Unexpected unemployment rise

[Annie]

It would help if you knew what the hell you're talking about. Stagflation refers to a period in which both inflation and unemployment are increase. Where is the inflation right now? O yeah... nonexistent.

Check inflation rate with costs for energy and food counted in. The government may dismiss because of 'volatility', Yet the consumer pays for them:

News Headlines

Jobless Claims, Inflation Jump as Economy Wobbles
ECONOMY, JOBLESS CLAIMS, EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT, LABOR DEPARTMENT
Reuters
| 18 Feb 2010 | 08:39 AM ET
The number of U.S. workers filing new applications for unemployment insurance unexpectedly surged last week, while producer prices increased sharply in January, raising potential hurdles for the economic recovery.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits increased 31,000 to 473,000, the Labor Department said on Thursday. That compared to market expectations for 430,000.

Another report from the department showed prices paid at the farm and factory gate rose a faster than expected 1.4 percent from December after a 0.4 percent gain in December, as higher gasoline prices and unusually cold temperatures helped boost energy costs.

"When you have PPI moving up and still no progress in the jobs situation, that doesn't bode well for continued improvement in equity prices," said Alan Lancz, president at Alan B. Lancz & Associates in Toledo, Ohio.

...

1.4 percent? Yeah, it is really clear that you have no clue what you're talking about. Do you know what the normal inflation rate is in a healthy economy? 2.0 percent.

And what direction is it moving in? You should be concerned.

 

[pinqy]

Sorry....all those imaginary jobs you are dreaaming of just don't exist...try again.

What the fuck are you talking about? Let's see..first you pussy out because you can't back up your false claim that I said we were in a recovery. Then, when I talk about what will happen when the economy eventually recovers you say "those imaginary jobs don't exist?" What the hell does that mean? I'm not saying there are any jobs right now, dumbass.

I don't have to prove shit dumb ass...

Oh, then neither do I. You've said you like to give blow jobs to sheep. Gee that's easy to make up stuff and then insist it's true.

all I have to do is point at Obama's record so far and all of the lies he and people like you tell others

What on earth does what Obama say have to do with what I say? And you can't show that I've said a single lie.

[quot].....your boss is saying we are out of the woods, jobs are here, money is here for businesses....[/quote]But I never have...so quit saying I have.

yet unemployment only changes when massive numbers of people quit looking for work alltogether.

No, unemployment changes for lots of reasons. In January, the labor force actually grew, though part of that is due to adjustments to population controls.

Several weeks ago in a different thread on jobs you said we are beginning the recovery, that's why we see the creation of jobs. Then after the Christmas season we see reality set back in.

No, I didn't. I said I would expect to see temp jobs at the beginning of a recovery. Which is true, I would. It was possible evidence. But I never said that we were definitely in a recovery, unlike the Obama administration.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

What the fuck are you talking about? Let's see..first you pussy out because you can't back up your false claim that I said we were in a recovery. Then, when I talk about what will happen when the economy eventually recovers you say "those imaginary jobs don't exist?" What the hell does that mean? I'm not saying there are any jobs right now, dumbass.

I don't have to prove shit dumb ass...

Oh, then neither do I. You've said you like to give blow jobs to sheep. Gee that's easy to make up stuff and then insist it's true.



What on earth does what Obama say have to do with what I say? And you can't show that I've said a single lie.

[quot].....your boss is saying we are out of the woods, jobs are here, money is here for businesses....

But I never have...so quit saying I have.

yet unemployment only changes when massive numbers of people quit looking for work alltogether.

No, unemployment changes for lots of reasons. In January, the labor force actually grew, though part of that is due to adjustments to population controls.

Several weeks ago in a different thread on jobs you said we are beginning the recovery, that's why we see the creation of jobs. Then after the Christmas season we see reality set back in.

No, I didn't. I said I would expect to see temp jobs at the beginning of a recovery. Which is true, I would. It was possible evidence. But I never said that we were definitely in a recovery, unlike the Obama administration.[/QUOTE]

It was possible evidence

It never fails....you guys always trip yourselves up.

Thank you for admitting I was correct.....

and please get help for your deviant sexual fantasies you project on other people.....Christ you Obamabots are some pretty sick fuckers.

 

[Polk]

What lie? Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's a lie.

 

[pinqy]

I don't have to prove shit dumb ass...

Oh, then neither do I. You've said you like to give blow jobs to sheep. Gee that's easy to make up stuff and then insist it's true.



What on earth does what Obama say have to do with what I say? And you can't show that I've said a single lie.

[quot].....your boss is saying we are out of the woods, jobs are here, money is here for businesses....

But I never have...so quit saying I have.

No, unemployment changes for lots of reasons. In January, the labor force actually grew, though part of that is due to adjustments to population controls.

Several weeks ago in a different thread on jobs you said we are beginning the recovery, that's why we see the creation of jobs. Then after the Christmas season we see reality set back in.

No, I didn't. I said I would expect to see temp jobs at the beginning of a recovery. Which is true, I would. It was possible evidence. But I never said that we were definitely in a recovery, unlike the Obama administration.

It was possible evidence

It never fails....you guys always trip yourselves up.

Thank you for admitting I was correct.....[/QUOTE]

But you're not correct, and I did not trip myself up. Saying "possible evidence" for a recovery is NOT saying we are in a recovery. You can't possibly be dumb enough to think they're the same.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Oh, then neither do I. You've said you like to give blow jobs to sheep. Gee that's easy to make up stuff and then insist it's true.



What on earth does what Obama say have to do with what I say? And you can't show that I've said a single lie.

[quot].....your boss is saying we are out of the woods, jobs are here, money is here for businesses....

But I never have...so quit saying I have.

No, unemployment changes for lots of reasons. In January, the labor force actually grew, though part of that is due to adjustments to population controls.

No, I didn't. I said I would expect to see temp jobs at the beginning of a recovery. Which is true, I would. It was possible evidence. But I never said that we were definitely in a recovery, unlike the Obama administration.

It was possible evidence

It never fails....you guys always trip yourselves up.

Thank you for admitting I was correct.....

But you're not correct, and I did not trip myself up. Saying "possible evidence" for a recovery is NOT saying we are in a recovery. You can't possibly be dumb enough to think they're the same.

[/QUOTE]
Uhhhh....yeah.....you did. ..... but that's OK. You Obama Admin guys do that a lot...especially the last few months.

 

[pinqy]

Uhhhh....yeah.....you did. ..... but that's OK. You Obama Admin guys do that a lot...especially the last few months.

Ok, show me where I said we were in a recovery. I looked, I didn't say it. I honestly don't know if we are or not...there are some slightly positive signs, but nothing solid yet.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Uhhhh....yeah.....you did. ..... but that's OK. You Obama Admin guys do that a lot...especially the last few months.

Ok, show me where I said we were in a recovery. I looked, I didn't say it. I honestly don't know if we are or not...there are some slightly positive signs, but nothing solid yet.

You said we were seeing "possible evidence of a recovery" which means basically you don't know what's going on either...thanks for playing.

 

[pinqy]

Uhhhh....yeah.....you did. ..... but that's OK. You Obama Admin guys do that a lot...especially the last few months.

Ok, show me where I said we were in a recovery. I looked, I didn't say it. I honestly don't know if we are or not...there are some slightly positive signs, but nothing solid yet.

You said we were seeing "possible evidence of a recovery" which means basically you don't know what's going on either...thanks for playing.

Which is not the same as saying we're in a recovery. Thanks for admitting I was right. Your apology for mischaracterizing my position is accepted.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Ok, show me where I said we were in a recovery. I looked, I didn't say it. I honestly don't know if we are or not...there are some slightly positive signs, but nothing solid yet.

You said we were seeing "possible evidence of a recovery" which means basically you don't know what's going on either...thanks for playing.

Which is not the same as saying we're in a recovery. Thanks for admitting I was right. Your apology for mischaracterizing my position is accepted.

The only thing I said in my last post was you don't know jack shit about what you pretend to be an expert on. So please .... continue to make a fool out of yourself by spinning, parsing words and deflecting. It's what you guys in the Obama Administration do best...lie to the American public.

 

[Meister]

Ok, show me where I said we were in a recovery. I looked, I didn't say it. I honestly don't know if we are or not...there are some slightly positive signs, but nothing solid yet.

You said we were seeing "possible evidence of a recovery" which means basically you don't know what's going on either...thanks for playing.

Which is not the same as saying we're in a recovery. Thanks for admitting I was right. Your apology for mischaracterizing my position is accepted.

WOW!....that's what you go out that, huh?
Poor attempt at deflecting

 

[pinqy]

You said we were seeing "possible evidence of a recovery" which means basically you don't know what's going on either...thanks for playing.

Which is not the same as saying we're in a recovery. Thanks for admitting I was right. Your apology for mischaracterizing my position is accepted.

WOW!....that's what you go out that, huh?
Poor attempt at deflecting

What's with the poor reading comprehension? Are you also claiming that "possible evidence of a recovery" is the same thing as "we're in a recovery?"

 

[FireFly]

you mean it goes up and down and that is unexpected?

THAT FAKE ASS CHART IS A TOTAL LIE YOU DUMB-ASS.
Here is the real chart from The US Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor & Statistics

Recovery My Ass, Obama has US on the Road to Ruin!

 

[Ame®icano]

Also, the relevant number is CPI (not PPI, which is what you're quoting) and guess what...

The cost of living in the United States remained steady in January, the Department of Labor said, with the price of a variety of goods — including medical expenses and cigarettes — increasing 0.2 percent. A closely watched measure that excludes volatile food and fuel prices, the cost of living underscored the downward trend: it fell 0.1 percent in January, the first decrease since the recession in 1982.

U.S. Inflation Report Gives Fed Breathing Room - NYTimes.com

This is obvious sign that economy is recovering. Let's celebrate.

 

[pinqy]

THAT FAKE ASS CHART IS A TOTAL LIE YOU DUMB-ASS.
Here is the real chart from The US Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor & Statistics

First, it's the Bureau of Labor Statistics, not "Labor & Statistics. Next, the first chart accurately shows the numbers from the Current Employment Statistics survey. It's showing the net job loss each month. You're showing the employment population ratio which comes from the Current Population Survey. So the charts aren't even comparable.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

you mean it goes up and down and that is unexpected?

THAT FAKE ASS CHART IS A TOTAL LIE YOU DUMB-ASS.
Here is the real chart from The US Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor & Statistics

Recovery My Ass, Obama has US on the Road to Ruin!

I would tend to lend more credence to this chart as it clearly reflects the shrinking employment pool. The more jobs that are outsourced overseas, the more people give up on looking for work the smaller the labor poll is compared to the population of the U.S. The unemployment figures from BLS don't reflect this as the people who quit looking for work are not counted.

 

[KissMy]

you mean it goes up and down and that is unexpected?

THAT FAKE ASS CHART IS A TOTAL LIE YOU DUMB-ASS.
Here is the real chart from The US Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor & Statistics

Recovery My Ass, Obama has US on the Road to Ruin!

THAT FAKE ASS CHART IS A TOTAL LIE YOU DUMB-ASS.
Here is the real chart from The US Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor & Statistics

First, it's the Bureau of Labor Statistics, not "Labor & Statistics. Next, the first chart accurately shows the numbers from the Current Employment Statistics survey. It's showing the net job loss each month. You're showing the employment population ratio which comes from the Current Population Survey. So the charts aren't even comparable.

Jay Canuck chart is a LIE because there are a million unemployed seasonally adjusted off the unemployment numbers. pinqy & Jay Canuck had best get the facts straight & stop regurgitating propaganda.

 

[pinqy]

Jay Canuck chart is a LIE because there are a million unemployed seasonally adjusted off the unemployment numbers. .

Except the chart isn't of the unemployment numbers. It has nothing to do with the unemployment numbers. It's from a completely different survey.

And you clearly don't understand seasonal adjustment. if I said the ocean levels were getting lower and you went out at low tide and then high tide to measure, would you claim that was an accurate measure showing the ocean level was getting higher? It's the same thing.

 

[KissMy]

Jay Canuck chart is a LIE because there are a million unemployed seasonally adjusted off the unemployment numbers. .

Except the chart isn't of the unemployment numbers. It has nothing to do with the unemployment numbers. It's from a completely different survey.

And you clearly don't understand seasonal adjustment. if I said the ocean levels were getting lower and you went out at low tide and then high tide to measure, would you claim that was an accurate measure showing the ocean level was getting higher? It's the same thing.

Another lie to cover Obamas ass. On the chart below notice how after Ovomit took office the seasonally adjusted line went from choppy to smooth & steeply up. Then for the first time in history on an unemployment spike the seasonally adjusted line went way above the actual not-seasonally adjusted line instead of holding below as it always has before. This scam was to make the headline number appear far worse than actual so he could blame it on Bush. Then he had VP Joe Biden go on TV & say "The economy is in much worse shape than we thought it was in" Then in March Obama has "The Working Group" buy the stock market up to 10,000 & holding. After that the adjusted numbers go down against the unadjusted numbers to make unemployment appear to drop while it continued to climb. The discrepancy is the largest in history & is now up to 1 million. Please continue to kiss Obamas ass, because it makes for great humor.

 

[Ame®icano]

In the other news, there is unexpected drop at the Obama job approval polls.