Labor Secretary Hilda Solis lied about today's unemployment numbers

[landrun]

The labor numbers don't add up. The labor department claims the unemployment number just fell faster in September than it has in the last 30 years.
But the actual numbers gained is relatively small. It makes no sense and they know it.

Watch this video.
Very odd behavior to say the least.
Labor Secretary Hilda Solis acts normal until she begin to answer the question about today's labor report being cooked up.

Then she begins to blink rapidly and constantly. Watch it. Very strange!

The psychology and crime site, a self described place to collate information of interest in a forensic psychological context,
here: http://deception.crimepsychblog.com/?p=134
says the following:


While lying, the more psychopathic offenders spoke faster and demonstrated increases in blinking and head movements. Indicators of deception in offenders were somewhat different from those typically observed in non-offender populations. These findings indicate that personality factors may have an impact on nonverbal indicators of deception in criminal justice settings where the detection of deception is of utmost concern.

Now what the video. Extremely strang behavior while claiming she's not lying to the American people. She begins to answer the question around the 42 second mark.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/jobs-report-met-skepticism_653731.html

If you believe the unemployment rate in this country just fell faster than it has in last 30 years, then we can't even have a rational conversation with you. :dejection:

[olevetonahill]

Its Bushs fault

[soonercruiser]

The unemloyment number are calculated from 2 different DOL surveys.
(..and we aren't even talking about the fact that this administration decided to stop counting the chronically unemployed. That overall number is still 14%)

One of the surveys is a very large survey, and pretty accurate.
The other is a relatively small survey, and easy to stop when you get the answer you want.
The Secretary of labor, although insulted by the charges, did not do that survey herself.
Gee! What a coincidence! :heart-borken:
But, for those unemployed, I hope it is true.

Anybody remember a lot od OMB and DOL statistics that end up significantly corrected 2 months later???

[StoopTroup]

You fellas looking for work?

[OU_Sooners75]

You fellas looking for work?

Nope, but heard you were.

[soonercruiser]

You fellas looking for work?

Too busy watching cow turds dry.
Are yours done yet?

[landrun]

Less than 115,000 jobs were added in September. That doesn't even keep up with population growth.
There is no possible way the employement rate is 7.8% with that number.
The number will be correct and adjusted upward to over 8% .... after the election.

edit: I'll add that there have only been three months this year we added fewer jobs than we did in September (highlighted in bold)
Every other month this year we've added more jobs.

September:114,000 jobs were added.
August:96,000 jobs were added
July:163,000 jobs added
June:80,000 jobs added
May: 65,000 jobs added
April: 115,000 jobs added
March: 120,000 jobs added
February: 227,000 jobs added
January: 243,000 jobs added

[Skysooner]

August and July were both revised higher so your numbers are wrong as any halfway decent research would have revealed.

[landrun]

August and July were both revised higher so your numbers are wrong as any halfway decent research would have revealed.

Please share, what were they?

[yermom]

at some point before Obama, they changed the way the unemployment numbers were counted

it's based on the number of people getting unemployment, isn't it?

[SCOUT]

at some point before Obama, they changed the way the unemployment numbers were counted

it's based on the number of people getting unemployment, isn't it?

It is. That is why people have questions. When 114,000 new jobs are created in a month, but unemployed claims decreased by 456,000 (with total employment raising by 873,000) it raises eyebrows. As is usually the case, it is more complicated than just that. It is dry reading but the official release is here:

http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

To me, the most interesting number is the increase of 600,000 "involuntary part-time" employees. Regardless, the numbers are odd but nothing more than that IMO.

[SCOUT]

Please share, what were they?
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for July was revised from
+141,000 to +181,000, and the change for August was revised from +96,000 to
+142,000.

[Skysooner]

August and July were both revised higher so your numbers are wrong as any halfway decent research would have revealed.

Please share, what were they?
BTW I am not saying you are wrong in this. I read the increases on cnn and yahoo today and the methodology predates this administration supposedly. As with all things and politics the truth is hard to discern.

[FaninAma]

The unemployment drop came from a magical 800,000 people who said they are now self-employed or working from home. In other words....no possible way to verify those numbers.

Of course these numbers are bogus. Does anybody really believe any of the statistics put out by the government. Remember they claim there has only been 2% or less inflation a year for the past 20 years.

[yermom]

It is. That is why people have questions. When 114,000 new jobs are created in a month, but unemployed claims decreased by 456,000 (with total employment raising by 873,000) it raises eyebrows. As is usually the case, it is more complicated than just that. It is dry reading but the official release is here:

http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

To me, the most interesting number is the increase of 600,000 "involuntary part-time" employees. Regardless, the numbers are odd but nothing more than that IMO.

people could be picking up seasonal jobs for the holidays? i do have recruiters bombarding me all the time. it doesn't seem all that bad out there to me...

[SCOUT]

people could be picking up seasonal jobs for the holidays? i do have recruiters bombarding me all the time. it doesn't seem all that bad out there to me...

Seasonal adjustments are often required (and disclosed when they are) but September is too early for that type of swing. I don't have an answer, by the way. I was just surprised at how high it was in September.

[Mazeppa]

Meet the Obama Donors at the BLS
BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
October 5, 2012 1:28 pm

At least two economists at the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) have contributed to President Barack Obama’s campaign. Harley Frazis of Bethesda, MD, has contributed at least $2,000 to Obama and $9,000 to the Democratic National Committee over the last three election cycles. During his time at BLS, Harley has published a number of papers including his most recent, “How to Think About Time-Use Data: What Inferences Can We Make About Long- and Short-Run Time Use from Time Diaries?”

Stephen Phillips of Washington, D.C., has contributed at least $270 to Obama during the 2012 cycle. According to his LinkedIn profile, Phillips served as an economist at BLS between June 2009 and July 2012. Phillips was responsible for examining the impact of Obamacare on Healthcare North American Industry Classification System indices. Phillips was also assistant coach for a girls’ high school tennis team in 2010.

[Mazeppa]

See, I Told You So: Regime Manipulates the Jobless Number Below 8% by Election Day
Rush Limbaugh October 05, 2012


BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: There you have it, folks. The economy's back. The stimulus worked. The job council's programs all worked. Obamacare worked. Look at all the jobs, 114,000 new jobs created, and as I told you last December, this would happen. The unemployment rate under 8%. It's 7.9, but it doesn't matter, 7.8, 7.9, whatever's after the decimal point doesn't matter. It's the seven that matters, and the reason it does is that no incumbent president has ever been reelected with the unemployment rate over 8%. It's that simple.

[Skysooner]

See, I Told You So: Regime Manipulates the Jobless Number Below 8% by Election Day
Rush Limbaugh October 05, 2012


BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: There you have it, folks. The economy's back. The stimulus worked. The job council's programs all worked. Obamacare worked. Look at all the jobs, 114,000 new jobs created, and as I told you last December, this would happen. The unemployment rate under 8%. It's 7.9, but it doesn't matter, 7.8, 7.9, whatever's after the decimal point doesn't matter. It's the seven that matters, and the reason it does is that no incumbent president has ever been reelected with the unemployment rate over 8%. It's that simple.

He was going to be reelected regardless. Rush is simply stirring up folks like you so that he earns his money. There are plenty of people on both sides that do that. Ed Schultz on the "left" is an example of a pseudo-liberal. People play to their own self-interest.

[StoopTroup]

BTW I am not saying you are wrong in this. I read the increases on cnn and yahoo today and the methodology predates this administration supposedly. As with all things and politics the truth is hard to discern.

But this should matter and what Romney said in the debate shouldn't because it's OK if he misrepresents himself or changes his entire campaign a Month before the election because he's the nominee now.

Erick Erickson: I don't think it is helpful or healthy for the GOP to argue that both polling and job numbers are cooked.

[SCOUT]

But this should matter and what Romney said in the debate shouldn't because it's OK if he misrepresents himself or changes his entire campaign a Month before the election because he's the nominee now.

Erick Erickson: I don't think it is helpful or healthy for the GOP to argue that both polling and job numbers are cooked.
You are the King of the straw men. I salute you.

Also, who the hell is Erick Erickson?

[Skysooner]

But this should matter and what Romney said in the debate shouldn't because it's OK if he misrepresents himself or changes his entire campaign a Month before the election because he's the nominee now.

Erick Erickson: I don't think it is helpful or healthy for the GOP to argue that both polling and job numbers are cooked.

Never said that either. Romney did a great job of lying about all the stuff that came before this or now trying to give us detail a month ahead of the election. I have said that the polling bs is just that. I work with statistics every single day, and I know that this mass conspiracy stuff is just a lame attempt at spin. There is virtually no way this was manipulated to any degree. The methodology I really don't know about. I'm simply reading what others say and trying to interpret. From what I gather, this measure has been this way for a long time, but I also know there are many times even in my own organization that numbers are cooked to make a person look better. It happens. It isn't important however. This election is not about two extremes between Presidents. Instead it is an election about what Congress will try and pass and can get by the President.

[SCOUT]

Never said that either. Romney did a great job of lying about all the stuff that came before this or now trying to give us detail a month ahead of the election. I have said that the polling bs is just that. I work with statistics every single day, and I know that this mass conspiracy stuff is just a lame attempt at spin. There is virtually no way this was manipulated to any degree. The methodology I really don't know about. I'm simply reading what others say and trying to interpret. From what I gather, this measure has been this way for a long time, but I also know there are many times even in my own organization that numbers are cooked to make a person look better. It happens. It isn't important however. This election is not about two extremes between Presidents. Instead it is an election about what Congress will try and pass and can get by the President.

I agree with you up until the end of your post, and even then it is only a tangential change. My tangent is the perception of a portion of the populace. Statistically, no simple little adjustment/tweak/massage of the numbers will matter, particularly over time. Trailing 12 month averages are an easy way to eliminate that sort of blip. However, the uninformed see unemployment as a single number. They see it as gospel. To those folks, those voters, this could matter.

With all that said, I don't think there was any purposeful manipulation.

[Skysooner]

I agree with you up until the end of your post, and even then it is only a tangential change. My tangent is the perception of a portion of the populace. Statistically, no simple little adjustment/tweak/massage of the numbers will matter, particularly over time. Trailing 12 month averages are an easy way to eliminate that sort of blip. However, the uninformed see unemployment as a single number. They see it as gospel. To those folks, those voters, this could matter.

With all that said, I don't think there was any purposeful manipulation.

The uninformed don't change based on stuff like this. They decided long ago. This applies to the people that vote either party without questioning anything.

[Sooner5030]

while there are problems with the way UE is calculated I seriously doubt there is any idealogical bias that is causing some sort of massive collusion between the folks in BLS. It's just not possible....too many people with their hands in it that would not go along.

I do think we should move from the UE and instead use some other worker:nonworker ratio to gauge how sustainable our system is.

[Mazeppa]

With all that said, I don't think there was any purposeful manipulation.

Then why did the numbers go down a month from the election and not in any of the 30 months before?

[SCOUT]

The uninformed don't change based on stuff like this. They decided long ago. This applies to the people that vote either party without questioning anything.

I honestly disagree with you. The uninformed make snap judgments...because they don't have any information. Unemployment is low? President is good. Unemployment high? President is bad.

That is why I categorize them as uninformed.

[SCOUT]

Then why did the numbers go down a month from the election and not in any of the 30 months before?

I have already said that I don't have an answer. I could speculate till the cows come home, but it wouldn't be valid in any way.

[Skysooner]

I honestly disagree with you. The uninformed make snap judgments...because they don't have any information. Unemployment is low? President is good. Unemployment high? President is bad.

That is why I categorize them as uninformed.

Uninformed don't read news.....

[SCOUT]

For example:
People moving past their UE claim limit
People becoming self employed
Part time employment (which saw a very large increase in Sept) vs. Full time
Becoming Stay at Homes
Retirement
1099's - Contract work

There may well be tampering going on at the BLS. I don't know. My view is that I don't think there is. I have been wrong before.

[SCOUT]

Uninformed don't read news.....

No but they watch The View.

Geeze, don't be obtuse

[Skysooner]

No but they watch The View.

Geeze, don't be obtuse

True. I'm talking about the uninformed who are undecided. Rarely do they vote and that is backed up with lots of data. The truly uninformed are going to vote their party line whichever way it is. My best friend from high school's mother lives in Oklahoma City (and is mega rich) still insists that Obama is a Muslim. She was going to vote R anyway. Her daughter who lives in Denver will vote D.

[SCOUT]

True. I'm talking about the uninformed who are undecided. Rarely do they vote and that is backed up with lots of data. The truly uninformed are going to vote their party line whichever way it is. My best friend from high school's mother lives in Oklahoma City (and is mega rich) still insists that Obama is a Muslim. She was going to vote R anyway. Her daughter who lives in Denver will vote D.
This is good. You and I are in agreement, although again to a degree. I know those folks, I live with those folks. Interestingly enough they are on the absolute other end of the spectrum. My Brother-In-Law was put in, in school suspension (in 4th grade) because he said that President Reagan should be killed. Why would he say that? That is what he heard at home all the time.

Anyway, your clarification is important. I shouldn't say uninformed. I should say marginally informed and lazy. Those are the folks that single month data will/could impact.

[Sooner5030]

True. I'm talking about the uninformed who are undecided. Rarely do they vote and that is backed up with lots of data. The truly uninformed are going to vote their party line whichever way it is. My best friend from high school's mother lives in Oklahoma City (and is mega rich) still insists that Obama is a Muslim. She was going to vote R anyway. Her daughter who lives in Denver will vote D.

I've always wondered who these so called undecided voters are that they always seem to find for a focus group on teevee.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

AOL Jobs spoke today to one of those economists at the BLS, John Mullins, about the process behind putting together the reports.


Q. Is there any chance for the data to be doctored?

A. No. And we are not political appointees. In my program, there are 15 economists. I have been here for 15 years, some of my colleagues have been here for longer. We don't really talk politics at work, at least not any more than in any other workplace. I would say I wouldn't even really know which way my colleagues lean politically.

Q. Are there any measures taken to make sure the numbers aren't doctored?

A. The data are reviewed by supervisory staff to make sure the analysis is based on sound statistical data. Any one person doesn't have influence great enough to change the numbers significantly. And over the course of the year, it's cross-checked with state unemployment data, which would reveal any inaccuracies. Our methodology is known to prominent statistical organizations and it is transparent and consistent with standard statistical practices.

The process is open and transparent, and all the information is on our website. Anyone who understands the process and statistics knows how preposterous the charge of doctoring is. And I will add that we're all professionals, and we take pride in this not being political.

[SCOUT]

AOL Jobs spoke today to one of those economists at the BLS, John Mullins, about the process behind putting together the reports.


Q. Is there any chance for the data to be doctored?

A. No. And we are not political appointees. In my program, there are 15 economists. I have been here for 15 years, some of my colleagues have been here for longer. We don't really talk politics at work, at least not any more than in any other workplace. I would say I wouldn't even really know which way my colleagues lean politically.

Q. Are there any measures taken to make sure the numbers aren't doctored?

A. The data are reviewed by supervisory staff to make sure the analysis is based on sound statistical data. Any one person doesn't have influence great enough to change the numbers significantly. And over the course of the year, it's cross-checked with state unemployment data, which would reveal any inaccuracies. Our methodology is known to prominent statistical organizations and it is transparent and consistent with standard statistical practices.

The process is open and transparent, and all the information is on our website. Anyone who understands the process and statistics knows how preposterous the charge of doctoring is. And I will add that we're all professionals, and we take pride in this not being political.
I am very reluctant to say this, heck just look at my previous post. The questions asked in that exchange doesn't address the only claim that may have some legs. The process is the same, but was the information reported consistent with months passed? In other words, was a shortened survey, or a different survey, used in lieu of the traditional one.

I am a person who reports labor data to the BLS. It is what it is. The word survey has just been tossed around a lot and that is nebulous term.

[diverdog]

The biggest jump came from part time workers. The problem for Obama is the 7.8% unemployment rate will go up when these jobs are shed. Of course that won't happen until the election is over. The real unemployment number which is the U6 number still stands above 14%.

[Midtowner]

Funny stuff. This conspiracy theory brought to you by the same folks who said:

1) Obama is a Muslim;
2) Obama is Kenyan;
3) Obama is an anti-colonialist who wants to degrade the United States to avenge Kenya for British colonialism;
4) Obama was exposed to very liberal thinking in his youth, thus is a communist.

The list goes on. Some people are pretty gullible.

[sappstuf]

Jack Welch is wrong, but that doesn’t make today’s unemployment numbers right. This morning the former General Electric CEO tweeted: “Unbelievable jobs numbers . . . these Chicago guys will do anything . . . can’t debate so change numbers.”

It would be virtually impossible for the Obama administration to fudge or otherwise tweak the employment numbers. The survey was conducted two weeks ago — well before the debate.

Further, President Obama has no political appointees in the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Until January the BLS commissioner was a holdover from the Bush administration whose term had not expired. The agency’s acting head is a member of the career civil service. Even if his campaign wanted to, Obama could not tweak the numbers.

That said, it is highly unlikely that today’s unemployment numbers are accurate. BLS conducts two main labor-market surveys: the payroll survey (polling employers) and the household survey (polling individuals). The household survey showed a 0.3 percent drop in unemployment and 873,000 net new jobs — the most since mid-1983. The payroll survey showed one-eighth as many jobs added (+114,000).

Unfortunately, the payroll survey is probably correct. Of the two, the household survey has a much smaller sample size and thus larger margin of error. Although the two surveys tend to show the same results over time, the household survey jumps around more on a month-to-month basis. Even without fudging, the laws of statistics dictate that some polls will produce results outside the margin of error. One out of every 20 polls is somewhat wrong, and one out of 100 polls is really wrong.

Today’s household survey looks a lot like that one poll in 100. It reports stronger job creation than any time since the height of the Reagan economic boom. However, nothing else shows anything similar.

The BLS payroll survey shows continued slow job growth. So does another payroll survey conducted by a private-sector firm. New claims for unemployment insurance remain stuck around 375,000 a week – higher than you see in a strong economy. The government just revised second-quarter economic growth estimates down to an anemic 1.3 percent. No other indicators point to an economic boom.

This looks a lot like an anomalous survey, which is quite possible without any political hijinks. It would be fantastic if today’s unemployment numbers are accurate. However, there is a good chance the next household survey (due November 2, four days before the election) will show unemployment jumping back up to 8 percent.

Analysts of all stripes should hesitate to read too much into today’s numbers.

..

[Soonerjeepman]

but...but...we have more jobs man...c'mon don't ya see that!!

[sappstuf]

We act like the 7.8% is a good sign, but let us keep in mind where Obama said unemployment would be if we passed his stimulus plan..

http://media.hotair.com/greenroom/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Screen-Shot-2012-10-06-at-12.05.57-AM.png

Pretty much complete failure and it only cost a trillion dollars!

[pphilfran]

This year (after revisions) we are generating 146k jobs per month
Last year 153
Compare to....
2004 171k
2005 208k
2006 172k

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth

[pphilfran]

Going back even further...jobs added per month after the 80's recession (a smaller economy)
1983 288k per month
1984 323k
1985 208k
1986 158k
1987 263k
1988 279k
1989 162k

During Clinton's term

1992 96k
1993 232k
1994 321k
1995 179k
1996 233k
1997 280k
1998 250k
1999 265k
2000 162k

[pphilfran]

I don't doubt the accuracy of the latest unemployment number...for various reasons a lot of people have stopped looking for a job...

Whatever the percent, the jobs numbers still stink...

[FaninAma]

Of course the progressives believe the governmemt would never manipulate data or information. That's why all of Obama's supporters to this day believe Saddam Hussein had WMDs.

[FaninAma]

I don't doubt the accuracy of the latest unemployment number...for various reasons a lot of people have stopped looking for a job...

Whatever the percent, the jobs numbers still stink...

There are fewer people in the workforce today than there were 4 years ago. Lowest percentage of the population in the workforce in 40+ years. Just fewer and fewer of us pulling the wagon.

[FaninAma]

Funny stuff. This conspiracy theory brought to you by the same folks who said:

1) Obama is a Muslim;
2) Obama is Kenyan;
3) Obama is an anti-colonialist who wants to degrade the United States to avenge
Kenya for British colonialism;
4) Obama was exposed to very liberal thinking in his youth, thus is a communist.

The list goes on. Some people are pretty gullible.

You should have stopped with your first 3 points. Then you had to discredit your entire line of logic by implying that upbringing and associations during a person's life has no bearing on their philosophy and outlook on life.

Progressives seem to want to claim that Obama's personal political view only started coming into focus after he took the oath of office for the Presidency.

[Skysooner]

Of course the progressives believe the governmemt would never manipulate data or information. That's why all of Obama's supporters to this day believe Saddam Hussein had WMDs.

Umm, unless I'm completely wrong on history, it was mostly the Ds not supporting the war with Iraq. That was Bush's war, so your analogy would be incorrect.

[Skysooner]

You should have stopped with your first 3 points. Then you had to discredit your entire line of logic by implying that upbringing and associations during a person's life has no bearing on their philosophy and outlook on life.

Progressives seem to want to claim that Obama's personal political view only started coming into focus after he took the oath of office for the Presidency.

Very early in life mean elementary school. We aren't claiming any such thing about political views. My true political views and outlook didn't come out until I was in college and exposed to critical thinking. I pretty much rejected everything I was taught as a child (at least politically and religiously).

[XingTheRubicon]

Umm, unless I'm completely wrong on history, it was mostly the Ds not supporting the war with Iraq. That was Bush's war, so your analogy would be incorrect.

No, it just went smooth right over your head.

[XingTheRubicon]

true or not, the wages being made and total citizens in the workforce suck

[Skysooner]

No, it just went smooth right over your head.

Actually no it didn't. He said progressives never believe the government manipulates data and that is why all of Obama's supporters still believe there are WMDs. Most of Obama's supporters don't believe there were WMDs (at least not the way Bush portrayed it since they were likely moved to other countries) therefore if we didn't believe there are WMDs, we believe the government manipulates data. Completely wrong analogy. Since I don't believe there were WMDs, and I do believe the government can manipulate numbers it is a wrong analogy. Most progressives I know aren't as naive as you are think we are. Don't lump us in with the totally left-wing Cali crowd. The government has been calculating unemployment this way for a number of years, so this is not some conspiracy to keep Rs out of power just as the whole "polls are liberally biased" isn't some stupid conspiracy either. The fact is most of us think that the R platform is neanderthal. There are some great things about it, yes. I agree fiscally with most if it. The social issues are so backwards it is ridiculous. I don't agree with a good chunk of the D platform either. If Romney manages to blow this election, it will be because the country said no to R ideas. You have history on your side, and he is still losing. Can he still win, yes absolutely. Since I am going to vote with Romney, you can't lump me in with the other crowd either. I'll be voting R nationally and D pretty much everywhere else.

[XingTheRubicon]

Actually no it didn't. He said progressives never believe the government manipulates data and that is why all of Obama's supporters still believe there are WMDs. Most of Obama's supporters don't believe there were WMDs (at least not the way Bush portrayed it since they were likely moved to other countries) therefore if we didn't believe there are WMDs, we believe the government manipulates data. Completely wrong analogy. Since I don't believe there were WMDs, and I do believe the government can manipulate numbers it is a wrong analogy. Most progressives I know aren't as naive as you are think we are. Don't lump us in with the totally left-wing Cali crowd. The government has been calculating unemployment this way for a number of years, so this is not some conspiracy to keep Rs out of power just as the whole "polls are liberally biased" isn't some stupid conspiracy either. The fact is most of us think that the R platform is neanderthal. There are some great things about it, yes. I agree fiscally with most if it. The social issues are so backwards it is ridiculous. I don't agree with a good chunk of the D platform either. If Romney manages to blow this election, it will be because the country said no to R ideas. You have history on your side, and he is still losing. Can he still win, yes absolutely. Since I am going to vote with Romney, you can't lump me in with the other crowd either. I'll be voting R nationally and D pretty much everywhere else.



woooosh.......wow.

[Turd_Ferguson]

woooosh.......wow.
I'm thinking that if Sky has hair, there's a discernible part down the middle right now...:encouragement:

[hawaii 5-0]

Less government jobs.

More private sector jobs.

Isn't that the idea?


5-0

[Skysooner]

Then explain it and I may agree or may not. Given the lack of validity of most right wing posts I am waiting with with not much anticipation. You guys only make sense to each other.

BTW you may or may not remember that I was voting R consistently back then so some point directed at long time Ds might not reach me.

[yermom]

true or not, the wages being made and total citizens in the workforce suck

that hasn't really changed. it's been the case since Bush's "recovery"

[pphilfran]

that hasn't really changed. it's been the case since Bush's "recovery"

I don't have long term data on wages...but citizens in the workforce peaked in 2000 at 64.4%..dropped after 911 to a low of 62.3%...then climbed slightly to 63% by 2007...then, due to the recession, into the crapper it went, down to a 2011 low of 58.4%..this Sept it sits at 58.7%...2012 will probably avg out at 58.5%...so it basically has done nothing during Obama's term...

http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.htm

[FaninAma]

Umm, unless I'm completely wrong on history, it was mostly the Ds not supporting the war with Iraq. That was Bush's war, so your analogy would be incorrect.
It's called sarcasm. You would have us believe Obama's Labor department is above manipulating data to shape public opinion favorably for the administration. So I just assume you would believe the same thing about the Bush administration and their data claiming Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

[Skysooner]

Ah okay. I don't put anything past politicians. Sorry I don't look for sarcasm here since when I try it, it is taken literally.

[Curly Bill]

No, it just went smooth right over your head.

LOL

[FaninAma]

Very early in life mean elementary school. We aren't claiming any such thing about political views. My true political views and outlook didn't come out until I was in college and exposed to critical thinking. I pretty much rejected everything I was taught as a child (at least politically and religiously).
So your parents and family had little influence on your life outlook?

[Curly Bill]

So your parents and family had little influence on your life outlook. That's sad.

It's not believable is what it is, just like it is for Obammy.

[hawaii 5-0]

Back to the topic, where's the proof?

Behind the file cabinet?

Seems like some are just pizzed the economy is improving. Kinda pathetic when one wishes their own country to fail.

If there's proof the numbers are cooked, let's see it.

5-0

[Curly Bill]

Back to the topic, where's the proof?

Behind the file cabinet?

Seems like some are just pizzed the economy is improving. Kinda pathetic when one wishes their own country to fail.

5-0

Kinda pathetic it has failed to the point many people have just quit looking for work.

[hawaii 5-0]

Kinda pathetic it has failed to the point many people have just quit looking for work.


Wrong, Bucko.

Actually employment number are up.

5-0

[Curly Bill]

Wrong, Bucko.

Actually employment number are up.

5-0

So too are the number of people who are out of work, many who have now quit looking. So...what else you got?

[Skysooner]

Very early in life mean elementary school. We aren't claiming any such thing about political views. My true political views and outlook didn't come out until I was in college and exposed to critical thinking. I pretty much rejected everything I was taught as a child (at least politically and religiously).
So your parents and family had little influence on your life outlook?

Actually my family was quite screwed up. I went to church regardless of them and then rejected it due to some people not willing to discuss my doubts. My family was also quite racist and I learned myself that people are people. I dated interacially but married a local girl of my own race. What is funny is that they all ended up where I am politically.

[Skysooner]

So your parents and family had little influence on your life outlook. That's sad.

It's not believable is what it is, just like it is for Obammy.

My life is my life and I find it completely offensive that you are questioning it. I don't f****** question how you ended up who you are.

[Soonerjeepman]

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-unemployment-rate-has-fallen-in-2012-2012-10

from the article:
The above analysis shows he's correct. Whereas the headline unemployment rate has dropped from 8.5 percent to 7.8 percent this year, if there were the same number of people looking for work today, as there were in December 2011, the unemployment rate would have only dropped from 8.5 percent to 8.35 percent today.

Now there is one more catch here, which is that there are two main reasons the Civilian Participation Rate can decline. One is discouragement (people just totally dropping out, going to live on a relative's couch, or something like that) and one is demographics, basically more people retiring. It's widely believed that the participation rate was always going to be on the down slope now, merely due to America's aging workforce, and more people going into retirement.

But that's a different debate, and either way, both technically fall into Romney's words: Both represent people who have stopped looking for work.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-unemployment-rate-has-fallen-in-2012-2012-10#ixzz28elWrUYu

[pphilfran]

Wrong, Bucko.

Actually employment number are up.

5-0

Yes they are...and at a rate, outside of recessionary times, that will not supply enough jobs for the new jobs seekers...http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

[Skysooner]

Yes they are...and at a rate, outside of recessionary times, that will not supply enough jobs for the new jobs seekers...http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

There are lots of jobs available in my industry for those willing to work hard and relocate. I am in San Antonio for the week at a convention, and the pressure to interview elsewhere is tremendous. Most of the issue seems to me to be people that aren't as employable in the 2012 economic realities.

[pphilfran]

There are lots of jobs available in my industry for those willing to work hard and relocate. I am in San Antonio for the week at a convention, and the pressure to interview elsewhere is tremendous. Most of the issue seems to me to be people that aren't as employable in the 2012 economic realities.

No doubt there are sectors that are needing workers but the workers are not qualified or don't really want that type of work...

[FaninAma]

My life is my life and I find it completely offensive that you are questioning it. I don't f****** question how you ended up who you are.
The sad comment was over the line. That's why I edited it out. I will say it is naive to think your family didn't influence the person you have become. My family has a big streak of crazy in it too but even that has influenced me in my life choices by examining their bad choices and using what I learned to avoid the same mistakes.

But a lot of my better qualities were instilled by my family way before I got to college.

Studies show that early childhood environmental factors have a huge impact on a person's psychological and moral development. To argue otherwise is practically anti-progressive.

[Skysooner]

My life is my life and I find it completely offensive that you are questioning it. I don't f****** question how you ended up who you are.
The sad comment was over the line. That's why I edited it out. I will say it is naive to think your family didn't influence the person you have become. My family has a big streak
if crazy in it too but even that has influenced me in my life choices by examining their bad choices and using what I learned to avoid the same mistakes.

I didn't take offense to that. It was more Curly being patronizing. Sad yes but I survived and it made me stronger although quite independent from them. Sad but reality.

I agree that their negative influences helped me in other ways.

[hawaii 5-0]

Even GE's Jack Welch has backed off his allegation that the books were cooked.

It says a lot about a political party when they collectively show outrage at any indication that the economy is improving.


Who knows? Maybe they were wrong. Maybe it was really 6.8% instead of 7.8%.

Where's the outrage?

5-0

[sappstuf]

Even GE's Jack Welch has backed off his allegation that the books were cooked.

It says a lot about a political party when they collectively show outrage at any indication that the economy is improving.


Who knows? Maybe they were wrong. Maybe it was really 6.8% instead of 7.8%.

Where's the outrage?

5-0

Or maybe it is 8.8%...

Those I have seen defending the report from corruption still say it is honestly wrong.

[Midtowner]

Who knows? Maybe they were wrong. Maybe it was really 6.8% instead of 7.8%.

If the facts don't agree with them, they just invent their own facts.

[Curly Bill]

I didn't take offense to that. It was more Curly being patronizing. Sad yes but I survived and it made me stronger although quite independent from them. Sad but reality.

I agree that their negative influences helped me in other ways.

Patronizing? Because I think it's silly someone would say their early childhood had no impact on the person they became? Anyone with any degree of education knows that's just not true. Too bad you took offense, but for better or worse the things a person is exposed to at a young age will impact the person they become later in life.

[okie52]

Patronizing? Because I think it's silly someone would say their early childhood had no impact on the person they became? Anyone with any degree of education knows that's just not true. Too bad you took offense, but for better or worse the things a person is exposed to at a young age will impact the person they become later in life.

Hmmmm.....
Product of our environment?

[Curly Bill]

Hmmmm.....
Product of our environment?


So, you too are familiar with the idea?

Silly me, I thought most everyone had. ;)

[okie52]

So, you too are familiar with the idea?

Silly me, I thought most everyone had. ;)

Radical thinking.

[olevetonahill]

Back to the topic, where's the proof?

Behind the file cabinet?

Seems like some are just pizzed the economy is improving. Kinda pathetic when one wishes their own country to fail.

If there's proof the numbers are cooked, let's see it.

5-0

4 buck gas, and 3 small bags of groceries for a 100 bucks. Dayum I hope we dont improve much more.

[Skysooner]

Patronizing? Because I think it's silly someone would say their early childhood had no impact on the person they became? Anyone with any degree of education knows that's just not true. Too bad you took offense, but for better or worse the things a person is exposed to at a young age will impact the person they become later in life.

Of course you are impacted. It will be silly to say otherwise. It sounded to me like you were saying something different. If that isn't what you meant then no problem. What I meant about my childhood is that I pretty much rejected most of the major themes I was taught early on (closet racism, unquestioning religion, etc.). I see so many people that "reject" those only to come back to them later in life. Childhood has an effect on them. In my case it was the polar opposite. I guess you could call that a negative effect, but it seems I learned most of what makes me who I am as I was a teenager and not really around my family all that much anymore.

[diverdog]

Yes they are...and at a rate, outside of recessionary times, that will not supply enough jobs for the new jobs seekers...http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

Phil:

A business friend of mine said he thinks the drop in the UE rate maybe due to all the people the various campaigns are hiring for political work. He thought it was much like all the census workers that were hired and that the drop in the UE number is very temporary but it is a real drop now. Thoughts?

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Back to the topic, where's the proof?

Behind the file cabinet?

Seems like some are just pizzed the economy is improving. Kinda pathetic when one wishes their own country to fail.

If there's proof the numbers are cooked, let's see it.

5-0

Surely you are joking??? The economy improving? Bull****!! These numbers are cooked up, just like all the DoL numbers are cooked. The true umemployment rate is probably around 15%. Or I could just Harry Reid the numbers and say 22% are unemployed.

[Skysooner]

Some food for thought on the numbers being cooked. The recovery is not robust no, but this argues against the numbers being cooked.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/06/14261841-suspicion-of-poll-jobs-numbers-takes-hold-on-right?lite

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Well, I will ignore it if it is from NBC. Biggest liars evar!

[Skysooner]

Well, I will ignore it if it is from NBC. Biggest liars evar!

And Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a Republican economist who formerly served as director of the Congressional Budget Office, strongly disputed the idea that Obama would manipulate September's report.
"These numbers put together by the BLS or BEA, they're all done by career civil servants who are experts in the area with complete integrity," he said. "If someone tried to do that -- if I, during my time in the Bush administration, had gone to the BLS and said, 'Juice these numbers,' they would have called the Washington Post so fast. That's just not acceptable; it's not how the process works."
Besides, Holtz-Eakin argued, Republicans have plenty to criticize in this jobs report. He argued that the drop in the jobless rate could be an aberration based on an unusually high number of households to report employment in this month's survey.
"We still have a labor force participation rate that's down at 1981 levels, and we still have an unemployment rate that's not a cause for celebration either," he said.

[hawaii 5-0]

Just like the Truthers and the Birthers we now have the Jobbers.


Just keep denying......

5-0

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Yeah, called the Washington Post so fast...that's because they are Dim. The largest group of people giving money to The Socialist are FedGov employees. Go figure...

[hawaii 5-0]

4 buck gas, and 3 small bags of groceries for a 100 bucks. Dayum I hope we dont improve much more.


Yeah, I remember dime cokes, nickel bag of chips and candy bars. I remember when there was 10 cents for a cuppa coffee but I wasn't drinking it then.

Ah, the good old days. $2.50 an hour wage was good money.

Sadly, they're gone.

5-0

[olevetonahill]

Yeah, I remember dime cokes, nickel bag of chips and candy bars. I remember when there was 10 cents for a cuppa coffee but I wasn't drinking it then.

Ah, the good old days. $2.50 an hour wage was good money.

Sadly, they're gone.

5-0

You are ignorant , Comparing prices from almost 40 years ago Try 3 years ago. Dumas

[hawaii 5-0]

You are ignorant , Comparing prices from almost 40 years ago Try 3 years ago. Dumas


If you think prices are bad here, try Europe.

Or Japan.

5-0

[Curly Bill]

If you think prices are bad here, try Europe.

Or Japan.

5-0

That's what we should strive for, to be like Europe or Japan.

[badger]

Anyone else have a United Way donation drive going on at their workplace? It seems like giving is down this year (but the campaign is far from over, so don't take my word for it). I always donate, but people still seem as pessimistic as these unemployment numbers.

And yes, 7.8ish percent unemployment is pessimistic. Those that are employed have stagnant wages or are underemployed. I think we are all starting to realize how good we had it in the late 90s/early aughts and that we aren't going to get those good times back any time soon.

[hawaii 5-0]

That's what we should strive for, to be like Europe or Japan.



My point with Doofus is that inflation is bad all over, not just the U.S.A.

5-0

[hawaii 5-0]

Anyone else have a United Way donation drive going on at their workplace? It seems like giving is down this year (but the campaign is far from over, so don't take my word for it). I always donate, but people still seem as pessimistic as these unemployment numbers.

And yes, 7.8ish percent unemployment is pessimistic. Those that are employed have stagnant wages or are underemployed. I think we are all starting to realize how good we had it in the late 90s/early aughts and that we aren't going to get those good times back any time soon.


I gave $100 and challenged co-workers to match my donation.

Actually I would prefer it go directly to one organization rather than an Umbrella group like the United Way.

I actively support the American Cancer Society, the Arthritis Foundation and Wounded Warriors.

5-0

[Turd_Ferguson]

I gave $100 and challenged co-workers to match my donation.

Actually I would prefer it go directly to one organization rather than an Umbrella group like the United Way.

I actively support the American Cancer Society, the Arthritis Foundation and Wounded Warriors.

5-0Well, aren't you just a special little lib...So proud of you!

[Skysooner]

Anyone else have a United Way donation drive going on at their workplace? It seems like giving is down this year (but the campaign is far from over, so don't take my word for it). I always donate, but people still seem as pessimistic as these unemployment numbers.

And yes, 7.8ish percent unemployment is pessimistic. Those that are employed have stagnant wages or are underemployed. I think we are all starting to realize how good we had it in the late 90s/early aughts and that we aren't going to get those good times back any time soon.

We don't do United Way. Instead you give directly to the charity of your choice, and the corporation matches 1:1.

[olevetonahill]

If you think prices are bad here, try Europe.

Or Japan.

5-0

I dont live in those places, again IGNORANT

[pphilfran]

If the facts don't agree with them, they just invent their own facts.

Mid, we have generated less jobs per month this year than last year...we are barely generating enough to support the new people coming on line...

The economy has stagnated over the last year or so...we have already hit a trillion dollar deficit for this fiscal year with a couple of weeks to go...the consensus for next year is another trillion dollar deficit...

The economy is stumbling along on it's knees...forecasters feel the economy contracted .3% in August and is growing at 2% for the year (which just happens to be the inflation rate) so there has been no real growth this year...if you think things are going "well" at the current time you are flat azzed wrong...

[Midtowner]

Mid, we have generated less jobs per month this year than last year...we are barely generating enough to support the new people coming on line...

The economy has stagnated over the last year or so...we have already hit a trillion dollar deficit for this fiscal year with a couple of weeks to go...the consensus for next year is another trillion dollar deficit...

The economy is stumbling along on it's knees...forecasters feel the economy contracted .3% in August and is growing at 2% for the year (which just happens to be the inflation rate) so there has been no real growth this year...if you think things are going "well" at the current time you are flat azzed wrong...

I never said things were rosy. They probably won't be and that has nothing to do with who the President is.

[pphilfran]

I never said things were rosy. They probably won't be and that has nothing to do with who the President is.

I agree with that statement...too many are cheering based on the 7.8% number...as a stand alone number it looks good...but if people were to look at the entire unemployment data they would not be so cheerful...

[soonercruiser]

If you think prices are bad here, try Europe.

Or Japan.

5-0

Bad attempt at a diversion 5-O.
:02.47-tranquillity:

[soonercruiser]

I never said things were rosy. They probably won't be and that has nothing to do with who the President is.

Obama promised to cut the deficit in half by now!
He also promised if the Skimulus package was passed that unemployment would be 5.8% by now!
Duh!
They though by changing the number in the calculation (dropping the chronically unemployed) that they could shape the number down immediately. How evil and dishonest!
If they used the same process as in the W administration, unepmoplyment is 14%!
A snippet of the whole administration!
Disgusting! Cynical! And their minions just soak it in....
:torn:

[SCOUT]

Cruiser,
The last change to the unemployment calc was under Clinton. Prior to that, Reagan made a change.

[hawaii 5-0]

I dont live in those places, again IGNORANT

I really think you should get out more.

You don't even know how good you have it.

5-0

[olevetonahill]

I really think you should get out more.

You don't even know how good you have it.

5-0

Even More Ignorance from you. I guess i shouldnt complain because Even tho it cost 4 times as much as it did when Obammy took office Gas is still available and so is food . We shouldnt complain because, well we dont live in Somalia . We shouldnt complain because we dont Live in Russia .
Bite me ignorant one.

[hawaii 5-0]

Even More Ignorance from you. I guess i shouldnt complain because Even tho it cost 4 times as much as it did when Obammy took office Gas is still available and so is food . We shouldnt complain because, well we dont live in Somalia . We shouldnt complain because we dont Live in Russia .
Bite me ignorant one.


Maybe you have some proof the price of gas and groceries wouldn't be twice what it is now if McCain had taken over?

Blaming worldwide inflation on one person is what is truly ignorant.

5-0

[olevetonahill]

Maybe you have some proof the price of gas and groceries wouldn't be twice what it is now if McCain had taken over?

Blaming worldwide inflation on one person is what is truly ignorant.

5-0


Bite me Obama dick likker .

So Now its NOT Obamas fault but all our countys Probs are still Laid at W's feet? Gotcha, dumas.

[Soonerjeepman]

October 08, 2012
Economics Group
John E. Silvia, Chief Economist

Seasonality, Sampling and the Ghost of 2008
The sharp decline in the unemployment rate in September to its lowest rate since January 2009 raised concerns about data manipulation. The less nefarious story reflects the combination of the inherent volatility of the household employment series and the seasonal quirk of the unemployment rate declining in the final months of the year since 2009.
The unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent in September from 8.1 percent in August. Yet the unemployment rate has displayed a similar pattern in the fall months of recent years, even though this widely reported number is seasonally adjusted. For example, from the August to January period in both 2010 and 2011, the unemployment rate fell 0.5 and 0.8 percentage points, respectively. September’s decline was likely accelerated by distortions in the BLS’s seasonal adjustment process and suggests that perhaps the current process is inadequate. Following the rapid deterioration in the economy in the fall of 2008, the unemployment rate rose 1.7 percentage points between August and January of that year. As a result, the small improvements in the unemployment rate in today’s environment are likely being exaggerated by how favorable they look compared to the unemployment rate’s swift ascent in 2008. Until modifications are made to account for the historic rise of the unemployment rate in 2008, payback from September’s sizable one-month drop is not a guarantee, and further declines in the unemployment rate may be in store in the months ahead.
A Black Swan Outlier
In addition to the survey’s recent seasonal adjustment quirks, the small sample size of the household survey (60,000 households) can contribute to volatile changes on a monthly basis. September’s drop in the unemployment rate was helped by an inordinate gain of 873,000 in the household survey’s measure of employment, which was more than four times the size of the average change over the past 12 months, and followed an average decline of 157,000 in July and August (top graph). Combining the seasonal-adjustment quirks and the inherent volatility of the household employment survey, the outlier for the unemployment rate estimate was not only possible, but became a reality (middle graph).
The Secular Story Underlying the Cyclical Improvement
While the one-month focus is on the volatility of full- and part-time jobs, the longer-term story reflects two distinct trends. As illustrated in the bottom graph, there has been a clear up-shift in part-time employment in this economic expansion compared to the pre-recession period. Meanwhile, the upswing in full-time employment, while not yet back to pre-recession levels, is following a cyclical pattern of improvement.
-1,500-1,000-50005001,000-1,500-1,000-50005001,000Jan-08Jul-08Jan-09Jul-09Jan-10Jul-10Jan-11Jul-11Jan-12Jul-12Household EmploymentSeasonally Adjusted Monthly ChangeHousehold Employment: Aug @ 873,000
01020304050010203040507.7%7.8%7.9%8.0%8.1%8.2%8.3% 8.4%September Unemployment RateEconomist Estimates vs. ActualEconomist EstimatesActual
20,00022,50025,00027,50030,000105,000110,000115,00 0120,000125,00000010203040506070809101112Household EmploymentSeasonally-Adjusted, Thousands of PersonsFull Time: Sep @ 115,226,000 (Left Axis)Part Time: Sep @ 27,731,000 (Right Axis)
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bloomberg LP and Wells Fargo Securities, LLC
The Unemployment Rate: Seasonality and Sampling
Since 2010, the unemployment rate has fallen rapidly late in the year, suggesting seasonal adjustment processes may be distorting the timing of improvement. Further declines seem likely in the months ahead.
Wells Fargo Securities, LLC Economics Group
Diane Schumaker-Krieg
Global Head of Research,
Economics & Strategy

[diverdog]

Even More Ignorance from you. I guess i shouldnt complain because Even tho it cost 4 times as much as it did when Obammy took office Gas is still available and so is food . We shouldnt complain because, well we dont live in Somalia . We shouldnt complain because we dont Live in Russia .
Bite me ignorant one.

Olevet:

Food prices are increasing due to the drought and global supply problems. Gas in California is higher because two refineries have had problems. One had a fire and the other a power problem. None of this the potus can control.

[hawaii 5-0]

Olevet:

Food prices are increasing due to the drought and global supply problems. Gas in California is higher because two refineries have had problems. One had a fire and the other a power problem. None of this the potus can control.


Nevermind Diver. The 14 year old thinks he can stay in SE Oklahoma and nothing will change while the World grows up around him.

That, or he's currently on Tralfamadore with Billy Pilgrim.

5-0

[hawaii 5-0]

Olevet:

Food prices are increasing due to the drought and global supply problems. Gas in California is higher because two refineries have had problems. One had a fire and the other a power problem. None of this the potus can control.


Nevermind Diver. The 14 year old thinks he can stay in SE Oklahoma and nothing will change while the World grows up around him.

That, or he's currently on Tralfamadore with Billy Pilgrim.

5-0

[StoopTroup]

You are the King of the straw men. I salute you.

Also, who the hell is Erick Erickson?

He was a German that could probably get you to vote Obama without using a cattle prod on you.

[8timechamps]

I don't think the numbers are being tampered with, but I don't read much in to them to begin with. Look no further than the part-time jobs number. Nobody can survive on a part time job, yet many resort to a couple (if not more) to try and make ends meet. The addition of part-time jobs means little to me in terms of the overall unemployment numbers.

[StoopTroup]

Olevet:

Food prices are increasing due to the drought and global supply problems. Gas in California is higher because two refineries have had problems. One had a fire and the other a power problem. None of this the potus can control.

No it was Bush's fault....

ROTF....

[StoopTroup]

I don't think the numbers are being tampered with, but I don't read much in to them to begin with. Look no further than the part-time jobs number. Nobody can survive on a part time job, yet many resort to a couple (if not more) to try and make ends meet. The addition of part-time jobs means little to me in terms of the overall unemployment numbers.

One of the reason lots of folks get full time jobs is because they receive benefits and usually are willing to take a position that pays less than a part time or contract job. It has always been about offering benefits to attract good candidates to work for you. Since President Bush was in office many folks not only lost jobs but when they replaced those jobs....many times they took not only a cut in pay but jobs that didn't offer any benefits like Healthcare, dental or a 401K matching program or stock options, that if after hiring you, the Company flourished...you would receive say up to 6-7% matching funds from the Company if you invested into the Company's plan and you also might receive a bonus check every quarter when your hard work proves that it was part of the Company making money.

I think there has been a long time where companies have tried to use temps and contract employees and now its become a hiring market where they can land qualified employees who are not only willing to work hard but are willing to work for a Company and be loyal to them instead of leaving as soon as they find another job that offers them 4 weeks vacation every year to the two they offered.

Employers have had the hiring faucet off for a very long time and now it's time to hire from a pool of qualified candidates that were let loose by some Companies that made 10-20% employee cuts across the board without knowing if they lost some really important employees and further hurt their company. Now there is a huge move to re-hire and or find employees to help them take advantage of the economy and suddenly the Labor Secretary is a liar.

What a bunch of horse puckey.

[olevetonahill]

Olevet:

Food prices are increasing due to the drought and global supply problems. Gas in California is higher because two refineries have had problems. One had a fire and the other a power problem. None of this the potus can control.

Bull****.
If all the Probs Obammy had is Ws Fault then Every thing since is Obammys' fault

[olevetonahill]

Nevermind Diver. The 14 year old thinks he can stay in SE Oklahoma and nothing will change while the World grows up around him.

That, or he's currently on Tralfamadore with Billy Pilgrim.

5-0

Aint you sweet? I have NO PROBLEM with things going UP. I do have a Prob with you ****ing Dem Idiots saying Its NORMAL inflation. Then saying "Theres NO inflation"

[olevetonahill]

Someone Tell SpongeBob PillPants that hes on Iggy ,OK?

[StoopTroup]

Bull****.
If all the Probs Obammy had is Ws Fault then Every thing since is Obammys' fault

That's as stupid as thinking that Obama didn't inherit any problems from the previous Administration. Of course he did. They all do. It's possible that President Obama also received many benefits from President Bush....however...you just look like an ***-hole trying to say that President Obama didn't inherit economic problems that were a result of an 8 year War in Iraq. We still are paying huge bucks for the Wars...both Iraq and Afghanistan. We have received very little in compensation from either as Saddam and his Sons had raped the Country very efficiently by trying to take on President H Bush and Clinton for 12 years. The 38th parallel and the games Saddam played, drained the Country as we had economic sanctions against them until GW decided to include Iraq in his War on Terror. We have a huge liability to pay for the War there and to keep it from being about Oil....GWB promised not to make a claim on the oil there to appease his friends at OPEC. Now we have nothing to show for that War but a huge debt and the memories of some very brave men and women who never returned Home alive from there.

[diverdog]

Aint you sweet? I have NO PROBLEM with things going UP. I do have a Prob with you ****ing Dem Idiots saying Its NORMAL inflation. Then saying "Theres NO inflation"

I agree there is inflation but it is everywhere due to a myriad of problems like the drought and tensions in the ME. There are no easy solutions and it isn't something any President can fix.

[diverdog]

Bull****.
If all the Probs Obammy had is Ws Fault then Every thing since is Obammys' fault

Really? Do you think Obama controls the climate? You know like Bush did with Katrina.

[hawaii 5-0]

No Inflation?

Whoever said that?

I'd like to know where there's no inflation. Maybe remote New Guinea?


I think someone's blowing a seal. (no, that's just ice cream.)

5-0

[rock on sooner]

One of the reason lots of folks get full time jobs is because they receive benefits and usually are willing to take a position that pays less than a part time or contract job. It has always been about offering benefits to attract good candidates to work for you. Since President Bush was in office many folks not only lost jobs but when they replaced those jobs....many times they took not only a cut in pay but jobs that didn't offer any benefits like Healthcare, dental or a 401K matching program or stock options, that if after hiring you, the Company flourished...you would receive say up to 6-7% matching funds from the Company if you invested into the Company's plan and you also might receive a bonus check every quarter when your hard work proves that it was part of the Company making money.

I think there has been a long time where companies have tried to use temps and contract employees and now its become a hiring market where they can land qualified employees who are not only willing to work hard but are willing to work for a Company and be loyal to them instead of leaving as soon as they find another job that offers them 4 weeks vacation every year to the two they offered.

Employers have had the hiring faucet off for a very long time and now it's time to hire from a pool of qualified candidates that were let loose by some Companies that made 10-20% employee cuts across the board without knowing if they lost some really important employees and further hurt their company. Now there is a huge move to re-hire and or find employees to help them take advantage of the economy and suddenly the Labor Secretary is a liar.

What a bunch of horse puckey.

I've said this in other threads, it is even more true today than ever before...
Employers, knowing how precious jobs were/are, would tell their employees
that there is more work to do but no more people to do it. Since you are the
best of the best, we expect you to pick up the slack so we can meet our goals.
Let's just go rock and roll and bring it home. Then, go tell HR that those who
can't or won't work harder can be replaced. That was the message then and it
is now. Why would an employer hire more people when he/she can get the better
production out of the same staff? Doesn't have to pay more..doesn't have to hire
more...just sit back and watch it happen!

Anyone who thinks otherwise, doesn't know business or the bottom line.

Now, if you give these same employers tax breaks to hire more people,
they'll just pocket it, because they can drive their workers harder. Trickle
down, hah! Never worked for Reagan or Dubya. This is Romney, pure
and simple. Worked for him, cause he was at the top, ask the majority of those
under neath. Didn't work then either.

No other way to explain it. If you disaree, then you need to check the Kool aid
flavor...if it's grape then Jones gotcha....

[Turd_Ferguson]

Spongebob Pillpants...rofl

[FaninAma]

Phil:

A business friend of mine said he thinks the drop in the UE rate maybe due to all the people the various campaigns are hiring for political work. He thought it was much like all the census workers that were hired and that the drop in the UE number is very temporary but it is a real drop now. Thoughts?

I think it is because we've started the new fall television season and most of the 800,000+ new jobs represent the people who now have their own reality based television show.

[olevetonahill]

No Inflation?

Whoever said that?

I'd like to know where there's no inflation. Maybe remote New Guinea?


I think someone's blowing a seal. (no, that's just ice cream.)

5-0

Yer Boy said it
No COLAs fer anyone till last year (an election yera)
**** off Dip****

[StoopTroup]

I've said this in other threads, it is even more true today than ever before...
Employers, knowing how precious jobs were/are, would tell their employees
that there is more work to do but no more people to do it. Since you are the
best of the best, we expect you to pick up the slack so we can meet our goals.
Let's just go rock and roll and bring it home. Then, go tell HR that those who
can't or won't work harder can be replaced. That was the message then and it
is now. Why would an employer hire more people when he/she can get the better
production out of the same staff? Doesn't have to pay more..doesn't have to hire
more...just sit back and watch it happen!

Anyone who thinks otherwise, doesn't know business or the bottom line.

Now, if you give these same employers tax breaks to hire more people,
they'll just pocket it, because they can drive their workers harder. Trickle
down, hah! Never worked for Reagan or Dubya. This is Romney, pure
and simple. Worked for him, cause he was at the top, ask the majority of those
under neath. Didn't work then either.

No other way to explain it. If you disaree, then you need to check the Kool aid
flavor...if it's grape then Jones gotcha....

There's no kool-aid when bad management is involved. Corporations aren't run like good businesses. They are run by CFO's in many cases. When a CFO actually knows something about the business they seem to do much better. I had a Boss that was Princeton/Harvard Guy. He lost his only child in a very awful car wreck. I was working for him at the time and really felt bad for him as he took it very bad. So bad he lost his position and his advancement to being the Senior VPs main guy didn't happen. They kept him around because he was very intelligent and really able to be cold when it came to money and personnel. He was a guy that if you asked him how he could sleep at night knowing someone worked for him for $5 per hour....his answer would be fine....you didn't have to accept the job if you didn't like the offer. He knew that he could hire folks cheap as the benefits were very good back then. They even had T-Shirts they sold employees that bragged about the benefits being so good that if you married an employee, you would receive those benefits by becoming a spouse.

Now these days...those benefits are gone and many of the others have changed greatly. They hire people based on the idea that the benefits are still there but they no longer sell the t-shirts as it's not true. At least they have the sense and morals to quit selling them.

My Wife no longer works there. She works somewhere else and we benefit greatly by their benefits. I am able to really not be the one to worry about whether or not we have health Insurance when the kids get hurt playing sports or have an accident on their bike. It's quite a relief. For years our lives were structured much differently and I was the one that had the best benefits. Those days are over and some Companies have changed quite a bit. Others haven't.

Back to the old guy that hired people for $5 per hour. The one thing I liked about him was that I later realized he was the kind of guy that hired a lot of people at $5 per hour and would see what those folks were made of. Did they work hard or were they just there for the benefits? Were they looking for advancement or just a job with benefits? Were they Loyal or just using him as a foot in the door?

Within 6 Months I was hired Full-Time and within 2 years I was making 3 times what I was hired for plus I was making money facilitating Teams who were supposed to find ways to save money and be more efficient. I don't see Companies doing much of that anymore. I see CFO's and managers being told what to do instead of actually managing. Kingdoms instead of work groups. It's pretty sad.

[olevetonahill]

So Unions just raise costs and Keep Pill Poppers in a job ?
Gotcha

[StoopTroup]

Horse Puckey. It's so funny to see you roll around in it too. You need a bath.