Author Topic: OBAMA'S ASS-KICKING OF 3333 CONTINUES...Jobless rate at 3 year low (Read 6644 times)

andreisdaman · « **on:** February 03, 2012, 09:34:00 AM »

Jobless rate is going down.....economy improving....Obama is kicking 3333's ass as usual...economy is really creating jobs at a much faster rate..we added 243,000 jobs last month....better than economists predicted...unemployment rate now at 8.3% and falling..unemployment has fallen for five straight months...the first time this has happened since 1994.....

the Obama re-election train is rolling!!!!

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/03/10309295-jobless-rate-drops-to-lowest-level-in-almost-three-years

240 is Back · « **Reply #1 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:37:07 AM »

power of the incumbency. it's very real.

Prez in power can manupulate events, massage numbers, and lie his ass off to keep the job. And it usually works. Except for 92, when a 3rd party stole 18% of total vote mostly from the sitting republican.... No sitting prez has been defeated in 32 years. And even Reagan needed a little help from Bush1's Iran october surprise to win that one...

andreisdaman · « **Reply #2 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:39:24 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on February 03, 2012, 09:37:07 AM

power of the incumbency. it's very real.

Prez in power can manupulate events, massage numbers, and lie his ass off to keep the job. And it usually works. Except for 92, when a 3rd party stole 18% of total vote mostly from the sitting republican.... No sitting prez has been defeated in 32 years. And even Reagan needed a little help from Bush1's Iran october surprise to win that one...

No lying here 240....the numbers are non-partisan..prez doesn't control these stats......if he did we would ALWAYS have 5% Unemployment

the statistics speak for themselves..give the prez his due

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:42:13 AM »

How Fraudulent Was the January Unemployment Number? Unemployment Actually Went UP last month

http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/2012/02/how-fraudulent-was-january-unemployment.html ^ |

I've written about this quite a few times before (most recently here). Essentially, the unemployment number reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics is complete fiction as millions of workers have been thrown out of the labor force, artificially lowering the unemployment rate. If you look at the labor force participation rate, it is now at multi-decade lows:

As you can see, the labor force participation rate is now down over 2% since Obama has taken office. Some would argue that this is due to demographics, as baby boomers leave the labor force as they reach retirement. The problem with this argument is that if you look at the participation rate for those 55 and up, it is slightly up since Obama has taken office. All the decline in due to those who would be considered to be in their peak working years. If you keep the rate at 66%, where it was at right before Obama was elected it appears that there are 5 million people missing from the unemployment data, and it seems to be spiking right now:

What does this mean for the unemployment rate itself? By my calculations, if you keep the missing people in, it is 11.4% right now, up 0.1% from last month when it ws 11.3%. The whole thing about it being down to 8.3% is absolute hogwash. Below you can see the striking difference between the real unemployment rate and the official one:

It's really a striking divergence isn't it? While the official rate seems to show a 1.7% improvement in the unemployment rate since the peak, the improvement is really a paltry 0.4%! And if you don't believe me, check out the government's own employment to population ratio which is also at multi-decade lows:

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #4 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:44:34 AM »

The bad news behind the January jobs report
Fox ^ | February 3, 2012 | John Lott

The number of unemployed Americans last month fell by 339,000, the fifth largest drop since January 2009. But there was an even much more shockingly large number -- almost 1.2 million additional Americans were classified in January as not being in the labor force (see figure here). Unfortunately, that has been the consistent story that has made this “recovery” unique as more and more Americans have just given up looking for work.

This last number not only means that the official unemployment number is misleading, but it will also likely determine where the unemployment rate ultimately goes. Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office just last week released its projected unemployment rate for the next couple of years. They predicted that the unemployment rate will be at 8.9 percent during the last quarter of 2012 and rise to 9.2 percent for the last quarter of 2013. . . .

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

240 is Back · « **Reply #5 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:44:54 AM »

Quote from: andreisdaman on February 03, 2012, 09:39:24 AM

No lying here 240....the numbers are non-partisan..prez doesn't control these stats......if he did we would ALWAYS have 5% Unemployment the statistics speak for themselves..give the prez his due

Are you saying that the non-partisan CBO didn't go from honest to shady on Jan 21, 2009?

This is what bothers me... People who accepted Bush's low numbers, used these numbers to shit on obama when they were at 9%...

Suddenly they call these numbers bogus when the numbers are showing improvement for Obama.

You can't call a method valid for decades, then suddenly rule is biased/partisan/bullshit... can you?

And before we all agree with a hypothesis from sites like obamasucks.bushrocks.rom ney2012.blogspot.com, why isn't FOX calling them out on it, if it's false? Why isn't Romney?

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #6 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:46:25 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on February 03, 2012, 09:44:54 AM

Are you saying that the non-partisan CBO didn't go from honest to shady on Jan 21, 2009?

This is what bothers me... People who accepted Bush's low numbers, used these numbers to shit on obama when they were at 9%...

Suddenly they call these numbers bogus when the numbers are showing improvement for Obama.

You can't call a method valid for decades, then suddenly rule is biased/partisan/bullshit... can you?

And before we all agree with a hypothesis from sites like obamasucks.bushrocks.rom ney2012.blogspot.com, why isn't FOX calling them out on it, if it's false? Why isn't Romney?

WHAT IMPROVEMENT? LESS PEOPLE ARE WORKING!

andreisdaman · « **Reply #7 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:51:45 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on February 03, 2012, 09:44:54 AM

Are you saying that the non-partisan CBO didn't go from honest to shady on Jan 21, 2009?

This is what bothers me... People who accepted Bush's low numbers, used these numbers to shit on obama when they were at 9%...

Suddenly they call these numbers bogus when the numbers are showing improvement for Obama.

You can't call a method valid for decades, then suddenly rule is biased/partisan/bullshit... can you?

And before we all agree with a hypothesis from sites like obamasucks.bushrocks.rom ney2012.blogspot.com, why isn't FOX calling them out on it, if it's false? Why isn't Romney?

well...you're right on, 240....every time I present this same argument to 3333, Dario, Fury, Whorewell, Kazan, they don't answer the question and scream about something else.....the numbers are right and honest when they make Obama look bad...they are bogus and manipulated by Obama when they show good news for the Prez....

their hypocrisy is unbelievable...which I have always said is the weakness of this board,,,no one calls them out except us when they are caught hypocritically with their pants down....

howardroark · « **Reply #8 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:56:52 AM »

The jobLESS rate is not at a three year low, it is at a thirty year high:

GigantorX · « **Reply #9 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:58:28 AM »

-1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force. That's a drop of 2% in a month.

-The LFPR is at fresh 30 year low.

-113k of those 234k jobs were "Low Wage" jobs.

Now as yourself, what new jobs are being "created"? What types? In what fields? How much do they pay? Are they temporary jobs? Full-time? Part-time?

Those aren't good statistics, and those statistics matter.

howardroark · « **Reply #10 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:00:44 AM »

Quote from: andreisdaman on February 03, 2012, 09:51:45 AM

well...you're right on, 240....every time I present this same argument to 3333, Dario, Fury, Whorewell, Kazan, they don't answer the question and scream about something else.....the numbers are right and honest when they make Obama look bad...they are bogus and manipulated by Obama when they show good news for the Prez....

their hypocrisy is unbelievable...which I have always said is the weakness of this board,,,no one calls them out except us when they are caught hypocritically with their pants down....

The answer has been given to you, but you cannot accept it because of your blind faith in Obummer. The unemployment rate has been falling because the BLS has defined away the vast majority of the long-term unemployed known as "discouraged workers." That is why the fall in the unemployment rate has been correlated with a shrinking labor force.

andreisdaman · « **Reply #11 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:01:58 AM »

Quote from: howardroark on February 03, 2012, 10:00:44 AM

The answer has been given to you, but you cannot accept it because of your blind faith in Obummer. The unemployment rate has been falling because the BLS has defined away the vast majority of the long-term unemployed known as "discouraged workers." That is why the fall in the unemployment rate has been correlated with a shrinking labor force.

This has ALWAYS been done...whats your point?

?..accept the good news and move on to fight another day...JESUS

howardroark · « **Reply #12 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:03:51 AM »

Quote from: andreisdaman on February 03, 2012, 10:01:58 AM

This has ALWAYS been done...whats your point??..accept the good news and move on to fight another day...JESUS

You fail at reading comprehension, don't you?

HAVING LABOR STATISTICIANS DEFINE AWAY THOSE WHO CAN'T FIND JOBS SHRINKS THE "OFFICIAL" UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, WHEN IN REALITY THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS INCREASING AND WORSENING.

andreisdaman · « **Reply #13 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:06:02 AM »

Quote from: howardroark on February 03, 2012, 10:03:51 AM

You fail at reading comprehension, don't you?

HAVING LABOR STATISTICIANS DEFINE AWAY THOSE WHO CAN'T FIND JOBS SHRINKS THE "OFFICIAL" UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, WHEN IN REALITY THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS INCREASING AND WORSENING.

and again....the Government has been doing the statistics this way for decades...why the problem now?

howardroark · « **Reply #14 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:10:53 AM »

Quote from: andreisdaman on February 03, 2012, 10:06:02 AM

and again....the Government has been doing the statistics this way for decades...why the problem now?

And again - as has been stated time and time again - it's been a problem! And if we calculate unemployment using the older methods, the unemployment rate is at a multi-decade high!!

Also, the BLS originally defined away discouraged workers since during good times it is easy to find a job - but during difficult times, people are finding themselves to be unemployed for longer and longer periods. And, unfortunately, the longer you're unemployed the more likely you are to fall out of the statistics. So during a weak economy, this new BLS measure of unemployment is even less reliable than it is during better economic times.

GigantorX · « **Reply #15 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:21:15 AM »

Quote from: howardroark on February 03, 2012, 10:03:51 AM

You fail at reading comprehension, don't you?

HAVING LABOR STATISTICIANS DEFINE AWAY THOSE WHO CAN'T FIND JOBS SHRINKS THE "OFFICIAL" UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, WHEN IN REALITY THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS INCREASING AND WORSENING.

Well explained and thought out, howard. I totally understand what you are saying. It's totally clear.

Most rational people would agree.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #16 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:22:50 AM »

. Andre - give it up.

GigantorX · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:23:36 AM »

Quote from: howardroark on February 03, 2012, 10:10:53 AM

And again - as has been stated time and time again - it's been a problem! And if we calculate unemployment using the older methods, the unemployment rate is at a multi-decade high!!

Also, the BLS originally defined away discouraged workers since during good times it is easy to find a job - but during difficult times, people are finding themselves to be unemployed for longer and longer periods. And, unfortunately, the longer you're unemployed the more likely you are to fall out of the statistics. So during a weak economy, this new BLS measure of unemployment is even less reliable than it is during better economic times.

You can also add the CPI and core/non-core inflation calculations to the list of stuff that hides the true nature.

Fury · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:29:49 AM »

Wow, did this thread ever backfire. On one hand, we have the two morons andreisadouche and 240 spouting off talking points and then we have Team "3-digit IQ" shutting them down hard.

1.2 million people fell off the rolls and these morons are celebrating it. LOL!!

tonymctones · « **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:46:18 AM »

Yes Andre they have been doing it for a long time they have also been keeping track of real unemployment since that time....real Unemployment is higher now then before Obama took office if you want to cheerlead that's fine but at least understand that we actually have less ppl employed today...

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #20 on:** February 03, 2012, 01:15:08 PM »

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/if-the-economy-is-improving

If the economy is getting better, then why did new home sales in the United States hit a brand new all-time record low during 2011?

If the economy is getting better, then why are there 6 million less jobs in America today than there were before the recession started?

If the economy is getting better, then why is the average duration of unemployment in this country close to an all-time record high?

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of homeless female veterans more than doubled?

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of Americans on food stamps increased by 3 million since this time last year and by more than 14 million since Barack Obama entered the White House?

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of children living in poverty in America risen for four years in a row?

If the economy is getting better, then why is the percentage of Americans living in “extreme poverty” at an all-time high?

If the economy is getting better, then why is the Federal Housing Administration on the verge of a financial collapse?

If the economy is getting better, then why do only 23 percent of American companies plan to hire more employees in 2012?

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of self-employed Americans fallen by more than 2 million since 2006?

If the economy is getting better, then why did an all-time record low percentage of U.S. teens have a job last summer?

If the economy is getting better, then why does median household income keep declining? Overall, median household income in the United States has declined by a total of 6.8% since December 2007 once you account for inflation.

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of Americans living below the poverty line increased by 10 million since 2006?

If the economy is getting better, then why is the average age of a vehicle in America now sitting at an all-time high?

If the economy is getting better, then why are 18 percent of all homes in the state of Florida currently sitting vacant?

If the economy is getting better, then why are 19 percent of all American men between the ages of 25 and 34 living with their parents?

If the economy is getting better, then why does the number of “long-term unemployed workers” stay so high? When Barack Obama first took office, the number of “long-term unemployed workers” in the United States was approximately 2.6 million. Today, that number is sitting at 5.6 million.

andreisdaman · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:03:05 PM »

Quote from: GigantorX on February 03, 2012, 09:58:28 AM

-1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force. That's a drop of 2% in a month.

-The LFPR is at fresh 30 year low.

-113k of those 234k jobs were "Low Wage" jobs.

Now as yourself, what new jobs are being "created"? What types? In what fields? How much do they pay? Are they temporary jobs? Full-time? Part-time?

Those aren't good statistics, and those statistics matter.

your argument has some merit...but this argument is NEVER made when the numbers make Obama look bad.,..they are just accepted without question

andreisdaman · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:04:28 PM »

Quote from: howardroark on February 03, 2012, 10:03:51 AM

You fail at reading comprehension, don't you?

HAVING LABOR STATISTICIANS DEFINE AWAY THOSE WHO CAN'T FIND JOBS SHRINKS THE "OFFICIAL" UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, WHEN IN REALITY THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS INCREASING AND WORSENING.

thats your opinion.....other people look at the statistics and see job growth.......I'm going by what the gov't defines the stats as being...as everyone always has

andreisdaman · « **Reply #23 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:08:00 PM »

Quote from: GigantorX on February 03, 2012, 10:21:15 AM

Well explained and thought out, howard. I totally understand what you are saying. It's totally clear.

Most rational people would agree.

Actually most rational and UNBIASED people would accept the statistics and move on to fight another day...the stats say UE is down to 8.5.....when they were at 10, I accepted it and said if it kept up at that pace, Obama was in trouble...no one quibbled then, including you...now all of a sudden, everyone is a statistician and pulling out graphs and stuff to show that the stats are wrong...

THE HYPOCRISY IS AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tonymctones · « **Reply #24 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:08:16 PM »

Quote from: andreisdaman on February 03, 2012, 10:04:28 PM

thats your opinion.....other people look at the statistics and see job growth.......I'm going by what the gov't defines the stats as being...as everyone always has

actually andre its not his opinion, its unadulterated fact bro.

again they have been keeping track of real unemployment since they started defining away those that drop out of the labor market. Go look up those stats for yourself to see the trend and where we stand now.