Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on December 02, 2011, 06:22:36 AM
-
1) Of course, these are massaged stats to help Barry get re-elected
2) If the UE rate had spiked to 11.4% this month, Repubs would be doing a dance in the street, pounding their chests about a number they find credible because they agree with it.
3) Power of the Incumbency. He can change UE rate, massage numbers, then seal everything for 40 years. It's real.
-
LOL. turn off the TV and read something real. The UE rate did not fall - the amount of people working did!
-
LOL. turn off the TV and read something real. The UE rate did not fall - the amount of people working did!
Does the 'rate' have a required baseline number? No. If 1/2 of America died in another bubonic plague, the amount of ppl working would certainly fall, but the rate would still be the number of UE vs Employed out of 100. That's simple.
So while the numbers are bullshit, this isn't an economics forum - it's a politics forum. And the argument that "No president has ever won when UE is at ___%" might not hold up anymore.
And unless the Republican candidate is willing to stand on debate stage and accuse the BLS of fraud... lol... it won't matter.
-
Hope & Change
-
There is already a thread on this and the reasoning behind the drop was also explained by someone much smarter than you.
But this is par the course for an Obama dicksucker like yourself.
By the way, U6 is well over 11%.
-
There is already a thread on this and the reasoning behind the drop was also explained by someone much smarter than you.
But this is par the course for an Obama dicksucker like yourself.
By the way, U6 is well over 11%.
1) I'm not a dicksucker, but I have nothing against people who like the cawk.
2) I bet UE or underemployment is a lot higher than 11%, I'm with you there.
3) Politically, this is a very smart move. Morally corrupt and economically unsound, sure, ,but we're not on a religious or economics forum. I mean, the GWB robo-calls mentioning Mccain's illigitimate child wasn't discussed on telecom message boards - it was a political tactic. As was this.
4) Obama's at a no-lose spot now. If he fakes UE and loses the election, at least he tried. If he fakes it and wins, then it's a good move.
-
It has to be someone like RP who can get up there in the debate with Obama and explain the reasoning behind this to the retards.
For every 1 person that gets hired, 2.5 quit looking for work. That is the stat to reflect on.
-
It has to be someone like RP who can get up there in the debate with Obama and explain the reasoning behind this to the retards.
For every 1 person that gets hired, 2.5 quit looking for work. That is the stat to reflect on.
no need to call me a dicksucker. I agree the numbers are faker than a 3rd tittie.
I don't see Newt or Mitt standing in front of a national audience and telling us the numbers are staged. I don't. Because they know they will be massaging the numbers in 2015 to make their performance look as good as possible for re-election.
Ron paul is a 1 term president at his age, who would probably prefer if people know the numebrs are lies.
-
Yes, this is due to a shrinking of the labor force, not due to an actual increase in the employment rate. The labor force shrank by 315,000 whereas employment grew by 278,000. Basically, what this means is that 315,000 people were unable to find satisfactory jobs and thus dropped out of the labor force. To statisticians, that might count as a drop in unemployment, but to those 315,000 people and millions of other Americans, that represents an increase in unemployment and poverty.
-
Yes, this is due to a shrinking of the labor force, not due to an actual increase in the employment rate. The labor force shrank by 315,000 whereas employment grew by 278,000. Basically, what this means is that 315,000 people were unable to find satisfactory jobs and thus dropped out of the labor force. To statisticians, that might count as a drop in unemployment, but to those 315,000 people and millions of other Americans, that represents an increase in unemployment and poverty.
Go check out HP - they are acting like the jobs are exploding everywhere.
-
no need to call me a dicksucker. I agree the numbers are faker than a 3rd tittie.
I don't see Newt or Mitt standing in front of a national audience and telling us the numbers are staged. I don't. Because they know they will be massaging the numbers in 2015 to make their performance look as good as possible for re-election.
Ron paul is a 1 term president at his age, who would probably prefer if people know the numebrs are lies.
Rob,
BF does "need" to call you names
He's profoundly insecure, plagued with self loathing and angry at the world for his shitty life and the only way he can make himself feel better is to resort to 3rd grade level tactics on an anonymous message board
-
8.6% unemployment? Baloney
dailymail ^ | 12/2/2011 | Don Surber
The federal government said employment increased by 120,000 in November (an increase of less than 1/1,000th) and the unemployment rate fell by 0.4%? Baloney. It is a statistical lie aimed at making it sound as if the economy is growing.
Indeed, Bloomberg reported that 315,000 people left the workforce — meaning the number of dropouts was nearly triple the net gain in jobs.
From Marketwatch: “WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) – The U.S. gained 120,000 jobs in November and the unemployment rate fell to 8.6% from 9.0%, the Labor Department said Friday. The government also revised jobs data for October and September to show that 72,000 additional jobs were created. Economists surveyed by MarketWatch had forecast a 125,000 increase in employment in November and no change in the jobless rate. About half of the drop in the unemployment rate stemmed from a decline in the number of workers in the labor force.”
I will say this, Gallup and others have polls that show a drop in the unemployment rate. But this figure from the Bureau of Labor Statistics is bogus.
Politically, this is of course a godsend for the president. This should send his approval rate past 50% again for the first time since May when he personally stalked, surprised and shot Osama bin Laden and then played a round of golf with his head. I do not buy that a president needs the unemployment rate to be below 7.2% to win re-election. Jerry Ford almost pulled it off despite 7.8% unemployment.
All a president need do is show progress on the economy, as President Reagan did in 1984.
This also boosts Mitt Romney’s chances. As Obama’s chances for re-election rise, the more moderate Republicans will become in selecting a nominee. It is atoss-up as to who is more moderate, Newt or Romney, but Romney is the safer choice. teh Mormon has the fewest wives.
I still stand by the Surber Rule: The economy will win the presidency for Republicans in 2012. Republicans should talk about nothing else, and should avoid troll questions by any reporter who tries to distract them.
Obama is too likable to the majority of Americans to be held accountable for his many, many blunders. Solyndra and Fast and Furious are not gaining traction. They likely will become an issue by next summer. But the Republican nominee can let the House handle those scandals. Focus on the economy. Americans are still pissed about it.
The Associated Press report:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The unemployment rate fell last month to its lowest level in more than two and a half years, as employers stepped up hiring in response to the slowly improving economy.
The Labor Department says the unemployment rate dropped sharply to 8.6 percent last month, down from 9 percent in October. The rate hasn’t been that low since March 2009, during the depths of the recession.
Employers added 120,000 jobs last month. And the previous two months were revised up to show that 72,000 more jobs added — the fourth straight month the government revised prior months higher.
Still, one reason the unemployment rate fell so much was because roughly 315,000 people gave up looking for work and were no longer counted as unemployed.
-
33,
would you be calling it baloney if Obama had announced it jumped to 11.6% this month?
No, you'd be rubbing his nose in it.
IN FACT, I don't remember you and other repubs calling the UE rate BS when it was spiked near 10% - you were laughing at obama for having a 10% UE rate!
You didn't say "slow down getbiggers, we don't know that it's 10%, these numbers are flawed, give obama a break..."
You shit on him no matter what dog.
-
33,
would you be calling it baloney if Obama had announced it jumped to 11.6% this month?
No, you'd be rubbing his nose in it.
IN FACT, I don't remember you and other repubs calling the UE rate BS when it was spiked near 10% - you were laughing at obama for having a 10% UE rate!
You didn't say "slow down getbiggers, we don't know that it's 10%, these numbers are flawed, give obama a break..."
You shit on him no matter what dog.
Fuck off. I go by the numbers that they are fudging. Bottom line - the LFPR is still shrinking! We are losing jobs.
-
Fuck off. I go by the numbers that they are fudging. Bottom line - the LFPR is still shrinking! We are losing jobs.
So to be clear - you think Obama was lying about the numbers being 10% when they were that high?
-
So to be clear - you think Obama was lying about the numbers being 10% when they were that high?
Yes!!!! It was even higher at the time.
Only a douchebag and dirtbag would buy into anything obama is vomiting from his dirty pie hole.
-
Yes!!!! It was even higher at the time.
Only a douchebag and dirtbag would buy into anything obama is vomiting from his dirty pie hole.
By your own argument - the cheated 10% rate has now been dropped to a cheated 8.6%.
Is obama cheating MORE now, or has the economy recovered?
Any documentation for any of this, or is this all CT material?
-
By your own argument - the cheated 10% rate has now been dropped to a cheated 8.6%.
Is obama cheating MORE now, or has the economy recovered?
Any documentation for any of this, or is this all CT material?
LOL. The economy is getting worse! ! ! ! Less people are working !!
-
LOL. The economy is getting worse! ! ! ! Less people are working !!
What year did the BLS start fudging the numbers?
-
240, do you realize you're being intellectually dishonest or are you willfully blind to the facts? "IN FACT, I don't remember you and other repubs calling the UE rate BS when it was spiked near 10% - you were laughing at obama for having a 10% UE rate!" is an unfair statement and you know it. The REASON why unemployment fell was because the labor force participation rate fell. The labor force participation rate doesn't fall in regular economic times; in fact it increases. That is why the economy has to produce at least a couple hundred thousand jobs per month (or per quarter? I forget) in order to keep the unemployment rate stable during normal economic times. The labor force shrunk because people weren't able to find jobs and so they gave up and left the labor market! That is a faaaar worse sign than a decrease in the "unemployment rate." Since the unemployment rate does not include these people, it is by no means a fair or accurate number. If you take 315,000 unemployed people and magically say "well, we won't count them as unemployed anymore," does that REALLY decrease the unemployment rate? Or are those just useless, fudged statistical numbers at that point?
-
I am completely cool with agreeing the BLS numbers are fudged and suspect.
My point is that the BLS employs 2500 people and has been in business for 120 years.
So unless they just started fudging the numbers in 2009... have we been using skewed numebrs all along?
-
I am completely cool with agreeing the BLS numbers are fudged and suspect.
My point is that the BLS employs 2500 people and has been in business for 120 years.
So unless they just started fudging the numbers in 2009... have we been using skewed numebrs all along?
Just look around driving down any street and there is your answer.
-
I am completely cool with agreeing the BLS numbers are fudged and suspect.
My point is that the BLS employs 2500 people and has been in business for 120 years.
So unless they just started fudging the numbers in 2009... have we been using skewed numebrs all along?
The definition of "unemployment" has changed over time. The unemployment numbers that we have from the Great Depression are more akin to U6 than U3, which is now considered the "unemployment rate."
Regardless, it's very clear what happened this time around: the labor force SHRUNK, because those who were unable to find jobs simply left the labor force, and THAT is why the unemployment rate "fell." That is not good news any way you slice it.