That damn Obama! His socialist policies appear to be working! Dammit!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/06/business/economy/06jobs.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Well at least we agree on one thing:

Exactly SOCIALIST!
Regardless of wether or not shit is "working".

Now we got it straight from the horses mouth.

now if he can just get back to the 7.6% he started with

Knowing how unemployment is calculated, unemployment going down with jobs lost going probably means the "underemployment" number went up (people went to part time work because they couldn't get full time, or gave up looking).

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That damn Obama! His socialist policies appear to
> be working! Dammit!
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/06/business/economy
> /06jobs.html

So, is this a trend? If these numbers are as reliable as the November and December numbers, we are on our way!

An employment miracle: Economy Sheds 20,000 Jobs But Unemployment Rate Drops to 9.7 Percent.

Okay, not so much of a miracle: “A sharp increase in the number of people giving up looking for work helped to depress the jobless rate. The number of ‘discouraged job seekers’ rose to 1.1 million in January from 734,000 a year ago.”

The system is working!

As a GOP follower, one thing is for sure, and that's I'm working the system. And by system, I mean men.

The Miracle Worker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Okay, not so much of a miracle: “A sharp increase
> in the number of people giving up looking for work
> helped to depress the jobless rate. The number of
> ‘discouraged job seekers’ rose to 1.1 million in
> January from 734,000 a year ago.”

Ah, good to see I know what I am talking about occasionally.

The Miracle Worker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> An employment miracle: Economy Sheds 20,000 Jobs
> But Unemployment Rate Drops to 9.7 Percent.
>
> Okay, not so much of a miracle: “A sharp increase
> in the number of people giving up looking for work
> helped to depress the jobless rate. The number of
> ‘discouraged job seekers’ rose to 1.1 million in
> January from 734,000 a year ago.”
>
> The system is working!

Only idiots would see this as a positive story. I was under the impression WTL was supposed to be smarter than most others (by his own statements)...


DATA SNAP:US Jan Jobless Rate Falls To 9.7%; Payrolls -20K


===========================================================
Jan Employment Report ! Consensus: !
Jan Dec ! Payrolls: Unch !
Payrolls -20K -150Kr! !
Unemployment Rate 9.7% 10.0% ! Actual: -20K !
Hourly Earnings $18.89 $18.84r! !
===========================================================
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201002050845dowjonesdjonline000354&title=data-snapus-jan-jobless-rate-falls-to-97-payrolls--20k

Quote

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The U.S. unemployment rate unexpectedly declined in January, but the economy continued to shed jobs and revisions painted a bleaker picture for 2009, casting doubt over the labor market's strength.

The unemployment rate, calculated using a household survey, fell to 9.7% last month from an unrevised 10% in December, the Labor Department said Friday. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had forecast the jobless rate would edge higher to 10.1%.

Meantime, nonfarm payrolls fell by 20,000 compared with a revised 150,000 drop decline in December. Economists had expected payrolls to be flat. The December figure was revised down sharply from an originally reported 85,000 drop.

The Labor Department's annual benchmark revision to the survey that produces the monthly payroll report painted a bleaker 2009 picture. Last year, job losses were almost 600,000 more than previously reported, the revisions showed.

The January report was influenced by several special factors that may not be consistent with the underlying jobs trend. Temporary hiring for the U.S. 2010 census collection helped the employment picture in January, while the unusually cold weather probably hurt it. The interaction of a very bad employment year in 2009 with January seasonal factors clouds the picture further, analysts warned ahead of the release.
...

There is nothing "positive" about this report, other than slight revisions that actually make the long term picture worse. Brilliant hype there.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2010 12:19PM by Registered Voter.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> There is nothing "positive" about this report,
> other than slight revisions that actually make the
> long term picture worse. Brilliant hype there.


These are the same kinds of factors that influence employment all of the time. You don't think that when Reagan had 10.8 percent unemployment that people had stopped looking for work? Anyone who thinks a drop in the unemployment rate is negative news, regardless of the specific factors, is an idiot.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

The Fed also hired thousands of temporary workers for the Census. Read the analysis - it is pretty spot on that the job picture is worse then previously thought. Add in that the States are hoping for additional "stimulus" money to keep their budgets balanced in the near term says a lot. If we go an additional year without a significant turn around, even the States will be hard pressed to keep employment at current levels - or they too will have to significantly raise taxes.

For all our sakes we should hope the outlook will improve in the next 6 months.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Fed also hired thousands of temporary workers
> for the Census. Read the analysis - it is pretty
> spot on that the job picture is worse then
> previously thought. Add in that the States are
> hoping for additional "stimulus" money to keep
> their budgets balanced in the near term says a
> lot. If we go an additional year without a
> significant turn around, even the States will be
> hard pressed to keep employment at current levels
> - or they too will have to significantly raise
> taxes.
>
> For all our sakes we should hope the outlook will
> improve in the next 6 months.


You don't think the hundreds of billions Bush threw at two wars created temporary jobs? Or the implementation of Bush's Medicare program? I mean, let's get real, here.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
If we go an additional year without a
> significant turn around, even the States will be
> hard pressed to keep employment at current levels
> - or they too will have to significantly raise
> taxes.

Likewise, if I go an additional year reading your posts, I'm sure I'll be stupider for the effort. It will be very umm..."taxing".


> For all our sakes we should hope the outlook will
> improve in the next 6 months.

Yes, by all means, we should hope. And um, stop posting too....hint, hint.

______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You don't think the hundreds of billions Bush
> threw at two wars created temporary jobs? Or the
> implementation of Bush's Medicare program? I mean,
> let's get real, here.

They should have included the war funding in the official budget during Bush's terms - that would have made it so these issues were dealt with before now. As far as Medicare goes, that was a bipartisan issue if there ever was one - most Republicans (in the real world - other than seniors) were NOT for the increase in spending. Was it needed? Maybe - but based on Obama wanting to cut $500B from Medicare probably not.

The unemployment numbers are bad right now - period. And not looking to get any better based on what we are seeing. Maybe if the housing market really does turn around it will help, but that is really going to have to stop bleeding before anything meaningful can happen. Right now a lot of banks are carrying Commercial paper on property that is probably 30%-40% below loan value - if real estate continues at current levels and nothing else changes, expect that reality to hit our faces later this year as well.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

fairfaxdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> If we go an additional year without a
> > significant turn around, even the States will
> be
> > hard pressed to keep employment at current
> levels
> > - or they too will have to significantly raise
> > taxes.
>
> Likewise, if I go an additional year reading your
> posts, I'm sure I'll be stupider for the effort.
> It will be very umm..."taxing".
>
>
> > For all our sakes we should hope the outlook
> will
> > improve in the next 6 months.
>
> Yes, by all means, we should hope. And um, stop
> posting too....hint, hint.

Feel free to go play in traffic FF. I am sure there are plenty of other sites you can peddle your petty BS.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You don't think the hundreds of billions Bush
> > threw at two wars created temporary jobs? Or
> the
> > implementation of Bush's Medicare program? I
> mean,
> > let's get real, here.
>
> They should have included the war funding in the
> official budget during Bush's terms - that would
> have made it so these issues were dealt with
> before now. As far as Medicare goes, that was a
> bipartisan issue if there ever was one - most
> Republicans (in the real world - other than
> seniors) were NOT for the increase in spending.
> Was it needed? Maybe - but based on Obama wanting
> to cut $500B from Medicare probably not.
>
> The unemployment numbers are bad right now -
> period. And not looking to get any better based on
> what we are seeing. Maybe if the housing market
> really does turn around it will help, but that is
> really going to have to stop bleeding before
> anything meaningful can happen. Right now a lot of
> banks are carrying Commercial paper on property
> that is probably 30%-40% below loan value - if
> real estate continues at current levels and
> nothing else changes, expect that reality to hit
> our faces later this year as well.

The commercial market is a problem, but on a much smaller scale than residential property. You won't see enough defaults on commercial property to come anywhere near the debacle in residential real estate.

Obama's strategy with employment is to keep unemployment at 10 percent or below long enough for the bad inventory in the housing market to work its way through the system. Obviously there will be many more defaults in the coming months, but if the trend slows to the point where inventory starts to come off the market at a decent rate, I think housing will slowly come back.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Here's to hoping.

Drudge had this from an old Pelosi statement. Rather funny in light of our current situation - especially with the emphasis on government employment atm.

Pelosi: Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?
August 1, 2003
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Aug03/prWherearetheJobs080103.html

Quote

Washington, D.C. -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the Bureau of Labor Statistics' announcement that 470,000 people abandoned their job searches in July and that 3.2 million private sector jobs have been lost since President Bush took office:

“The fact is that President Bush’s misguided economic policies have failed to create jobs. Since President Bush took office, the country has lost 3.2 million jobs, the worst record since President Hoover. And today we learned that in July nearly half a million people gave up looking for a job.

“Job losses are taking a real toll on the financial security of American families. While Democrats are fighting for opportunity, jobs, and economic security for working families, Republicans continue to focus on helping those who need help the least.

“According to today’s survey, while the national unemployment rate dropped slightly, it still stands at a near record high. In addition, the unemployment rate for African Americans was still over 11 percent in July, and the unemployment rate for Hispanics was 8.2 percent in July.

“It is time for President Bush and the Republicans to get to work for all Americans, not just the elite few.”

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here's to hoping.
>
> Drudge had this from an old Pelosi statement.
> Rather funny in light of our current situation -
> especially with the emphasis on government
> employment atm.
>

Truth be told, we had virtually no real job creation in the 2000s. That's because neither the Republicans nor the Dems have figured out that you can't create wealth - and thus decent jobs - solely through exporting raw goods and a service economy. You know who has economies like that? Third World shit holes in Africa, South America and parts of Asia.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2010 01:14PM by WashingTone-Locian.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Here's to hoping.
> >
> > Drudge had this from an old Pelosi statement.
> > Rather funny in light of our current situation
> -
> > especially with the emphasis on government
> > employment atm.
> >
>
> Truth be told, we had virtually no real job
> creation in the 2000s. That's because neither the
> Republicans nor the Dems have figured out that you
> can't create wealth - and thus decent jobs -
> solely through exporting raw goods and a service
> economy. You know who has economies like that?
> Third World shit holes in Africa, South America
> and parts of Asia.

Now see, on this we are in complete and total agreement.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Now see, on this we are in complete and total
> agreement.


There is hope for the world yet.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Here's an interesting comic from the past... 1934 Chicago Tribune
http://wallstreetblips.dailyradar.com/story/1934_chicago_tribune_cartoon/
.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Attachments:

How is that relevant now? The guy's hat in the corner says "Stalin" and he is dead, you can even check Wikipedia.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Now see, on this we are in complete and total
> > agreement.
>
>
> There is hope for the world yet.

Two pieces of shit agree on something and they pat each other on the back! What a joke.

Republikans wont see any good news until the day after the mid-term elections. Then if they increase their strength they will drag the congress and they country into the more of shit they created.

Lets get it straight..it has been over 20 years of Republikan economic policy that has un in this mess. It is true that a significant number of democrats drank from the republikan cool-aid and went along with their "free market fraud".

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

The Europeans are having their own troubles now, I guess the Republikans did that too. Oh and Japan's debt to GDP ratio has sucked for decades so throw that on the Republikan heap 'o blame too. Oh and snow is coming down and covering everything, those friggin Republikans.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2010 09:19PM by pgens.

why does pgens always have a huge gap after his posts? None of the other members have this...

i'm not quite sure.





















.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_George_W._Bush_administration#Unemployment

The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate rose from 4.2% in January 2001, peaking at 6.3% in June 2003 and reaching a trough of 4.4% in March 2007. After an economic slowdown, the rate rose again to 6.1% in August 2008 and up to 7.2% in December 2008.[55] From December 2007 when the recession started to December 2008, an additional 3.6 million people became unemployed.[56] And, in January 2009, his last month in office, the nation lost 655,000 jobs, raising the unemployment rate to 7.6 percent, the highest level in more than 15 years.[57]

Well there's one thing for sure, as a Gay Democrat I surely know how to take control of a situation. And when I say "situation", I mean dick.

pgens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Europeans are having their own troubles now, I
> guess the Republikans did that too. Oh and
> Japan's debt to GDP ratio has sucked for decades
> so throw that on the Republikan heap 'o blame too.
> Oh and snow is coming down and covering
> everything, those friggin Republikans.


The Western European countries have historically had a high percentage of debt...the increased spending they have needed to do to counter the "free market fraud" recession we all find ourselves in. What should be done is for all the affectd countires to have a sinlge plan which will include increased taxes..when appropriate...to control their deficits. But of course that wont be done.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2010 10:11AM by Vince(1).

Vince(1) Wrote:

> The Western European countries have historically
> had a high percentage of debt...the increased
> spending they have needed to do to counter the
> "free market fraud" recession we all find
> ourselves in. What should be done is for all the
> affectd countires to have a sinlge plan which will
> include increased taxes..when appropriate...to
> control their deficits. But of course that wont
> be done.
Attachments:

9.7%? Impossible. Everything is either all or nothing. 100% or 0%. There are no extents to anything. Nothing is relative. There are no differences between systems. A country is either Socialist or Democratic, even though they're not even related and some aspects of some countries (including this one) are what some could call "Socialist" and others are "Democratic." They're either Fascist or Democratic.

OH wait, did I say Fascist? I meant Communist. Oh wait, I meant Socialist. OH wait, they're all exactly the same thing! They're exactly identical, just like all the countries in the Middle East! Also, our intervention in Iraq was completely necessary, because the people who attacked us on 9/11 were Iraqistani!

I love Fox News and how the percentages of their displayed polls add up to more than 100%! I also love how Mark Foley's apparently a Democrat after his scandal! They're so awesome! They're made of average people, like Glenn Beck! That's why I love them! They're also Fair and Balanced! I haven't actually taken any notes or judged for myself, but they say they are, therefore they are!!

Also, Gay people are pushing everything on us, even though they're not forcing anyone to do anything! PLUS, the Bible said homosexuality is wrong, so therefore gay marriage should be illegal! Even though no scientific data says so, it's simply not natural and it's extremely dangerous to our population!

Republican (R) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 9.7%? Impossible. Everything is either all or
> nothing. 100% or 0%. There are no extents to
> anything. Nothing is relative. There are no
> differences between systems. A country is either
> Socialist or Democratic, even though they're not
> even related and some aspects of some countries
> (including this one) are what some could call
> "Socialist" and others are "Democratic." They're
> either Fascist or Democratic.
>
> OH wait, did I say Fascist? I meant Communist. Oh
> wait, I meant Socialist. OH wait, they're all
> exactly the same thing! They're exactly identical,
> just like all the countries in the Middle East!
> Also, our intervention in Iraq was completely
> necessary, because the people who attacked us on
> 9/11 were Iraqistani!
>
> I love Fox News and how the percentages of their
> displayed polls add up to more than 100%! I also
> love how Mark Foley's apparently a Democrat after
> his scandal! They're so awesome! They're made of
> average people, like Glenn Beck! That's why I love
> them! They're also Fair and Balanced! I haven't
> actually taken any notes or judged for myself, but
> they say they are, therefore they are!!
>
> Also, Gay people are pushing everything on us,
> even though they're not forcing anyone to do
> anything! PLUS, the Bible said homosexuality is
> wrong, so therefore gay marriage should be
> illegal! Even though no scientific data says so,
> it's simply not natural and it's extremely
> dangerous to our population!


pure genious!

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

There is NO SUCH THING AS "GAY MARRAIGE".

The notion is an OXYMORON.

But I'm sure the heterosexuals will have no problem renaming thier holy matrimonial-union and making a new enty into the dictionary,

Fuckin' ornery copycats.

The household survey found that more people say they had jobs in January. But it turns out that those "more people" are a statistical artifact created by "seasonal adjustment." That is, traditionally, unemployment increases in January, because, for instance, stores lay off help hired for the holiday season of the previous two months. Against that background, this year, fewer people were laid off than in the past, hence the SA employment rate is "higher". But the raw data shows that fewer, not more, people had jobs in January than in December. A different survey found that businesses shed 20,000 jobs in January.
A Labor Department survey of households found that 541,000 more Americans had jobs last month. But most of those gains were attributed to seasonal adjustments to the data. Without those adjustments, which account for reduced hiring during winter, the data show fewer people had jobs last month.
The problem is that seasonal adjustment presumes a normal economy--stable or growing. But the assumption begs the question. Surely, seasonal adjustment when the number of jobs in an economy remains stable or is growing is different in quality than seasonal adjustment when the number of jobs in the economy is declining and declining for a long time.
Wall Street does not think the unemployment and employment numbers are good. The Dow dropped over 300 points when the numbers were released. Where ever the index ends, it is difficult to shake the impression that people investing in the market did not greet the numbers as positive for the private economy.
The fact is that this recession did, and continues, to lose jobs at a rate greater than and for a longer time than any other post-1945 recession.

Have It your way like Burger Kongs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But I'm sure the heterosexuals will have no
> problem renaming thier holy matrimonial-union and
> making a new enty into the dictionary,
>
> Fuckin' ornery copycats.

Not everyone wants their marriage to be "holy matrimony"... a good lot of us are agnostics and atheists.

a good lot of us are agnostics and atheists.

A good lot of you vermin should have been aborted.

Willy Don Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A good lot of you vermin should have been aborted.

You're an awful person, RV.

though not as bad as EJ

question Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> why does pgens always have a huge gap after his
> posts? None of the other members have this...

LAMAO! he think he's teh sneaky but everyone know those are teh fake traxor imgs.

LAME!
[iomg]http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/fail-owned-covert-fail.jpg[/img]