US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

[Faun]

Your neighbor is caught in the unemployment problem from the Great Republican Recession of 2008.

You're caught in the "I'm a hack and bend reality to fit my partisan perspective loop."

Unemployment peaked in 2011 during the Obama recession, what followed is under-employment. With the Obama administration using a 30 hour week as the floor for "full time" for purposes of Fascistcare, employers across the nation slashed hours to avoid that fiasco.


Obama's trail of victims are all those who were fully employed, but now need multiple jobs to earn the income lost due to the foolish policies of your little tin god.

Now, since that recession was handed over to the obama economic team, the rate of unemployment has gone from 10% to 5%, which is a REALLY< REALLY low rate. If your neighbor is having issues getting a job, it probably makes sense to not blame the person who has been making every effort to make unemployment better. But, it is a free world.
What is it that Republicans did to help the economy? They have owned congress for going on 6 years, so they could do something if they cared about people like your neighbor. The very wealthy, who they do indeed care about, have gotten much richer.

The economy didn't start to recover at all until the Republicans took the house. Looks like they did a great deal to help the economy.

You're ******* insane.

Unemployment peaked in October, 2009.

 

[Oldstyle]

Bush is the President who gave us TARP which is the one policy that actually DID prevent the economy from "cratering". You'd grasp that concept if you really DID know anything about economics or what took place during that economic meltdown! Bush is also the only President who warned that what we were doing with housing, Fannie Mai and Freddie Mac was dangerous for our financial institutions. You didn't hear that from Carter, Reagan, HW Bush or Clinton.

Proving you are a con tool, you make it sound like bush was trying to do something about his economic disaster. He was doing little. He saved a number of banks, made most richer than ever, but did little else. Nearly nothing. He was not part of the stimulus package, or any other economic effort to stop the disaster that was his. What saved us from a new Republican Depression was the Stimulus program, primarily And nothing else. There were exactly zero bills put forward by the republicans, but multiple efforts at stoping any bills put forward by the president.
There was, me boy, exactly one remaining effort to speed up the effects of the recession. And republicans voted against that effort every single time and with every single republican congressman voting to stop progress.

Bush did do something about the economic meltdown...he incurred the wrath of many conservatives by pushing TARP through.

Yes he did. And he did nothing the for mainstreet. And the american public by being unable to stop the worst recession since the great Republican Depression of 1929. So, yup, that is it. He did something AFTER the cow was out of the barn. Nice. So, are you just trying to say his heart was in the right place??

So first you declare that Bush did nothing to counter the economic downturn. I point out that Bush pushed TARP through...something that was crucial at stabilizing the economy at it's worst point and something that Obama continued during his Presidency...and you declare that Bush only did something "AFTER the cow was out of the barn"? TARP ended up having more of an influence on the recovery than the Obama Stimulus (Barry's STILL looking for those "shovel ready" jobs!) and TARP was all W. Can't give him credit for it though...can you?

Ah, but I did give him credit. It was october of 2008. He pushed through a bill worked over by congress to try and save the country from a disaster that was already underway. But, perhaps you can find an IMPARTIAL source that says TARP saved the economy, and that the Stimulus did not. You will not find it, me boy, because it is untrue. Only the bat shit crazy con web sites say that.

Here, me boy, is an impartial link (I know, you hate those) that scores the Stimulus:
Of all the myths and falsehoods that Republicans have spread about President Obama, the most pernicious and long-lasting is that the $832 billion stimulus package did not work. Since 2009, Republican lawmakers have inextricably linked the words “failed” and “stimulus,” and last week, five years after passage of the Recovery Act, they dusted off their old playbook again.

“The ‘stimulus’ has turned out to be a classic case of big promises and big spending with little results,” wrote Speaker John Boehner. “Five years and hundreds of billions of dollars later, millions of families are still asking, ‘where are the jobs?’ ”

The stimulus could have done more good had it been bigger and more carefully constructed. But put simply, it prevented a second recession that could have turned into a depression. It created or saved an average of 1.6 million jobs a year for four years. (There are the jobs, Mr. Boehner.) It raised the nation’s economic output by 2 to 3 percent from 2009 to 2011. It prevented a significant increase in poverty — without it, 5.3 million additional people would have become poor in 2010.

Now I understand, Oldstyle, that this study, and many more, from an impartial source, does not match the conservative talking points and the millions of dollars that have been spent lying about the Stimulus, But that is the truth. And don't we all want to find the truth. Oldstyle?
Relative to TARP and W, it is absolutely true that W signed the bill into law. That was required, me boy, since we only had one President, and it was W. But the bill was put together by congress. Representatives and Senators. Like always. And the Republicans VOTED AGAINST TARP. HAD IT BEEN LEFT TO THEM, TARP WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. TARP was a bill crafted by congress, and signed by W. We all understand that simple fact, me boy. But where you get the idea that TARP was a great success and the Stimulus failed is nuts. Except, of course, that it lines up perfectly with the hundreds of adds and the talking points of over 100 nut case crazy con web sits. But it does NOT line up with the hundreds of impartial sites that have worked to score the Stimulus. So, we can believe you, or the CBO (and many others)! My money is on the CBO.

What's amusing is that you STILL buy the line of crap you were fed by the Obama Administration with "jobs created or saved", Rshermr but think anyone who tells you that you were deliberately misled...is a "liar".

And all the CBO reports ever REALLY told us was that unemployment would have been higher if the Federal Government hadn't spent billions of dollars on stimulus! Does that surprise you for some reason? What each job created by the stimulus ended up costing the American taxpayer is another matter though...isn't it? Yet ideologues like yourself use the CBO reports as "proof" that the stimulus was a success! All I can say is if THAT is success...then you set the bar for that about as low as it can get!

 

[Oldstyle]

Your neighbor is caught in the unemployment problem from the Great Republican Recession of 2008.

You're caught in the "I'm a hack and bend reality to fit my partisan perspective loop."

Unemployment peaked in 2011 during the Obama recession, what followed is under-employment. With the Obama administration using a 30 hour week as the floor for "full time" for purposes of Fascistcare, employers across the nation slashed hours to avoid that fiasco.


Obama's trail of victims are all those who were fully employed, but now need multiple jobs to earn the income lost due to the foolish policies of your little tin god.

Now, since that recession was handed over to the obama economic team, the rate of unemployment has gone from 10% to 5%, which is a REALLY< REALLY low rate. If your neighbor is having issues getting a job, it probably makes sense to not blame the person who has been making every effort to make unemployment better. But, it is a free world.
What is it that Republicans did to help the economy? They have owned congress for going on 6 years, so they could do something if they cared about people like your neighbor. The very wealthy, who they do indeed care about, have gotten much richer.

The economy didn't start to recover at all until the Republicans took the house. Looks like they did a great deal to help the economy.

You're ******* insane.

Unemployment peaked in October, 2009.

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

 

[Faun]

Your neighbor is caught in the unemployment problem from the Great Republican Recession of 2008.

You're caught in the "I'm a hack and bend reality to fit my partisan perspective loop."

Unemployment peaked in 2011 during the Obama recession, what followed is under-employment. With the Obama administration using a 30 hour week as the floor for "full time" for purposes of Fascistcare, employers across the nation slashed hours to avoid that fiasco.


Obama's trail of victims are all those who were fully employed, but now need multiple jobs to earn the income lost due to the foolish policies of your little tin god.

Now, since that recession was handed over to the obama economic team, the rate of unemployment has gone from 10% to 5%, which is a REALLY< REALLY low rate. If your neighbor is having issues getting a job, it probably makes sense to not blame the person who has been making every effort to make unemployment better. But, it is a free world.
What is it that Republicans did to help the economy? They have owned congress for going on 6 years, so they could do something if they cared about people like your neighbor. The very wealthy, who they do indeed care about, have gotten much richer.

The economy didn't start to recover at all until the Republicans took the house. Looks like they did a great deal to help the economy.

You're ******* insane.

Unemployment peaked in October, 2009.

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

 

[Oldstyle]

And as for what caused those better numbers for unemployment? Was it anything that the Obama Administration was doing...or was it the oil and natural gas boom taking place due to fracking...which Obama and the Democrats generally opposed? You can easily make the point that the economy was bouncing back DESPITE Obama and his minions...not because of their policies!

 

[Oldstyle]

Your neighbor is caught in the unemployment problem from the Great Republican Recession of 2008.

You're caught in the "I'm a hack and bend reality to fit my partisan perspective loop."

Unemployment peaked in 2011 during the Obama recession, what followed is under-employment. With the Obama administration using a 30 hour week as the floor for "full time" for purposes of Fascistcare, employers across the nation slashed hours to avoid that fiasco.


Obama's trail of victims are all those who were fully employed, but now need multiple jobs to earn the income lost due to the foolish policies of your little tin god.

Now, since that recession was handed over to the obama economic team, the rate of unemployment has gone from 10% to 5%, which is a REALLY< REALLY low rate. If your neighbor is having issues getting a job, it probably makes sense to not blame the person who has been making every effort to make unemployment better. But, it is a free world.
What is it that Republicans did to help the economy? They have owned congress for going on 6 years, so they could do something if they cared about people like your neighbor. The very wealthy, who they do indeed care about, have gotten much richer.

The economy didn't start to recover at all until the Republicans took the house. Looks like they did a great deal to help the economy.

You're ******* insane.

Unemployment peaked in October, 2009.

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

 

[NoNukes]

Last time it was this low was 1973

Right, until the democrat President Jimmy Carter took over in 1974, whereas the Republican President was in office in '73.

The economy went to hell because the war ended.it did not matter who was President.

 

[Faun]

Your neighbor is caught in the unemployment problem from the Great Republican Recession of 2008.

You're caught in the "I'm a hack and bend reality to fit my partisan perspective loop."

Unemployment peaked in 2011 during the Obama recession, what followed is under-employment. With the Obama administration using a 30 hour week as the floor for "full time" for purposes of Fascistcare, employers across the nation slashed hours to avoid that fiasco.


Obama's trail of victims are all those who were fully employed, but now need multiple jobs to earn the income lost due to the foolish policies of your little tin god.

Now, since that recession was handed over to the obama economic team, the rate of unemployment has gone from 10% to 5%, which is a REALLY< REALLY low rate. If your neighbor is having issues getting a job, it probably makes sense to not blame the person who has been making every effort to make unemployment better. But, it is a free world.
What is it that Republicans did to help the economy? They have owned congress for going on 6 years, so they could do something if they cared about people like your neighbor. The very wealthy, who they do indeed care about, have gotten much richer.

The economy didn't start to recover at all until the Republicans took the house. Looks like they did a great deal to help the economy.

You're ******* insane.

Unemployment peaked in October, 2009.

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

That didn't even happen in 2011. Just how far out on that frail limb are you willing to climb for your fellow yahoo?

 

[Oldstyle]

You're caught in the "I'm a hack and bend reality to fit my partisan perspective loop."

Unemployment peaked in 2011 during the Obama recession, what followed is under-employment. With the Obama administration using a 30 hour week as the floor for "full time" for purposes of Fascistcare, employers across the nation slashed hours to avoid that fiasco.


Obama's trail of victims are all those who were fully employed, but now need multiple jobs to earn the income lost due to the foolish policies of your little tin god.

The economy didn't start to recover at all until the Republicans took the house. Looks like they did a great deal to help the economy.

You're ******* insane.

Unemployment peaked in October, 2009.

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

That didn't even happen in 2011. Just how far out on that frail limb are you willing to climb for your fellow yahoo?

The North Dakota oil boom refers to the period of rapidly expanding oil extraction from the Bakken formation in the state of North Dakota that lasted from the discovery of Parshall Oil Field in 2006, and peaked in 2012,[1][2] but with substantially less growth noted since 2015 due to a global decline in oil prices.[3] Despite the Great Recession, the oil boom resulted in enough jobs to provide North Dakota with the lowest unemployment rate in the United States.[4][5] The boom has given the state of North Dakota, a state with a 2013 population of about 725,000, a billion-dollar budget surplus. North Dakota, which ranked 38th in per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2001, rose steadily with the Bakken boom, and now has per capita GDP 29% above the national average.[6]

I'm actually willing to go rather far out on that limb, Faun because it's looking rather sturdy!

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

He knows, but his agenda means far more to him than his integrity, which is why I no longer engage in serious debate with him.

 

[Faun]

You're ******* insane.

Unemployment peaked in October, 2009.

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

That didn't even happen in 2011. Just how far out on that frail limb are you willing to climb for your fellow yahoo?

The North Dakota oil boom refers to the period of rapidly expanding oil extraction from the Bakken formation in the state of North Dakota that lasted from the discovery of Parshall Oil Field in 2006, and peaked in 2012,[1][2] but with substantially less growth noted since 2015 due to a global decline in oil prices.[3] Despite the Great Recession, the oil boom resulted in enough jobs to provide North Dakota with the lowest unemployment rate in the United States.[4][5] The boom has given the state of North Dakota, a state with a 2013 population of about 725,000, a billion-dollar budget surplus. North Dakota, which ranked 38th in per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2001, rose steadily with the Bakken boom, and now has per capita GDP 29% above the national average.[6]

I'm actually willing to go rather far out on that limb, Faun because it's looking rather sturdy!

LOL

You've already fallen off. Your post does nothing to prove unemployment peaked in 2011.

 

[Rshermr]

Proving you are a con tool, you make it sound like bush was trying to do something about his economic disaster. He was doing little. He saved a number of banks, made most richer than ever, but did little else. Nearly nothing. He was not part of the stimulus package, or any other economic effort to stop the disaster that was his. What saved us from a new Republican Depression was the Stimulus program, primarily And nothing else. There were exactly zero bills put forward by the republicans, but multiple efforts at stoping any bills put forward by the president.
There was, me boy, exactly one remaining effort to speed up the effects of the recession. And republicans voted against that effort every single time and with every single republican congressman voting to stop progress.

Bush did do something about the economic meltdown...he incurred the wrath of many conservatives by pushing TARP through.

Yes he did. And he did nothing the for mainstreet. And the american public by being unable to stop the worst recession since the great Republican Depression of 1929. So, yup, that is it. He did something AFTER the cow was out of the barn. Nice. So, are you just trying to say his heart was in the right place??

So first you declare that Bush did nothing to counter the economic downturn. I point out that Bush pushed TARP through...something that was crucial at stabilizing the economy at it's worst point and something that Obama continued during his Presidency...and you declare that Bush only did something "AFTER the cow was out of the barn"? TARP ended up having more of an influence on the recovery than the Obama Stimulus (Barry's STILL looking for those "shovel ready" jobs!) and TARP was all W. Can't give him credit for it though...can you?

Ah, but I did give him credit. It was october of 2008. He pushed through a bill worked over by congress to try and save the country from a disaster that was already underway. But, perhaps you can find an IMPARTIAL source that says TARP saved the economy, and that the Stimulus did not. You will not find it, me boy, because it is untrue. Only the bat shit crazy con web sites say that.

Here, me boy, is an impartial link (I know, you hate those) that scores the Stimulus:
Of all the myths and falsehoods that Republicans have spread about President Obama, the most pernicious and long-lasting is that the $832 billion stimulus package did not work. Since 2009, Republican lawmakers have inextricably linked the words “failed” and “stimulus,” and last week, five years after passage of the Recovery Act, they dusted off their old playbook again.

“The ‘stimulus’ has turned out to be a classic case of big promises and big spending with little results,” wrote Speaker John Boehner. “Five years and hundreds of billions of dollars later, millions of families are still asking, ‘where are the jobs?’ ”

The stimulus could have done more good had it been bigger and more carefully constructed. But put simply, it prevented a second recession that could have turned into a depression. It created or saved an average of 1.6 million jobs a year for four years. (There are the jobs, Mr. Boehner.) It raised the nation’s economic output by 2 to 3 percent from 2009 to 2011. It prevented a significant increase in poverty — without it, 5.3 million additional people would have become poor in 2010.

Now I understand, Oldstyle, that this study, and many more, from an impartial source, does not match the conservative talking points and the millions of dollars that have been spent lying about the Stimulus, But that is the truth. And don't we all want to find the truth. Oldstyle?
Relative to TARP and W, it is absolutely true that W signed the bill into law. That was required, me boy, since we only had one President, and it was W. But the bill was put together by congress. Representatives and Senators. Like always. And the Republicans VOTED AGAINST TARP. HAD IT BEEN LEFT TO THEM, TARP WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. TARP was a bill crafted by congress, and signed by W. We all understand that simple fact, me boy. But where you get the idea that TARP was a great success and the Stimulus failed is nuts. Except, of course, that it lines up perfectly with the hundreds of adds and the talking points of over 100 nut case crazy con web sits. But it does NOT line up with the hundreds of impartial sites that have worked to score the Stimulus. So, we can believe you, or the CBO (and many others)! My money is on the CBO.

What's amusing is that you STILL buy the line of crap you were fed by the Obama Administration with "jobs created or saved", Rshermr but think anyone who tells you that you were deliberately misled...is a "liar".

And all the CBO reports ever REALLY told us was that unemployment would have been higher if the Federal Government hadn't spent billions of dollars on stimulus! Does that surprise you for some reason? What each job created by the stimulus ended up costing the American taxpayer is another matter though...isn't it? Yet ideologues like yourself use the CBO reports as "proof" that the stimulus was a success! All I can say is if THAT is success...then you set the bar for that about as low as it can get!

That is either because you do not want to understand, or because you are incapable of understanding. A job saved means one less person is on the unemployment rolls. A job created means one less person is on the unemployment rolls. Assuming, of course, that there are people unemployed, and that we do not have full employment. Do you yet see why from an unemployment standpoint saving and creating are the same??? Or is that too complicated??
Relative to the costs of the stimulus, you are rather simplistic, me boy. Costs for the gov are what the gov pays. Revenues are what the gov gets back for what the gov pays. Obvious, to most people, thing is that what we are concerned about is the two things together. Kind of like your work pay and your expenses. Now, since a person on unemployment does not pay taxes, no revenues accrue. If a person is employed, revenues from taxes he pays accrue. The net is quite different from what you are concerned about.

So again, me boy, I can either believe you or the CBO. Again, my bet is on the CBO.

 

[Rshermr]

You're ******* insane.

Unemployment peaked in October, 2009.

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

That didn't even happen in 2011. Just how far out on that frail limb are you willing to climb for your fellow yahoo?

The North Dakota oil boom refers to the period of rapidly expanding oil extraction from the Bakken formation in the state of North Dakota that lasted from the discovery of Parshall Oil Field in 2006, and peaked in 2012,[1][2] but with substantially less growth noted since 2015 due to a global decline in oil prices.[3] Despite the Great Recession, the oil boom resulted in enough jobs to provide North Dakota with the lowest unemployment rate in the United States.[4][5] The boom has given the state of North Dakota, a state with a 2013 population of about 725,000, a billion-dollar budget surplus. North Dakota, which ranked 38th in per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2001, rose steadily with the Bakken boom, and now has per capita GDP 29% above the national average.[6]

I'm actually willing to go rather far out on that limb, Faun because it's looking rather sturdy!

Good for you, Oldstyle. Get out there on that limb. But do not look at the trend, me boy. Ignore that. Now, what is your point?????

 

[Rshermr]

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

That didn't even happen in 2011. Just how far out on that frail limb are you willing to climb for your fellow yahoo?

The North Dakota oil boom refers to the period of rapidly expanding oil extraction from the Bakken formation in the state of North Dakota that lasted from the discovery of Parshall Oil Field in 2006, and peaked in 2012,[1][2] but with substantially less growth noted since 2015 due to a global decline in oil prices.[3] Despite the Great Recession, the oil boom resulted in enough jobs to provide North Dakota with the lowest unemployment rate in the United States.[4][5] The boom has given the state of North Dakota, a state with a 2013 population of about 725,000, a billion-dollar budget surplus. North Dakota, which ranked 38th in per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2001, rose steadily with the Bakken boom, and now has per capita GDP 29% above the national average.[6]

I'm actually willing to go rather far out on that limb, Faun because it's looking rather sturdy!

LOL

You've already fallen off. Your post does nothing to prove unemployment peaked in 2011.

That, of course, is because it did not But oldstyle wants SOOOOO badly for it to have peaked in 2011.

 

[Rshermr]

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

That didn't even happen in 2011. Just how far out on that frail limb are you willing to climb for your fellow yahoo?

The North Dakota oil boom refers to the period of rapidly expanding oil extraction from the Bakken formation in the state of North Dakota that lasted from the discovery of Parshall Oil Field in 2006, and peaked in 2012,[1][2] but with substantially less growth noted since 2015 due to a global decline in oil prices.[3] Despite the Great Recession, the oil boom resulted in enough jobs to provide North Dakota with the lowest unemployment rate in the United States.[4][5] The boom has given the state of North Dakota, a state with a 2013 population of about 725,000, a billion-dollar budget surplus. North Dakota, which ranked 38th in per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2001, rose steadily with the Bakken boom, and now has per capita GDP 29% above the national average.[6]

I'm actually willing to go rather far out on that limb, Faun because it's looking rather sturdy!

LOL

You've already fallen off. Your post does nothing to prove unemployment peaked in 2011.

Have you EVER seen anyone try so hard to push con talking points??? Lie, cheat, steal, makes no difference to oldstyle. Just wants to post those con talking points. Which is why, of course, cons are incapable of conversation.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Last time it was this low was 1973

here's the problem according to Bill Clinton:
“The problem is, 80% of the American people are still living on what they were living on the day before the [2008 finnan*cial] crash. And about half the American people, after you adjust for inflation, are living on what they were living on the last day I was president 15 years ago. So that’s what’s the matter.”

 

[Rshermr]

Ah, the problem I am having is reconciling the numbers on your graph with what is published by the BLS. I get BLS from Davemanual, and have never found them wrong. They ranged, in 2010, from 9.95 in March and April down to 9.4% in December. In 2011, they ranged from 9.1% in January to 8.5% in December. So, not sure where the bump in 2011 was. But I suspect it was an anomaly.. Further, there is absolutely no doubt that the ue rate was NEVER close to as high as the highest rate in 2011 in 2010. Simple.

 

[Oldstyle]

Come on, Faun...your own chart shows that spike just prior to 2011 that brought the number right back to where it was for much of 2009! It may not have "peaked" at the end of 2010 but it was damn close!

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

That didn't even happen in 2011. Just how far out on that frail limb are you willing to climb for your fellow yahoo?

The North Dakota oil boom refers to the period of rapidly expanding oil extraction from the Bakken formation in the state of North Dakota that lasted from the discovery of Parshall Oil Field in 2006, and peaked in 2012,[1][2] but with substantially less growth noted since 2015 due to a global decline in oil prices.[3] Despite the Great Recession, the oil boom resulted in enough jobs to provide North Dakota with the lowest unemployment rate in the United States.[4][5] The boom has given the state of North Dakota, a state with a 2013 population of about 725,000, a billion-dollar budget surplus. North Dakota, which ranked 38th in per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2001, rose steadily with the Bakken boom, and now has per capita GDP 29% above the national average.[6]

I'm actually willing to go rather far out on that limb, Faun because it's looking rather sturdy!

LOL

You've already fallen off. Your post does nothing to prove unemployment peaked in 2011.

Did you not want to comment on my point that the fracking oil and natural gas boom taking place up through 2012 probably created more jobs and more economic growth than ANYTHING the Obama Administration's policies did? Or are you still claiming that didn't happen in 2011?

 

[Faun]

A spike in 2010 means that moron is insane when he claimed, "unemployment peaked in 2011." Thanks for confirming.

A spike that very nearly reached the high levels of 2009...so what's your point?

That didn't even happen in 2011. Just how far out on that frail limb are you willing to climb for your fellow yahoo?

The North Dakota oil boom refers to the period of rapidly expanding oil extraction from the Bakken formation in the state of North Dakota that lasted from the discovery of Parshall Oil Field in 2006, and peaked in 2012,[1][2] but with substantially less growth noted since 2015 due to a global decline in oil prices.[3] Despite the Great Recession, the oil boom resulted in enough jobs to provide North Dakota with the lowest unemployment rate in the United States.[4][5] The boom has given the state of North Dakota, a state with a 2013 population of about 725,000, a billion-dollar budget surplus. North Dakota, which ranked 38th in per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2001, rose steadily with the Bakken boom, and now has per capita GDP 29% above the national average.[6]

I'm actually willing to go rather far out on that limb, Faun because it's looking rather sturdy!

LOL

You've already fallen off. Your post does nothing to prove unemployment peaked in 2011.

Did you not want to comment on my point that the fracking oil and natural gas boom taking place up through 2012 probably created more jobs and more economic growth than ANYTHING the Obama Administration's policies did? Or are you still claiming that didn't happen in 2011?

A lot of things happened in 2011. At the moment, we're discussing what didn't happen -- namely, that unemployment peaked that year.

Are you too senile to keep up, gramps?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Did you not want to comment on my point that the fracking oil and natural gas boom taking place up through 2012 probably created more jobs and more economic growth than ANYTHING the Obama Administration's policies did?

not to mention that Democrats mostly opposed fracking! So Repubican policies mostly saved Obama fro a complete disaster. Always remember the golden rule from Econ 101: a recession is the time it takes the free market to correct for liberal interference.