You have to reset the start date 2004 to 1947 and click on "go" using the link below.
I'm pointing that out for minirebnc, not for you because he would never be able to figure it out for himself.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[Londoner]

I

Yes, the housing bubble, which Democrats played a major role in creating did cause unemployment to go up during the Bush years. The most notable thing is how long recovery has taken under Obama. Due to poor policy decision this has been a very drawn out and poor recovery.

Yes, of course the Dems played a major role. This is not a revelation. Problem is, the Right has not taken its share of responsibility for the Housing Bubble. They controlled all of Washington for much of the Bush presidency, yet they blame Clinton for everything. (Oddly, the Left can't blame Bush for anything, including things that happened during his presidency).

If you want to understand the central cause of the housing bubble, listen to George W Bush.

He spells out his plan very clearly.

(While FOX News was distracting us with color coded hysteria, this man ignited a nuclear bomb over the American Economy. He destroyed this Great Nation. Have the courage to do what you want the Left to do. Have the courage to own the mistakes made by your party. Only then can we take you seriously)



Still Carter's faults.

Still Clinton's fault.

NEVER, and I mean never, Bush's fault.

(never)

(cue laugh track)

 

[Faun]

And yet, YOUR source for that 92.6 figure, the BLS, say it does. Whassamatter, ijit? You don't believe your own source??

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

Get over it obama has the record 92 BILLION Americans are not working A RECORD

So? 94% of them don't want to work.

And I point out again that you are incapable of demonstrating that the LFPR is a negative indicator of the economy.

92 MILLION CHERISH THIS MOMENT OBAMA HAS A RECORD. It will never happen again unless you idiots help elect another moron.
I'll be back to kick your dumb ass some more

Really, that record won't be broken if a Republican is elected???

Well let's look at it historically, before I give my vote to the Republican candidate in 2016 ...

From what I see, the BLS has been tracking "not in the labor force" since 1975 (at least that's as far back as their data goes). Let's take a look at all the Republican presidents since then, shall we?

Ford, he had a record high of 60,480,000 during his presidency ....
Reagan broke the record when it hit 63,324,000 in 1984....
Bush Sr. broke that record with 65,562,000 in his last month in office ...
Bush Jr. shattered the record with 80,529,000 by the end of his presidency...

... so no, I have zero faith you are speaking honestly or truthfully.

Actually, the pattern you point out goes back to 1947.

You have to reset the start date 2004 to 1947 and click on "go" using the link below.
I'm pointing that out for minirebnc, not for you because he would never be able to figure it out for himself.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

I see that I was looking at seasonally adjusted data. Non-seasonally adjusted data does go back further.

 

[theHawk]

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.

The unemployment rate was never 2.4%, not even close.

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

The only reason that the rate is currently going "down" is because so many people dropped out of the labor workforce and are no longer looking for jobs. Only a liberal hack would gloat about such an "accomplishment".