Political Forums

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   Jobless rate falls to 7.8 % (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=4742)

bobabode 10-05-2012 12:24 PM

Jobless rate falls to 7.8 %
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...y.html?hpid=z1

Maybe this is Romney's October surprise?:rolleyes:

Boreas 10-05-2012 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobabode (Post 127227)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...y.html?hpid=z1

Maybe this is Romney's October surprise?:rolleyes:

Seemingly within minutes of the announcement, the right wing punditocracy was all over the press and the internet saying that the numbers were bogus and that the DoL had cooked the books, the only "evidence" being that they don't like the numbers.

Just like they're saying that the polls are all a fraud, even FOX and Rasmussen.

The President said he'd get unemployment below 8% during his first term.

He did.

John

budgetaudio6 10-05-2012 12:44 PM

I wonder if the number of jobs disappearing by companies down sizing due to increased cost of business is taken into consideration? This kinda makes one go hmmm.

Considering how much the administration lies, im not so sure to believe the numbers.

icenine 10-05-2012 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boreas (Post 127233)
Seemingly within minutes of the announcement, the right wing punditocracy was all over the press and the internet saying that the numbers were bogus and that the DoL had cooked the books, the only "evidence" being that they don't like the numbers.

Just like they're saying that the polls are all a fraud, even FOX and Rasmussen.

The President said he'd get unemployment below 8% during his first term.

He did.

John

Of course no one was cooking the books before when it was at 10% right?:rolleyes:

icenine 10-05-2012 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by budgetaudio6 (Post 127236)
I wonder if the number of jobs disappearing by companies down sizing due to increased cost of business is taken into consideration? This kinda makes one go hmmm.

Considering how much the administration lies, im not so sure to believe the numbers.

Then you REALLY should not believe Mitt Romney then....

bobabode 10-05-2012 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by icenine (Post 127239)
Then you REALLY should not believe Mitt Romney then....

I figure Romney did it all by himself....by getting all of those fact checkers a job.;)

Boreas 10-05-2012 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by budgetaudio6 (Post 127236)
I wonder if the number of jobs disappearing by companies down sizing due to increased cost of business is taken into consideration? This kinda makes one go hmmm.

Considering how much the administration lies, im not so sure to believe the numbers.

First off, where is your evidence that businesses are closing because of increased costs (I assume you mean taxes)?

And, no, the number of potential employers or available jobs isn't what they count. They count people.

Budgie, I don't think you're a capable judge of the Administration's honesty. Your biases preclude that.

John

John

CarlV 10-05-2012 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobabode (Post 127242)
I figure Romney did it all by himself....by getting all of those fact checkers a job.;)

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d1...V_/AK/lmao.gif


Carl

whell 10-05-2012 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boreas (Post 127233)
Seemingly within minutes of the announcement, the right wing punditocracy was all over the press and the internet saying that the numbers were bogus and that the DoL had cooked the books, the only "evidence" being that they don't like the numbers.

Just like they're saying that the polls are all a fraud, even FOX and Rasmussen.

The President said he'd get unemployment below 8% during his first term.

He did.

John

If unemployment has truly dropped that's good news, and more power to the folks who were able to find work in a tough economy.

That said, it does seem unlikely that the addition of 144K jobs resulted in a 3/10% reduction in the unemployment rate. There seems to be some legitimate disagreement on the numbers.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/49299718

bobabode 10-05-2012 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlV (Post 127260)

Thanks Carl!;)

Wasillaguy 10-05-2012 01:50 PM

With that big of a drop, I'd think we'd also see the number on food stamps coming down.

bobabode 10-05-2012 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasillaguy (Post 127272)
With that big of a drop, I'd think we'd also see the number on food stamps coming down.

No doubt they will.

piece-itpete 10-05-2012 01:52 PM

It'll become the 46% :)

It's very good news for us, and good news for Obie, I hope it's, um, straightforward. At this point I'd be leery of anything like this from both sides though.

It has felt like things are getting better.

Pete

bobabode 10-05-2012 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 127275)
It'll become the 46% :)

It's very good news for us, and good news for Obie, I hope it's, um, straightforward. At this point I'd be leery of anything like this from both sides though.

It has felt like things are getting better.

Pete

I agree. Nothing scientific but the commercial real estate seems to be filling up once again around here. It was friggin' depressing to see all of the empty retail and office space looking like a gapped tooth grin in my neck of the woods.

Of course out here in lalaland those trees are mostly palms and jacarandas.:D

Boreas 10-05-2012 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobabode (Post 127277)
I agree. Nothing scientific but the commercial real estate seems to be filling up once again around here. It was friggin' depressing to see all of the empty retail and office space looking like a gapped tooth grin in my neck of the woods.

Of course out here in lalaland those trees are mostly palms and jacarandas.:D

Building more here. That can't be a bad sign.

John

piece-itpete 10-05-2012 02:18 PM

Here better housing appears to be picking up but us normal shlubs are still stuck and I wonder if innercity values will ever recover. I won't believe it's over until they start the last phase in the development of the McMansions behind me. They put the road in just before the crash.

Pete

Boreas 10-05-2012 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 127285)
Here better housing appears to be picking up but us normal shlubs are still stuck and I wonder if innercity values will ever recover. I won't believe it's over until they start the last phase in the development of the McMansions behind me. They put the road in just before the crash.

Pete

What caused our inner cities to thrive was plenty of good manufacturing jobs. Unless we rebuild our industrial base we don't have a prayer of revitalizing our cities.

John

piece-itpete 10-05-2012 02:36 PM

It may be different elsewhere but during the 1990s-2000s housing prices in Cleveland rocketed, even the hood (which honestly is most of Cleveland proper now). We had already lost mucho manufacturing. I'm sure it was a bubble indeed but doubt we'll see 50% of those values in years.

Pete

Boreas 10-05-2012 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 127297)
It may be different elsewhere but during the 1990s-2000s housing prices in Cleveland rocketed, even the hood (which honestly is most of Cleveland proper now). We had already lost mucho manufacturing. I'm sure it was a bubble indeed but doubt we'll see 50% of those values in years.

Pete

That was when the "dot commers" were gentrifying certain of the older and more interesting parts of cities. The dot com bubble bursting put an end to that and, in any case, you can't fill a whole city that way.

John

piece-itpete 10-05-2012 02:46 PM

Brother, not here in Cleveland. There are small areas gentrified but very very little even today. You guys in the fancy cities, that's different ;) :D

Some of the working poor benifited, the few that bought their homes, but it was mostly the landlords & flippers that made the cash, my take. Although some flippers got burned too.

Pete

BlueStreak 10-05-2012 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 127275)
It'll become the 46% :)

It's very good news for us, and good news for Obie, I hope it's, um, straightforward. At this point I'd be leery of anything like this from both sides though.

It has felt like things are getting better.

Pete

Yes, but I'd be even more leary of unsubstantiated negative kneejerk reactions to such news. The GOPs constant doomsday predictions and "Everything you hear is a lie unless it comes from us." mantra is bound to wear thin sooner or later with all but their most die hard adherents.

Regards,
Dave

BlueStreak 10-05-2012 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 127300)
Brother, not here in Cleveland. There are small areas gentrified but very very little even today. You guys in the fancy cities, that's different ;) :D

Some of the working poor benifited, the few that bought their homes, but it was mostly the landlords & flippers that made the cash, my take. Although some flippers got burned too.

Pete

The flipper who bought my last house after I flipped it, got burned.
I walked away with a check $109,000.:)
It seems August of 2005 was best time to sell a house.....After that, not so much.

Regards,
Dave

JBS... 10-05-2012 03:00 PM

Wow.... 144K

Indeed truly great news... at this pace It will only take 8.3 years to get back to 5%


The avg unemployment rate from 2005 to the end of 2008 (which was Bush's 2nd term) was....5.1%

Boreas 10-05-2012 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 127300)
Brother, not here in Cleveland. There are small areas gentrified but very very little even today. You guys in the fancy cities, that's different ;) :D

Some of the working poor benifited, the few that bought their homes, but it was mostly the landlords & flippers that made the cash, my take. Although some flippers got burned too.

Pete

Baltimore ain't no fancy city, hon! That's where I lived then and that's what happened there.

John

BlueStreak 10-05-2012 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBS... (Post 127303)
Wow.... 144K

Indeed truly great news... at this pace It will only take 8.3 years to get back to 5%


The avg unemployment rate from 2005 to the end of 2008 (which was Bush's 2nd term) was....5.1%

And here it is, at it's worst.

The last three months of Bush's term we were losing up to a three quarter million jobs a month, you dork.

I'm still waiting for the second dip that was supposed to happen three years ago.....where is it?

The best thing that will ever happen to this country will be the day the last teabagger idiot packs up his tricorner hat and goes back to Pig Knuckle to breed with his sister.

Regards,
Dave

piece-itpete 10-05-2012 03:17 PM

Baltimore eh? THAT explains it! :D Just kidding. There is one part of Cleveland that pretty well gentrified, but not til they closed the projects and turned them into condos, the Tremont area. It's not very big.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueStreak (Post 127302)
The flipper who bought my last house after I flipped it, got burned.
I walked away with a check $109,000.:)
It seems August of 2005 was best time to sell a house.....After that, not so much.

Regards,
Dave

Awesome :) Drinks on Dave?

Pete

JBS... 10-05-2012 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueStreak (Post 127306)
And here it is, at it's worst.

The last three months of Bush's term we were losing up to a three quarter million jobs a month, you dork.

I'm still waiting for the second dip that was supposed to happen three years ago.....where is it?

The best thing that will ever happen to this country will be the day the last teabagger idiot packs up his tricorner hat and goes back to Pig Knuckle to breed with his sister.

Regards,
Dave

Dork... now that hurts. :(

bhunter 10-05-2012 03:36 PM

We're still going backwards regardless of the so-called unemployment rate. This from BLS:

Quote:

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 114,000 in September. In 2012, employment growth has averaged 146,000 per month, compared with an average monthly gain of 153,000 in 2011. In
September, employment rose in health care and in transportation and warehousing. (See table B-1.)

Health care added 44,000 jobs in September. Job gains continued in ambulatory health care services (+30,000) and hospitals (+8,000). Over the past year, employment in health care has risen by 295,000.

In September, employment increased by 17,000 in transportation and warehousing. Within the industry, there were job gains in transit and ground passenger transportation (+9,000) and in warehousing and storage (+4,000).
http://www.bls.gov/ces/
I think the growth in healthcare employment strongly correlates with the aging population and transport/warehousing perhaps being related to pre-Christmas and back-to-school. Moreover, the number of jobs were lower than what most predicted yet the rate decreased. I'm not sure I'd be jumping for joy now that 206 more people are employed today than were in August.

Boreas 10-05-2012 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBS... (Post 127303)
Wow.... 144K

Indeed truly great news... at this pace It will only take 8.3 years to get back to 5%


The avg unemployment rate from 2005 to the end of 2008 (which was Bush's 2nd term) was....5.1%


You people are really amazing. Your capacity for self delusion is positively staggering.

http://www.unemployment-extension.or...yment-rate.png

http://www.globalpost.com/sites/defa...graph_jpeg.jpg

I had a conversation just a little while ago with the Teabagger that runs the garden shop at the corner. She brought up the unemployment figures and, of course, parroted the Right Wing talking point that they were fake.

I said that, yes, I'd been hearing that since about 15 minutes after the Labor Dept. released the numbers, far too soon for there to be any evidence to support the claim. (There still isn't.)

Her response was that she could have told me 6 months ago that Obama would release fake unemployment figures right before the election.

I said, "So, the fact that it's good news makes it false?"

She just said, "I don't believe it."

So, then I said, "Look, I'm not married to either one of those guys. If these numbers are proven to be bogus, I'll be the first to admit it."

Her response was to say, "I'm gonna hold you to that."

I then asked her if she would admit it if the numbers turned out to be true.

Her reply was, "I don't think that's going to happen."

Groan.............

John

Boreas 10-05-2012 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 127318)
We're still going backwards regardless of the so-called unemployment rate. This from BLS:

A temporary reduction in the rate of growth is not moving backward.

Quote:

I think the growth in healthcare employment strongly correlates with the aging population and transport/warehousing perhaps being related to pre-Christmas and back-to-school. Moreover, the number of jobs were lower than what most predicted yet the rate decreased. I'm not sure I'd be jumping for joy now that 206 more people are employed today than were in August.
We've been an aging population for decades. What's new? Obamacare is new. Clearly it's a benefit to the overall economy as well as to the overall health of the people.

John

bhunter 10-05-2012 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boreas (Post 127320)

Her response was that she could have told me 6 months ago that Obama would release fake unemployment figures right before the election.

I said, "So, the fact that it's good news makes it false?"

She just said, "I don't believe it."

So, then I said, "Look, I'm not married to either one of those guys. If these numbers are proven to be bogus, I'll be the first to admit it."

Her response was to say, "I'm gonna hold you to that."

I then asked her if she would admit it if the numbers turned out to be true.

Her reply was, "I don't think that's going to happen."

Groan.............

John

There is nothing wrong with the numbers; however, I think they are not particularly significant given the BLS methodology. Similarly, I don't like the much tweaked CPI.

BTW, since you appear to like BLS data, have you checked out their American Time Use Survey? I found it rather interesting.

http://www.bls.gov/tus/#tables

JBS... 10-05-2012 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boreas (Post 127320)
You people are really amazing. Your capacity for self delusion is positively staggering.

Groan.............

John

oh, goodie pictures... I have some too..

http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/z...2012-data1.jpg

http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/z...2012-data1.jpg

Rex E. 10-05-2012 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBS... (Post 127328)
oh, goodie pictures... I have some too..

http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/z...2012-data1.jpg

Interesting pic JBS...

It would seem that it was on a very very steep rise at the end of the Bush term and continued for the next several months under Obama (as anyone would expect no matter who won office as it does take a bit of time. Ever tried to turn a cruise ship or an aircraft carrier?)

Then it peaks in Oct '09 with another bump in May 2010 and another Dec 2010. Post Dec 2010 it's been in steady decline. 18 months of steady decline in unemployment according to your pic. Looks like the policies are working despite the oppositions best efforts in congress to STOP THE TURN AROUND OF UNEMPLOYMENT!

bhunter 10-05-2012 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rex E. (Post 127329)
Interesting pic JBS...

It would seem that it was on a very very steep rise at the end of the Bush term and continued for the next several months under Obama (as anyone would expect no matter who won office as it does take a bit of time. Ever tried to turn a cruise ship or an aircraft carrier?)

Then it peaks in Oct '09 with another bump in May 2010 and another Dec 2010. Post Dec 2010 it's been in steady decline. 18 months of steady decline in unemployment according to your pic. Looks like the policies are working despite the oppositions best efforts in congress to STOP THE TURN AROUND OF UNEMPLOYMENT!

But you're not considering his second graph. The participation numbers and the unemployment rate are linked. That is, lower participation will also decrease the unemployment rate in similar proportion to an increase in the number of jobs. The use of the unemployment rate alone is not sufficient to characterize the nation's employment. I wish the statistics challenged media would realize it. If you want to see what can be done with data, check out how the CPI has been modified starting back in the Reagan Administration.

icenine 10-05-2012 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 127275)
It'll become the 46% :)

It's very good news for us, and good news for Obie, I hope it's, um, straightforward. At this point I'd be leery of anything like this from both sides though.

It has felt like things are getting better.

Pete

WOW ....the cool meter is surging to .....1!:)

icenine 10-05-2012 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 127318)
We're still going backwards regardless of the so-called unemployment rate. This from BLS:



I think the growth in healthcare employment strongly correlates with the aging population and transport/warehousing perhaps being related to pre-Christmas and back-to-school. Moreover, the number of jobs were lower than what most predicted yet the rate decreased. I'm not sure I'd be jumping for joy now that 206 more people are employed today than were in August.

Come on quit looking for gloom in the sunshine....;)

bhunter 10-05-2012 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by icenine (Post 127334)
Come on quit looking for gloom in the sunshine....;)

I point you to A.E. Houseman's "Terrence This Is Stupid Stuff." A great poem that capture the essence of pessimism.:D

icenine 10-05-2012 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 127337)
I point you to A.E. Houseman's "Terrence This Is Stupid Stuff." A great poem that capture the essence of pessimism.:D

Hmmm I guess you do have a sort of survivalist bent lol......

Oerets 10-05-2012 06:30 PM

I keep hearing the statement used when this statistics are made, "those who quit looking". What exactly does that mean?



Barney

wgrr 10-05-2012 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 127275)
It'll become the 46% :)

It's very good news for us, and good news for Obie, I hope it's, um, straightforward. At this point I'd be leery of anything like this from both sides though.

It has felt like things are getting better.

Pete

Pete, honestly I feel things are improving a lot. I was test driving cars Wednesday while my work truck was in the shop. We drove down a highway that is narrow and curvy. I was shocked to see a couple of huge new McMansion subdivisions going in. Most houses were already sold and many new homes were under construction.

I see signs of economic recovery in my area all the time. The car lot I was at sold sixty four white fleet pickups and vans this month. There are major road improvement projects going on everywhere. Four huge schools have been built this year in the NW Arkansas metropolitan area. I have many more examples. I will spare you.

Right now I do not believe it is a good time to change horses in the middle of the stream. Romney/Ryan is not the answer. I have not heard one specific about how they are going to get use out of this mess.

To me we are coming out of the depression /recession despite an almost 100% obstruction of the Republican members of Congress, on all bills proposed, to improve the economy. It reinforces my faith in the American worker. Thank God for us. :)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.