zappasguitar
Well-known member
let her check her teabag talking points and get back to you
Oh yeah...that's gonna happen.
let her check her teabag talking points and get back to you
Temporary government workers, no less.
I'll have to look it up. I know it was lower, but the guy on la radia may have been exaggerating a bit.Was the 162K figure really half of what they expected?
You mean like the people who said that Bush's 5% unemployment rate after 3 years being President was "the worst economy since the Great Depression"?These threads are probably good practice for some of the posters here. Creativity is going to be needed to keep spinning good economic news in the worst way possible.
I'll have to look it up. I know it was lower, but the guy on la radia may have been exaggerating a bit.![]()
You mean like the people who said that Bush's 5% unemployment rate after 3 years being President was "the worst economy since the Great Depression"?
You mean like the people who said that Bush's 5% unemployment rate after 3 years being President was "the worst economy since the Great Depression"?
Yes, I think that pointing out the hypocrisy of those now in power is important.Are you really trying to say that "they did it too?"
And I never said that. I consistently said that Bush had no economic plan or policy, and benefitted from an inflated boom in the housing market during most of his term, and that this was not a good foundation for the economy.
Was I wrong?
Gallup released the real numbers of unemployment and that grew. Those who gave up and therefore are no longer counted part of the "labor market" were not counted.... It's disconcerting, but I prefer to be optimistic. We can make the economy go well, despite bad economic policy.when it goes down under a lib president, its inherited
when overall jobs continue to be lost, yet some jobs are added, if under a lib president, this is a "good" economic sign
when unemployment allegedly stays the "same", under a lib president, this is "good" economic news
basically, if anything happens under a lib president, its "good" for the country, if it happened under bush, its "bad" for the country
Yeah, baby!
Excellent news today.
Bet everyone still wants to talk about Guam tipping over, though...
But not Alaska or Hawaii, because he'd been in 57 states because his staff wouldn't let him go to Hawaii or Alaska at that time. And he was going to another "tomorrow", that would make it 58, he said. He'd have visited all 58 of the continental states....come on now.... that was fucking funny.... seriously.... a US CONGRESSMAN thinks an island might tip over if the military adds 25000 people to it? There really should be no other topics of conversation. We should be mocking him 24/7 in all 57 states.
48,000 temporary part time government workers...way to grow an economy *sarcasm*
1) The numbers were a bit below estimates, expectations were for about 200000. The reason it was down is the total census hires were slower than expected. There were supposed to be about 100k hired by now, only 48k have been thus far.
2) We could see the jobs numbers be positive for 6-12 months without a decline in the unemployment rate. This is because there are roughly 2-3 million that have given up looking. As new hires are made, those people will likely start job searching again. This will keep the unemployment rate high until those numbers dwindle back down. THEN you will see the unemployment rate come back down.
3) Damo is correct, we are going to need at least 500-600k a month for several years to get back to where we were at 5-6% unemployment. This is due to the ever increasing labor force coupled with the fact that many boomers are now going to need to extend their working years and fewer will retire early due to the lost decade of performance in many peoples equity portfolios.
4) This is a good jobs number. Is it sustainable? Obviously only time will tell. I still believe we will see the double dip. Many governments around the globe are pulling back spending. Many others are up to their eyeballs in debt. Consumers in general are still scared and credit is still tight.
5) Cypress is correct. The stimulus did not go far enough into infrastructure build out. Those are REAL jobs they could create almost immediately (they should have already been put in place). These are the types of jobs needed when the labor market is so loose. I don't think it necessarily needed to be bigger... though that may be the case. Given that 65% of it hasn't even been spent yet, it is way to friggin early to be making that call.
come on now.... that was fucking funny.... seriously.... a US CONGRESSMAN thinks an island might tip over if the military adds 25000 people to it? There really should be no other topics of conversation. We should be mocking him 24/7 in all 57 states.