Dems: Record low unemployment numbers are a result of Trump's "reckless" policies

[rogue06]

The consistent trend in unemployment and major decrease was under Obama. Recently we are hovering around 4 percent.

Accusing Dems of what this thread is trying in vain to do is Conservative hyperbole and generalization.

The benefits described benefits the poor, which conservative hate with great disdain, and helps the economy of the l ow income areas of the country

Yeah, as a result of a massive number of people simply abandoning looking for work (and thereby being removed from unemployment numbers), record numbers being put on disability and with the lion's share of jobs that were created being part time. Good times

Now we are actually experiencing a time when there are more jobs available (both for skilled and unskilled labor) than there are people to fill them.

[rogue06]

Yep. You duplicitously pretend that they were talking about MS-13 rather than talking about immigrants. I am getting so sick of your constant falsehoods. Just stop already. You're by far the worst poster on TWeb at just continuously spouting this sort of falsehood, when you've been corrected over and over again, so it's clearly intentional on your part.

Pelosi was specifically referencing MS-13 when she blathered on about their "spark of divinity" and how we need to "respect the dignity and worth." That is why I keep referring to her as the gift that keeps on giving. Feinstein equated them with legal immigrants therefore she was including them as being "our family and friends and they make significant contributions to our country" -- especially considering that the context was about a discussion concerning MS-13.

As far as your whining that I'm "by far the worst poster on TWeb" I'll wear that label as a badge of honor considering the source. Much like I was happy to be at the top of Jorge's "pig list."

[Starlight]

The consistent trend in unemployment and major decrease was under Obama. Recently we are hovering around 4 percent.

Yep. Bureau of Labor and Statistics figures say precisely that...

Unemployment

Unemployment shot up in Bush W's great recession, and then it went down pretty steadily once Obama got things sorted, and Trump's come in at the tail end of it. It's getting pretty close to flat now at around 4%.

What seems to be concerning economists though is that incomes aren't rising. The median income for the first quarter of this year was essentially the same as the final quarter of Obama's term in office. During Obama's time in office he got Bush's Great Recession under control by the end of his first year in office and then we saw a period of consistent job growth for the rest of his time in office, and then at the tail end of that period (2015-16) incomes started to rise a little as you might expect if there was low employment and employers were starting to have to offer higher wages to attract employees. But now that's flat-lined again under Trump. Not good.

Yeah, as a result of a massive number of people simply abandoning looking for work (and thereby being removed from unemployment numbers)

Out of curiosity I had a dig through the BLS data on discouraged workers as they are called (people who've given up looking for work but want it). And... no, there's not really massive numbers of them at all. They would be lost in the rounding if you added them into the total unemployment numbers (< 10% of the number of unemployed people). So, nope, not a plausible explanation for the flat-lining of the unemployment rate.

record numbers being put on disability

According to the data the number of people on disability at the end of Obama's term in office was pretty much the same as when he took office. So no. There was a temporary uptick that dropped back down again in the 2009-2013 period as people went onto the disability benefit then came off it again when they found work. That might be what you're (mis)remembering.

and with the lion's share of jobs that were created being part time.

Gonna have to call pants on fire on that one.

BLS data says that from the lowest part of the Great Recession (Dec 2009) to the end of Obama's time in office (Dec 2016) there were 13.7 million full-time jobs created and only 0.4 million part-time jobs created. So, nope, not in any way, shape or form were the lion's share part time. Slightly under 3% of the jobs created were part time, that's not a lion's share unless it's a dwarfed and half-starved lion cub.


Overall, I'm gonna have to give you 0/3 for those explanations rogue. They don't stand up to double-checking.

[JimL]

Yep. You duplicitously pretend that they were talking about MS-13 rather than talking about immigrants. I am getting so sick of your constant falsehoods. Just stop already. You're by far the worst poster on TWeb at just continuously spouting this sort of falsehood, when you've been corrected over and over again, so it's clearly intentional on your part.

rogue is a Trumpster, what else would you expect.

[rogue06]

Out of curiosity I had a dig through the BLS data on discouraged workers as they are called (people who've given up looking for work but want it). And... no, there's not really massive numbers of them at all. They would be lost in the rounding if you added them into the total unemployment numbers (< 10% of the number of unemployed people). So, nope, not a plausible explanation for the flat-lining of the unemployment rate.

For whatever reason that does not include all the folks who simply opted for early retirement not so much because they wanted to but because they couldn't find a job^[1]. Even if you don't include them, according to CNN Money, that still left something like 7.5 million people who dropped out of the labor force not due to retirement, illness or going back to school. The labor force participation rate (the percentage of people that participate in the labor force by either having a job or looking for one) declined for all Americans during Obama's time in office from 65.7% to 62.7%. It was even lower (62.4%^[2]) shortly before the 2016 election but that started turning around almost immediately after it. Go figure.

Further, one of the legacies of the Obama Era is the sharp drop of women in the labor force. At the end of his Administration there were only 4.311 million women who became employed whereas 7.756 million left the labor force. This means that the labor force participation rate for women dropped from 59.4% when he took office to 56.7% when he left. Talk about your War on Women.

The fact is that the final jobs report from the Obama presidency revealed that the number that dropped out of the labor force went up by 18.09% since he took office back in January of 2009. Further, under Obama the number of Americans not in the labor force went from 80 million to slightly more than 95 million. Sure he inherited a bad economy with a high "funemployment"^[3] rate but the rate was considerably higher under Reagan and he managed to turn it around without having millions simply abandoning looking for work.

Going over to friends for the rest of the afternoon and out for an early dinner (I have to be in bed early since I have to be up by 3:45 AM to get ready for work). I'll try to remember to go over the rest of your post later.








1. Conversely older workers who weren't forced to retire by becoming unemployed now tended to put off retiring or switching to part time in larger numbers in spite of the expectations from government economists that they would thanks to Obamacare allowing anyone to buy health insurance regardless of pre-existing conditions. The reasoning was this would decrease "job lock" (the tendency of workers in their late 50s and early 60s to keep their jobs due to a fear of losing health insurance until Medicare kicks in at 65). Lot of speculation with few hard numbers why this was the case.

2. The worst it was since 1977 when we were in the throes of what really was the worst recession since the Great Depression where unemployment and inflation both reached double digits and interest rates were over 20%. Not a good time to try to buy a home or even a car unless you could buy it outright.

3.

[Darth Ovious]

You mean like Pelosi who gushed on about their "spark of divinity" and how we need to "respect the dignity and worth" of these wanton killers? Or Schumer comparing MS-13 to our ancestors who came to America declaring that our "great-great-grandparents" weren't animals when they immigrated here and members of MS-13 "aren't either"? Or maybe Feinstein when she droned on about how they "are our family and friends and they make significant contributions to our country"? To be fair in the latter case Feinstein was duplicitously trying to conflate MS-13 with legal immigrants which in itself is reprehensible.

And speaking of not being good about being truthful, how about this whooper from you?

That's how racist they are. A gang that rapes and murder people are compared to all other immigrants.

[rogue06]

BLS data says that from the lowest part of the Great Recession (Dec 2009) to the end of Obama's time in office (Dec 2016) there were 13.7 million full-time jobs created and only 0.4 million part-time jobs created. So, nope, not in any way, shape or form were the lion's share part time. Slightly under 3% of the jobs created were part time, that's not a lion's share unless it's a dwarfed and half-starved lion cub.

Left out is that under the Obama Administration the definition of what is part-time was radically changed. For generations a full-time job was defined as working 40 hours a week or more. That was changed to 30 hours a week. So they can claim Americans were finding full-time jobs when in fact many were getting jobs where they lost 25% of their hours.

That was exactly what happened to me after I took a year off in 2012 to take care of my mother when she got cancer. And when I tried to find work elsewhere everything I found was doing the same thing. I didn't get actual full time work until 2 years ago.

[Cow Poke]

Yep. You duplicitously pretend...

I went ahead and amen'd your post just because you used the word duplicitously - even though I don't believe it applies to Rogue.

[Cow Poke]

rogue is a Trumpster, what else would you expect.

Jimmy is a NAMBLAer, what else would you expect?

[rogue06]

I went ahead and amen'd your post just because you used the word duplicitously - even though I don't believe it applies to Rogue.

Meh. The boy was just parroting me

You mean like Pelosi who gushed on about their "spark of divinity" and how we need to "respect the dignity and worth" of these wanton killers? Or Schumer comparing MS-13 to our ancestors who came to America declaring that our "great-great-grandparents" weren't animals when they immigrated here and members of MS-13 "aren't either"? Or maybe Feinstein when she droned on about how they "are our family and friends and they make significant contributions to our country"? To be fair in the latter case Feinstein was duplicitously trying to conflate MS-13 with legal immigrants which in itself is reprehensible.

Yep. You duplicitously pretend that they were talking about MS-13 rather than talking about immigrants. I am getting so sick of your constant falsehoods. Just stop already. You're by far the worst poster on TWeb at just continuously spouting this sort of falsehood, when you've been corrected over and over again, so it's clearly intentional on your part.

[Cow Poke]

Meh. The boy was just parroting me

OK, I TRIPLE amen'd you!


(don't know why it only shows one )

[JimL]

Source: June beats expectations with 213,000 new payroll jobs, unemployment at 4 percent

Source

© Copyright Original Source

Nevertheless Democrats seem to think this is bad news^[1]. Nancy Pelosi issued a statement via Twitter that the June jobs report declaring that this is evidence that Americans are getting a "raw deal" and DNC Chair and former Labor Secretary under Obama, Tom Perez^[2]

She also said that they "creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name" which begs the question if food stamps and unemployment are better than jobs, as she said, why would you want to create jobs at all? Could it be that she knows what she was spewing is a load of bovine scat?

Still one of my favorite Pelosisms is when she said that people losing their jobs ought to be regarded not as rising unemployment but rather an increase in "funemployment." That's because you should consider yourself lucky to be out of work because













1. And maybe it is -- for them. A headline from CNBC explains when similar numbers were reported the previous month:

2. and who recently proclaimed that socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a "spectacular" candidate who represents the "future of our party"

Last year of Obamas administration the created jobs in June were nearly 300,00 in comparison to Trumps 213,000 this June. Obama also created more jobs in his last year in office than Trump created in his first year. Stop being such Trumpster boob!

[One Bad Pig]

Last year of Obamas administration the created jobs in June were nearly 300,00 in comparison to Trumps 213,000 this June. Obama also created more jobs in his last year in office than Trump created in his first year. Stop being such Trumpster boob!

This is where you're expected to back up your assertion with proof, Jim.

[Cow Poke]

This is where you're expected to back up your assertion with proof, Jim.

You such funny funny pig!

[JimL]

This is where you're expected to back up your assertion with proof, Jim.

I'll back up my assertions when and if I choose to OBP, otherwise you are free to show me I'm wrong if you choose. Would you choose to?