What Does AOC Have That Boebert Does Not?

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Don't worry about it, Fredo. Just keep doing what you're doing so your WSE friends will like you.


Example:

you got nothing.

shut your lying face hole.

 

[Gondwanaland]

You may want to take your own advice, dumbass, including the links...but it appears you're a "concrete thinker". Not your fault.

Yes, I asked you if you included AOC pretending to be arrested. How was that me saying AOC had been arrested more than Bobert, you fucking dumb cunt?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Yes, I asked you if you included AOC pretending to be arrested. How was that me saying AOC had been arrested more than Bobert, you fucking dumb cunt?

^^^ Didn't read the posts.

Your anger is a clue, Mr. Concrete Thinker. LOL

Don't worry about. Just keep thinking I'm a dumb cunt so you can feel good about yourself.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

i dont have a link but i have seen iy and that is a fair account of what she said.

and as she was talking about the employer survey its correct as they count a job as a job irrespective of others. the household survey does not. this is why household is usually lower especiallt the one last month which was about a third of the employer tally.

LOL.. I posted the link to the actual video. Care to point out where she says she is talking about the employer survey? She was given the unemployment number which is the household survey.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

isn't reality more than just the deep state jacking itself off?

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Dutch Uncle,

I did do something, sweetie; I proved you were bullshitting about AOC being arrested more than Boebert.

While I don't despise either, Boebert is clearly a nutjob and possible traitor. AOC is just a LWL.

https://www.denverpost.com/2022/04/26/lauren-boebert-january-6-capitol-riot/
Rep. Lauren Boebert at early meeting discussing how Mike Pence “could approach certifying the electoral college votes,” witness says
“I just remember general – general correspondence of Vice President may be able to do this,” the aide told a congressional committee

Actually working against the United States of America. Very unpatriotic of Boebert! I do hope she ends up in prison over it. That would be the right thing.

 

[Celticguy]

LOL.. I posted the link to the actual video. Care to point out where she says she is talking about the employer survey? She was given the unemployment number which is the household survey.

oh brother.... well that sounds more like her.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Hello Dutch Uncle,



Actually working against the United States of America. Very unpatriotic of Boebert! I do hope she ends up in prison over it. That would be the right thing.

Agreed, which is why she may end up on the wrong side of a courtroom over her actions surrounding 1/6.

 

[Taichiliberal]

You have it all wrong in how the unemployment rate is calculated. It is done with a survey. People are asked:
Do you have a job? People with one job answer yes and people with three jobs answer yes.
If you don't have a job are you looking for work? Only people with no jobs and looking for work answer yes.
If you don't have a job are you not looking for work?

The standard unemployment rate is the people looking for work divided by the sum of people working and looking for work. A person that has three jobs is only counted once since they are only one person.

Other unemployment rates such as U6 are calculated differently. U6 is people with jobs divided by all persons over 16 include retired and those not looking for work.
There is also an underemployed category which includes people working part time that would like to be working full time.

If 1 out of 10 people is working 3 jobs and the other 9 people are looking for work then the unemployment would be 90%. If 1 out of 10 people is working 3 jobs, 4 people are looking for work and 5 people are not looking for work then the unemployment would be 75%.

Your first paragraph says it all, because that survey does NOT ask how many jobs does that person have. And if that person is only counted once, as you point out then any tally afterward is off no matter what other avenues you look, because those businesses are reporting an increase in employees.

People who are NOT looking for work but apply for unemployment insurance give a reason....medical, legal, etc. I think you would be hard pressed to actually find people who "just stopped looking for work" as our MSM has periodically stated in the last few decades...because unless they qualify for welfare (now "work fare" - Slick Willy's version of indentured servitude), no one in their right mind is just going to give up eating or living indoors (unless they become part of a criminal group).

Here's how the DOL approaches dolling out unemployment insurance: https://dol.ny.gov/work-search-frequently-asked-questions#:~:text=Yes.,Labor when we request it.

When the official final reports are given, they are always couched as "estimates".

I seriously doubt either Bobbert or Green give this matter this much thought. AOC may be (and can be, has been, will be) accused of generalizations, but here she's at least in the ball park.

 

[Taichiliberal]

You are conflating 3 different reporting systems and trying to claim they say things they don't.
Unemployment is based on a household survey.
People collecting unemployment is based on the actual number of people applying for unemployment so it is related to people that have lost jobs and doesn't reflect unemployment in general.
The ADP employment survey counts the number of people getting paid for work so it can double count people if someone is working 2 jobs.

The ADP employment survey almost never matches the unemployment survey or the unemployment survey. They can show similar trends but they will rarely match.

See Post #129 in response.

 

[Taichiliberal]

That's... not how unemployment is measured. Looks like you're as braindead as her.

See Post #129 as a response to you. Hope the information enlightens you.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Um.... no. It reports that one person is employed and 9 are unemployed and looking for employment.

Does it show HOW that person is employed beyond full, temp or part time? Remember, businesses also report their employment/unemployment rate as part of the mix. AND the official reports always couch everything with the word "estimates".

Let me explain it to you in a manner you'll find acceptable: remember when Obama touted that the near recession that was the Bush legacy was over because employment was up as reported by businesses? The GOP retort was that those jobs were NOT of the same quality as the ones previously held (lower salaries, more part-time and temp, less benefits). They made the DISTINCTION to counter the official tallied facts that jobs were being filled and the horizon was brighter. All I'm doing here is applying to same scrutiny to the ACTUAL employment/unemployment rate.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Your first paragraph says it all, because that survey does NOT ask how many jobs does that person have. And if that person is only counted once, as you point out then any tally afterward is off no matter what other avenues you look, because those businesses are reporting an increase in employees.

People who are NOT looking for work but apply for unemployment insurance give a reason....medical, legal, etc. I think you would be hard pressed to actually find people who "just stopped looking for work" as our MSM has periodically stated in the last few decades...because unless they qualify for welfare (now "work fare" - Slick Willy's version of indentured servitude), no one in their right mind is just going to give up eating or living indoors (unless they become part of a criminal group).

Here's how the DOL approaches dolling out unemployment insurance: https://dol.ny.gov/work-search-frequently-asked-questions#:~:text=Yes.,Labor when we request it.

When the official final reports are given, they are always couched as "estimates".

I seriously doubt either Bobbert or Green give this matter this much thought. AOC may be (and can be, has been, will be) accused of generalizations, but here she's at least in the ball park.

Of course people stop looking for work. They retire. They are 55 and become discouraged because no one will hire them. They are a single mom and realize that they can't afford day care while working.

You really need to look at how the 3 different statistics are created. They are created by different entities entirely.
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment, the government uses the number of people collecting unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under state or federal government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.

https://adpemploymentreport.com/

The ADP National Employment Report is an independent estimate of the change in U.S. private sector employment and pay derived from actual, anonymous payroll data of client companies served by ADP, a leading provider of human capital management solutions.

https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/claims.asp

Unemployment Insurance Weekly Claims Data

The Unemployment Insurance weekly claims data are used in current economic analysis of unemployment trends in the nation, and in each state. Initial claims measure emerging unemployment and continued weeks claimed measure the number of persons claiming unemployment benefits.

The numbers are estimates because they use sampling to get their results. Any number that is calculated from a sample will have a statistical error so it is never given as an absolute.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Does it show HOW that person is employed beyond full, temp or part time? Remember, businesses also report their employment/unemployment rate as part of the mix. AND the official reports always couch everything with the word "estimates".

Businesses do not typically report their employment/unemployment rates. Large businesses are required by law to give notice for layoffs but none of the numbers from employment released every month come directly from businesses.

Let me explain it to you in a manner you'll find acceptable: remember when Obama touted that the near recession that was the Bush legacy was over because employment was up as reported by businesses? The GOP retort was that those jobs were NOT of the same quality as the ones previously held (lower salaries, more part-time and temp, less benefits). They made the DISTINCTION to counter the official tallied facts that jobs were being filled and the horizon was brighter. All I'm doing here is applying to same scrutiny to the ACTUAL employment/unemployment rate.

The problem you are having is that you don't seem to know the first thing about how the numbers are created or announced. It's best to not explain something you know nothing about.

When it comes to what AOC was talking about, the question was a long one that included the unemployment number but was also about the rich vs the poor in today's society. AOC was answering about the rich vs the poor and how the poor have to work 2-3 jobs or 60-80 hour weeks to make ends meet. Her statement was taken out of context to try to claim she was talking about how unemployment was officially calculated. She clearly was not really talking about that at all. You are defending her out of ignorance which does you and AOC no favors. Educate yourself and you will have a stronger defense. The attack on AOC is idiotic since she wasn't talking about the unemployment rate and never used the words unemployment rate.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Your first paragraph says it all, because that survey does NOT ask how many jobs does that person have. And if that person is only counted once, as you point out then any tally afterward is off no matter what other avenues you look, because those businesses are reporting an increase in employees.

People who are NOT looking for work but apply for unemployment insurance give a reason....medical, legal, etc. I think you would be hard pressed to actually find people who "just stopped looking for work" as our MSM has periodically stated in the last few decades...because unless they qualify for welfare (now "work fare" - Slick Willy's version of indentured servitude), no one in their right mind is just going to give up eating or living indoors (unless they become part of a criminal group).

Here's how the DOL approaches dolling out unemployment insurance: https://dol.ny.gov/work-search-frequ...20request it.

When the official final reports are given, they are always couched as "estimates".

I seriously doubt either Bobbert or Green give this matter this much thought. AOC may be (and can be, has been, will be) accused of generalizations, but here she's at least in the ball park

Of course people stop looking for work. They retire. They are 55 and become discouraged because no one will hire them. They are a single mom and realize that they can't afford day care while working.

You really need to look at how the 3 different statistics are created. They are created by different entities entirely.
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment, the government uses the number of people collecting unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under state or federal government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.

https://adpemploymentreport.com/

The ADP National Employment Report is an independent estimate of the change in U.S. private sector employment and pay derived from actual, anonymous payroll data of client companies served by ADP, a leading provider of human capital management solutions.

Unemployment Insurance Weekly Claims Data

The Unemployment Insurance weekly claims data are used in current economic analysis of unemployment trends in the nation, and in each state. Initial claims measure emerging unemployment and continued weeks claimed measure the number of persons claiming unemployment benefits.

https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/claims.asp


The numbers are estimates because they use sampling to get their results. Any number that is calculated from a sample will have a statistical error so it is never given as an absolute.

Since they are estimates, then how can people point to them as if their conclusions are solid, conclusive FACT? You keep trying to split a hair to ignore the FACT that NONE of your examples incorporate my statement. Your first paragraph bends over backwards with supposition and conjecture...because when the MSM (print & broadcast) throw in that little gem of "people who have stopped looking for work", they sure don't do as you do here because of the severe flaws in it. Remember, unemployment insurance is temporary. When it runs out, those people are NOT counted....there are just ASSUMPTIONS as to what became of them. You keep proving my point when you post reports from the private and public sector employers, because you cannot point to 3 different employers registering the same person....common knowledge for average working people, but a stunning revelation for folk like G.W. Bush. And like your examples show, the UI is PART of the equation.....and if that equation leaves out some facts and estimates to "fill in the gaps", it's inaccurate. Why you are fighting this doesn't make sense.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Since they are estimates, then how can people point to them as if their conclusions are solid, conclusive FACT? You keep trying to split a hair to ignore the FACT that NONE of your examples incorporate my statement. Your first paragraph bends over backwards with supposition and conjecture...because when the MSM (print & broadcast) throw in that little gem of "people who have stopped looking for work", they sure don't do as you do here because of the severe flaws in it. Remember, unemployment insurance is temporary. When it runs out, those people are NOT counted....there are just ASSUMPTIONS as to what became of them. You keep proving my point when you post reports from the private and public sector employers, because you cannot point to 3 different employers registering the same person....common knowledge for average working people, but a stunning revelation for folk like G.W. Bush. And like your examples show, the UI is PART of the equation.....and if that equation leaves out some facts and estimates to "fill in the gaps", it's inaccurate. Why you are fighting this doesn't make sense.

Now you are only proving you don't understand how statistics work. You should really stop proving your ignorance.
The MSM doesn't throw out the little gem. It is statistics generated from the random sample that is surveyed. Spend some time to look up statistics and why and how it works.
Read the explanations and the source documents before you make such obvious errors about people not being counted when their insurance runs out. By doing a household survey, BLS avoids the issue of not counting people whose unemployment insurance has run out. They say it right there in their explanation when they explain that people often make the mistake that you are making. Read it three times and then if you need it explained, ask someone. Employers don't report!!!! That is another mistake on your part. Don't you want to stop being ignorant? Because if you aren't willing to educate yourself then you stop being ignorant and reveal yourself to be stupid.

 

[Into Тhe Night]

It's not for that. This is his stupid you people are. She is made fun of because she's an idiot.

No. Republicans put words into her mouth and they twist what she says.

I mean, aren't you the party who voted for a POTUS who says he loves the uneducated?

Lol.

 

[Trumpet]

.

A college degree.

integrity

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Since they are estimates, then how can people point to them as if their conclusions are solid, conclusive FACT? You keep trying to split a hair to ignore the FACT that NONE of your examples incorporate my statement. Your first paragraph bends over backwards with supposition and conjecture...because when the MSM (print & broadcast) throw in that little gem of "people who have stopped looking for work", they sure don't do as you do here because of the severe flaws in it. Remember, unemployment insurance is temporary. When it runs out, those people are NOT counted....there are just ASSUMPTIONS as to what became of them. You keep proving my point when you post reports from the private and public sector employers, because you cannot point to 3 different employers registering the same person....common knowledge for average working people, but a stunning revelation for folk like G.W. Bush. And like your examples show, the UI is PART of the equation.....and if that equation leaves out some facts and estimates to "fill in the gaps", it's inaccurate. Why you are fighting this doesn't make sense.

Now you are only proving you don't understand how statistics work. You should really stop proving your ignorance.
The MSM doesn't throw out the little gem. It is statistics generated from the random sample that is surveyed. Spend some time to look up statistics and why and how it works.
Read the explanations and the source documents before you make such obvious errors about people not being counted when their insurance runs out. By doing a household survey, BLS avoids the issue of not counting people whose unemployment insurance has run out. They say it right there in their explanation when they explain that people often make the mistake that you are making. Read it three times and then if you need it explained, ask someone. Employers don't report!!!! That is another mistake on your part. Don't you want to stop being ignorant? Because if you aren't willing to educate yourself then you stop being ignorant and reveal yourself to be stupid.

Your insults and basic repetition display your waning ability to prove your case, or disprove what I say. Pay attention to what you source, Rick. Again, the Census questions DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT MULTIPLE JOBS HELD BY ONE PERSON. Essentially, this can lead to a more positive report.

Only residents who are in the labor force are counted in the unemployment rate. Someone who does not have a job but claims they are not looking for one is considered out of the labor force and is not counted in the unemployment rate. Economists call members of this group "discouraged workers." https://www.investopedia.com/ask/an...ulate-unemployment-rate-published-monthly.asp


But the kicker is this:

The Unemployment Insurance weekly claims data are used in current economic analysis of unemployment trends in the nation, and in each state

https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/claims.asp

Nuff said, Rick. All this information is NOT treated as 2 different and separate issues. My previous statement stands valid despite all your repetitive supposition and conjecture. (yes, one site says one thing, then says another...both are gov't agencies dealing with the job market. You want to beat a dead horse on this, go right ahead.

 

[Gondwanaland]

Does it show HOW that person is employed beyond full, temp or part time? Remember, businesses also report their employment/unemployment rate as part of the mix. AND the official reports always couch everything with the word "estimates".

Let me explain it to you in a manner you'll find acceptable: remember when Obama touted that the near recession that was the Bush legacy was over because employment was up as reported by businesses? The GOP retort was that those jobs were NOT of the same quality as the ones previously held (lower salaries, more part-time and temp, less benefits). They made the DISTINCTION to counter the official tallied facts that jobs were being filled and the horizon was brighter. All I'm doing here is applying to same scrutiny to the ACTUAL employment/unemployment rate.

It does, actually. There are unemployment stats for 'underemployed', etc.. But again, the stats would report that one person is employed and that 9 are unemployed. Not what you claimed.