US Unemployment is down to 6.3%

[Rochard]

Seems unemployment in the US dropped down to 6.3%, great news.

[seeandsee]

Can i get green card now?

[DamianJ]

“The part that is a little less positive is this apparently wonderful story on the unemployment rate,” added North. “If you look at the changes in the labor force there are 700,000 more unemployed, in other words the labor force shrunk because more people left.” This is why the unemployment rate should be taken with a grain of salt, he says,

http://www.forbes.com/sites/samantha...t-down-to-6-3/

[hottoddy]

Real impressive when 288,000 jobs are added but another 800,000 dropped out of the labor force - the lowest "participation rate" since 1978. Pretty easy to shrink the unemployment rate when so many people completely give up and drop out of the statistic.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-0...t-at-6-3-.html

[EonBlue]

Numbers can be deceiving.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/03/up...deceiving.html

The details of the April job report, though, threw serious cold water on that proposition. The number of people in the labor force fell by a whopping 806,000, wiping out the February and March gains and a bit of January as well. The labor force participation rate fell by 0.4 percentage points to 62.8 percent, returning to its December level.

And the number of people reporting they were unemployed fell by 733,000, which sounds good on its surface, but paired with the similar-sized decline in the labor force points to job seekers giving up looking rather than finding new employment.

I guess it's a "good news with a footnote" type of thing.

[Vendzilla]

288,000 new jobs as burger king expands it's service

[seeric]

Sorry Rochard. You are a smart guy. That number drops every time they make an announcement because less and less people are even eligible. That number is based on people that can claim benefits. The truth is the country has never been wrought with more unemployment than it is right now. The financial gurus are saying that it's closer to 20% realistically.

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by DamianJ

?The part that is a little less positive is this apparently wonderful story on the unemployment rate,? added North. ?If you look at the changes in the labor force there are 700,000 more unemployed, in other words the labor force shrunk because more people left.? This is why the unemployment rate should be taken with a grain of salt, he says,

http://www.forbes.com/sites/samantha...t-down-to-6-3/

^^^ This ^^^

What's the REAL number? 15-20% ?


.

[Vendzilla]

Yep, things are going great!

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Seems unemployment in the US dropped down to 6.3%, great news.

These numbers would be really great if Obama was republican.
But since he is a democrat, these number are skewed.

[h01mz]

unbelievable, rochard is still suckng obama's dick

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by seeric

Sorry Rochard. You are a smart guy. That number drops every time they make an announcement because less and less people are even eligible. That number is based on people that can claim benefits. The truth is the country has never been wrought with more unemployment than it is right now. The financial gurus are saying that it's closer to 20% realistically.

I believe this is only half true. You can try to argue and debate what the true figure is, and if you want to go that route.... Then you need to recompute the figure for the past twenty years so we have some kind of a baseline to judge everything by.

If the "true" unemployment rate is really 20%, what was it two years ago? Four years ago? 40%? 60%?

[VikingMan]

more cooked numbers to pacify the cattle while the smart money continues to get out of the market

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by h01mz

unbelievable, rochard is still suckng obama's dick

Not at all. I judge unemployment by what the government tells me the unemployment rate is; I always have and always will. When Bush was in office I didn't sit back and say "Well gee, the unemployment rate is really much higher".

What I just happen was fucking amazing. I saw people leaving their houses in droves until exactly half of the houses on my street - ten out of twenty houses - were empty. I saw them stop building houses when they were half way built; For years we had an entire condo complex half built. They were building a Sonic restaurant down the street - they got the walls up, it sat there for a year, and eventually the tore it down. It was fucking amazing what just happened. I'm just glad this is over.

I'm not an Obama cock sucker. The truth is there was only one solution to the problem we had, and that solution was... Time. My pet dog could have been running the Oval Office and we would be in the same place we are now. I am also starting to wonder how Romney would have done if he won; He could have put Romneycare in place on the federal level and there would have been a lot less discussion about healthcare.

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by h01mz

unbelievable, rochard is still suckng obama's dick

Interesting.

Your join date is set to system time "00000000000" which comes out to Dec 31 1969;
as if the nick was added by hand and join date was left blank.
That's the only time I ever get that error.
Weird.







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_time

Unix and POSIX-compliant systems encode system time ("Unix time") as the number of seconds elapsed since the start of the Unix epoch at 1 January 1970 00:00:00 UT,

[Captain Kawaii]

Originally Posted by L-Pink

^^^ This ^^^

What's the REAL number? 15-20% ?


.

Easily. Food stamps up from 2 million to more than 47 million - US is fukt. Programs should think about the fact their clients now have McJobs if they are lucky, and downshift their pricing structures. 29.95 hard to pay on mcjob wages. A mornings work for a month of porn? When tubes offer it for nothing?

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Rochard

My pet dog could have been running the Oval Office and we would be in the same place we are now. I am also starting to wonder how Romney would have done if he won; He could have put Romneycare in place on the federal level and there would have been a lot less discussion about healthcare.

We would have been better off with your dog

Romney care wouldn't have left 20,000 pages of regulations that make people pay more money.

Besides, these are excuses, isn't it time for results instead of excuses? The latest is from Eric Holder telling everyone it's because they are both black is why they having such a hard time, fuck them!

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

We would have been better off with your dog

Sure. But clearly we can also say that about the President before him who brought our country to it's knees.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Romney care wouldn't have left 20,000 pages of regulations that make people pay more money.

I don't believe that is true. It's gong to be a lot easier to pass a bill in one state with one set of laws instead of fifty states with fifty sets of laws.

Compare Obamacare to other Federal laws. They don't usually measure laws by pages, but instead words. Obamacare has some 314k words. Oddly enough, so does the "Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act" of 2005. (And not one of us knows what that is!) The "No Child Left Behind Act of 2001" has 274k words. (source)

You just keep cherry picking your stats. You always do.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Besides, these are excuses, isn't it time for results instead of excuses?

But this is what kills me. Unemployment is down (again), economy is moving, Wall Street is up. What more results do you want?

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

The latest is from Eric Holder telling everyone it's because they are both black is why they having such a hard time, fuck them!

Seriously, wtf does that even mean?

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by h01mz

unbelievable, rochard is still suckng obama's dick

unbelievable that people attack others from behind a fake nick.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Sure. But clearly we can also say that about the President before him who brought our country to it's knees.

But we can't say that about promises to bring us back from our knees

I don't believe that is true. It's gong to be a lot easier to pass a bill in one state with one set of laws instead of fifty states with fifty sets of laws.

I'm not the one that brought up Romneycare

Compare Obamacare to other Federal laws. They don't usually measure laws by pages, but instead words. Obamacare has some 314k words. Oddly enough, so does the "Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act" of 2005. (And not one of us knows what that is!) The "No Child Left Behind Act of 2001" has 274k words. (source)

You just keep cherry picking your stats. You always do.

Did I lie about the pages of regulations, no. Comparing to other bills doesn't make it right

But this is what kills me. Unemployment is down (again), economy is moving, Wall Street is up. What more results do you want?

The economy is SO SHITTY, that people are leaving middle income jobs and taking low wage jobs, what I want is for you to realize that you assumption that only the Unemployment rates are the show for a good economy is bull shit. How do you explain the median wage in the US has fallen 8%

Seriously, wtf does that even mean?

Means that more excuses, less results, or did I lose you when I said that?

[Jesse1984]

Considering the population is 313.9 Million according to google that means that about 18,800,000 people are unemployed. Not an inspiring figure.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by JesseFame

Considering the population is 313.9 Million according to google that means that about 18,800,000 people are unemployed. Not an inspiring figure.

That's not how it is figured, it's figured out of the size of the workforce. Which the population over the 5 years has gone up and the size of the workforce has gone down.

[pimpmaster9000]

what the report fails to mention is that most of the new jobs are lower paying jobs and that the gain in new low paying jobs vs new high paying jobs is now very disproportionate and that even though unemployment may be "down" this is not progress at all

[baddog]

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

These numbers would be really great if Obama was republican.
But since he is a democrat, these number are skewed.

Oh please, you expect us to believe that you don't understand how unemployment records are calculated? I find that very hard to believe

[baddog]

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Interesting.

Your join date is set to system time "00000000000" which comes out to Dec 31 1969;
as if the nick was added by hand and join date was left blank.
That's the only time I ever get that error.
Weird.







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_time

And only 8 posts come up when you search for posts she made

[deltav]

Possibly the easiest troll job I've seen all week, nice work Rochard.

[GregE]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Seems unemployment in the US dropped down to 6.3%, great news.

You realize, don't you, that once a laid-off worker's unemployment benefits run out, the government then pretends that that person is no longer unemployed.

Not saying that any of this is Obama's fault, but that's just the way it is.

The official employment numbers don't mean jack shit.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by baddog

And only 8 posts come up when you search for posts she made

When one of the admins made this fake nic, they probably put down their birth date for join date.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

But we can't say that about promises to bring us back from our knees

Sure sure, we are down on our knees, the economy is in the shitter, half of the houses on my street are still vacant, unemployment is up to 14%, and Wall Street is dead.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I'm not the one that brought up Romneycare

But you did. You said "Romney care wouldn't have left 20,000 pages of regulations that make people pay more money.".

I'm sorry, you are comparing apples to kittens. Passing a law for Massachusetts is easy, one state, one set of rules, it's not on the national stage, and does't have to go through Congress or the Senate.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Did I lie about the pages of regulations, no. Comparing to other bills doesn't make it right

Why not? You want to compare a small state bill to a Federal bill with fifty states and fifty sets of rules - done on the national stage and pushed through Congress and the Senate. It's okay for you to compare a state law to a federal law, but not good to compare a federal law to a federal law?

Once again, cherry picking. That's all you do.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

The economy is SO SHITTY, that people are leaving middle income jobs and taking low wage jobs, what I want is for you to realize that you assumption that only the Unemployment rates are the show for a good economy is bull shit. How do you explain the median wage in the US has fallen 8%

Let's be a little more specific here - the median wage fell 8% over what period?



You spin bullshit and cherry pick stats until you are blue in the face.

And while I'm at it.....

Stock market is up:



Value of houses is going up:



And then.... We are getting richer again!



But you keep finding things to bitch about.

[Nookster]

It's actually 7.3% source our economy is bouncing back as usual. There are highs and lows. Usual economic activity.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by GregE

You realize, don't you, that once a laid-off worker's unemployment benefits run out, the government then pretends that that person is no longer unemployed.

Not saying that any of this is Obama's fault, but that's just the way it is.

The official employment numbers don't mean jack shit.

Yes, but there are also a lot of people on unemployment that shouldn't be. My brother lost his job, remained on unemployment as long as he could, and when it ran out.... He said "Why go get a job?".

If we are going to start factoring in people who went off unemployment but aren't employed, shouldn't we count people like my brother who milked unemployment and then when it ran out didn't get a job because he didn't really need one? (He is supported by his wife.)

I just find it funny we suddenly question the unemployment percentage after all of this time. I mean, we've only been doing it this way since 1890.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by Nookster

It's actually 7.3% source our economy is bouncing back as usual. There are highs and lows. Usual economic activity.

That page only goes up to October of 2013.

[seeric]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I believe this is only half true. You can try to argue and debate what the true figure is, and if you want to go that route.... Then you need to recompute the figure for the past twenty years so we have some kind of a baseline to judge everything by.

If the "true" unemployment rate is really 20%, what was it two years ago? Four years ago? 40%? 60%?

there is no argue and debate with me.

i could give a flying fuck what anyone on an internet message board believes.

people can believe what they want. i make 20 posts every 3 months on GFY now.



have a good weekend.

[Nookster]

I agree with Richard 100%.

[Nookster]

Originally Posted by Rochard

That page only goes up to October of 2013.

That is all we are given in terms of stats from the gov. You are correct though.

[Nookster]

It is still typical economic activity. There is no issue regarding economic downturn. We are as strong as ever.

[- Jesus Christ -]

Propaganda

[Vendzilla]

I don't know where you got that graph, but

Back in 2007, median household income was $55,438. That's declined to $51,404 in February 2013. Those numbers are pretax and adjusted for inflation and seasonal factors.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...the-recession/

the stock market is up because the feds are printing up money at a rate of 85 billion a month