Jump to content

Another 200,000+ Jobs Added Last Month...the Recovery Continues.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Deisel

I guess Gallups poll yesterday was a mirage. Dude, the Govt website is Obama's website. The real unemployment #'s are back to 9% and now gas prices are going to flash fire inflation and more jobs are going to be lost to make up for that increase. Lets also consider the costs of Everything, Excluding my cadillac, is going up and up, which means people drive less, go on vacations and business trips less, which means peoples spending decreases and the overall mood of the country continues to spiral. Best of luck selling that to the electorate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess Gallups poll yesterday was a mirage. Dude, the Govt website is Obama's website. The real unemployment #'s are back to 9% and now gas prices are going to flash fire inflation and more jobs are going to be lost to make up for that increase. Lets also consider the costs of Everything, Excluding my cadillac, is going up and up, which means people drive less, go on vacations and business trips less, which means peoples spending decreases and the overall mood of the country continues to spiral. Best of luck selling that to the electorate.

Ah, I see. So under Reagan, all of the job gains were an illusion because "the govt website is Reagan's website" and Reagan manufactured those number. Is that what you're saying?

And let's take a look at Gallup:

zh0hu1picu2m-spxb6p3sw.gif

So even with Gallup, unemployment is dropping. Are you ready to credit Obama for reducing unemployment?

And more importantly, government jobs fell by 6,000. Let's hope that trend continues.

But, but, but...Obama is a BIG GOVERNMENT LIBERAL! How can this be???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

Wait till they add in all the military cuts. Thats gonna put alot of good men and women out of work and I'm sure the Govt website will find a way not to count them. They are also cutting military health care programs/services. Cuts on the backs of our Military. Thats just great. On a more positive note: Fed-Subsidized 'Green' Light Bulb Hits Market -- Cost: $50...

I'm sure glad to have this to spend on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

Ah, I see. So under Reagan, all of the job gains were an illusion because "the govt website is Reagan's website" and Reagan manufactured those number. Is that what you're saying?

And let's take a look at Gallup:

zh0hu1picu2m-spxb6p3sw.gif

So even with Gallup, unemployment is dropping. Are you ready to credit Obama for reducing unemployment?

But, but, but...Obama is a BIG GOVERNMENT LIBERAL! How can this be???

Thats pretty funny Acworth. But, ah, Acworth there were NO websites to be had during Reagans years and we all KNOW how the Govt can put out #'s to obfuscate their corruption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats pretty funny Acworth. But, ah, Acworth there were NO websites to be had during Reagans years and we all KNOW how the Govt can put out #'s to obfuscate their corruption.

Good catch. However, the Bureau of Labor Statistics was the department that calculated the numbers. They control the website and they are the ones who calculated the numbers under Reagan. So can we dismiss those job gains under Reagan because his gov't department were cooking the numbers? Or do we only dismiss numbers that disagree with our political views as fabricated when the other party holds the presidency? Just trying to figure out how the game works.

In the meantime, even the "neutral" Gallup poll shows a drop in unemployment. Plus, consumer confidence is way up as well. The evidence just doesn't support your narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I see. So under Reagan, all of the job gains were an illusion because "the govt website is Reagan's website" and Reagan manufactured those number. Is that what you're saying?

And let's take a look at Gallup:

zh0hu1picu2m-spxb6p3sw.gif

So even with Gallup, unemployment is dropping. Are you ready to credit Obama for reducing unemployment?

But, but, but...Obama is a BIG GOVERNMENT LIBERAL! How can this be???

Public sector jobs are across the board, meaning state and local jobs are included.

It doesn't change the fact that Obama is a big government liberal. Or are you going to try to dispute that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

And here we have a story abt Govt being concerned about leaking Jobs data to the press, before they(govt) have a chance to massage the data, manipulate the data, as they see fit. The article even cites Obama's approval ratings and poll #'s as a concern. This is all about vetting the data to specifically control the information the media gets. Gov't concerned people could leak jobs data...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Public sector jobs are across the board, meaning state and local jobs are included.

It doesn't change the fact that Obama is a big government liberal. Or are you going to try to dispute that?

Yet there's been a DECREASE in public sector jobs under Obama. Take a look at the interactive graph on this website:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/10/business/economy/us-added-227000-jobs-last-month-rate-at-8-3.html?_r=1&hp

I can't copy the image because it's interactive, but it gives the option to show only private sector job growth. Notice that private sector job growth has been more positive than total job growth precisely because under Obama the public sector jobs have declined (due to the recession, but nonetheless..). The narrative that he has expanded government jobs is false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here we have a story abt Govt being concerned about leaking Jobs data to the press, before they(govt) have a chance to massage the data, manipulate the data, as they see fit. The article even cites Obama's approval ratings and poll #'s as a concern. This is all about vetting the data to specifically control the information the media gets. Gov't concerned people could leak jobs data...

Where in that article does it claim that the concern is about having "a chance to massage the data, manipulate the data, as they see fit"? Here is what the article says:

The jobs report can move the market strongly in a blink. If traders had advance notice of what the government numbers were going to be, they would have an unfair advantage that could net them millions of dollars in profit.

The concern is about insider trading. You keep making this claim that the numbers are being manipulated, so why shouldn't we discount all of the job growth under Reagan? Same bureau. Same calculations. Same opportunity for political manipulation.

Also, how do you explain the decline in unemployment using the Gallup poll and the increase in consumer confidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet there's been a DECREASE in public sector jobs under Obama. Take a look at the interactive graph on this website:

http://www.nytimes.c...-3.html?_r=1

I can't copy the image because it's interactive, but it gives the option to show only private sector job growth. Notice that private sector job growth has been more positive than total job growth precisely because under Obama the public sector jobs have declined (due to the recession, but nonetheless..). The narrative that he has expanded government jobs is false.

Obama has added 123,000 federal employees since taking office. State and local government jobs are the ones being axed.

I blame Obama specifically for 3 things:

Trying to pin our revenue collection on the backs of the rich.

Not fixing Social Security and Medicare when he had the mandate.

Inserting Obamacare which has already proven that it won't lower costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama has added 123,000 federal employees since taking office. State and local government jobs are the ones being axed.

I blame Obama specifically for 3 things:

Trying to pin our revenue collection on the backs of the rich.

Not fixing Social Security and Medicare when he had the mandate.

Inserting Obamacare which has already proven that it won't lower costs.

So you blame Obama for the jobs lost in February, when he had only been in office a few days? And the jobs lost in March and April before his policies had a chance to go into effect?

The 8.3 percent unemployment number is a cooked number. The numbers are massaged, as Deisel pointed out, and do not include those who have dropped out of the work force, meaning that they are no longer looking for employment and are therefore not counted in the unemployment statistics.

And the statistics are not calculated now the way they were under Reagan.

Do you have any evidence to support these claims?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...