|
Post by Merlot Joe on Oct 11, 2012 9:24:30 GMT -6
I say BULLSHIT on this report. they do not mention the people who's unemployment has run or those who just said f**k it and gave up. These number are being manipulated to make Obama look good.
I know of 2 people who gave up and one who's job ends on October 24th and that is Denice. The company she works for after 35 years is closing their doors due to the bad economy. She has worked there as, bookkeep, purchasing agent, payroll clerk and mother hen for 28 years.
So BULLSHIT to the Department of Labor and their numbers.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 11, 2012 9:33:37 GMT -6
Funny that the unemployment numbers were quoted and requoted by conservatives for the past couple years as why Obama is bad (47 months above 8% ... or whatever)... then as soon as the number drops below 8%, all of a sudden the unemployment numbers are cooked or arent really the statistic we need to looking at.
Just saying. Good to throw around then... not the number we need to be looking at now.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on Oct 11, 2012 10:38:07 GMT -6
The unemployment numbers are like a bathroom scale that is off by some unknown number of pounds: It doesn't tell you the real situation, but it does tell you if you gained or lost since the last time you stepped on it.
That said, the news media is definitely going to spin any reports as much in Obama's favor as possible.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 11, 2012 17:47:58 GMT -6
Except for Fox of course.. but I guess they are not "the media"
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on Oct 11, 2012 18:47:30 GMT -6
Except for Fox of course.. but I guess they are not "the media" I would say Fox News is "equal time" to balance out the rest of the media.
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Oct 15, 2012 15:01:40 GMT -6
The numbers are cooked. Not one agency, number cruncher or organization forecasted this drop. It's smoke and mirrors folks. Unemployment is really north of 14% but who cares about those that have given up looking or are working part time for a fraction of their previous wages?
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Oct 15, 2012 17:53:51 GMT -6
If all of the bad shit is GW's fault, does he get some credit for this?
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Oct 16, 2012 4:27:16 GMT -6
The numbers are cooked. Not one agency, number cruncher or organization forecasted this drop. It's smoke and mirrors folks. Unemployment is really north of 14% but who cares about those that have given up looking or are working part time for a fraction of their previous wages? [/size] The number crunchers for the Democrats care. When people fall off the unemployment radar the numbers fall and Obama looks good.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 5:27:32 GMT -6
What a load of crap. Parroting of the punditocracy.
If there were REALLY cooking of the books, that is fraud.
And if there is fraud: a) Where is the evidence b) Why arent the Republican Senators who are not standing for reelection ALL OVER THIS WITH INVESTIGATIONS?
The number crunchers are not "Democrats" in the terms that they were appointees of Obama. They are civil servants of both parties who do not owe their job to Obama winning and no doubt come from a wide background of ideologies.
If someone on the inside really knew of "book cooking" wouldnt they be all over the media with it? And those Republican Senators who COULD be investigating this right now could bring down the President WITH that information regardless of what Romney says or does.
So... where is the evidence beyond the typical right wing punditocracy's "if we shout it long enough and loud enough it must be true"?
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 5:32:25 GMT -6
The numbers are cooked. Not one agency, number cruncher or organization forecasted this drop. It's smoke and mirrors folks. Unemployment is really north of 14% but who cares about those that have given up looking or are working part time for a fraction of their previous wages? Source PLEASE!
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 5:34:42 GMT -6
The numbers are cooked. Not one agency, number cruncher or organization forecasted this drop. It's smoke and mirrors folks. Unemployment is really north of 14% but who cares about those that have given up looking or are working part time for a fraction of their previous wages? Unions.. but you guys have gutted them pretty well... and THANK GOD for minimum wage laws or those "fractions" would be a LOT LOWER than they are now. Thank you for asking.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Oct 16, 2012 7:12:44 GMT -6
The numbers are cooked. Not one agency, number cruncher or organization forecasted this drop. It's smoke and mirrors folks. Unemployment is really north of 14% but who cares about those that have given up looking or are working part time for a fraction of their previous wages? Unions.. but you guys have gutted them pretty well... and THANK GOD for minimum wage laws or those "fractions" would be a LOT LOWER than they are now. Thank you for asking. "You guys" didn't gut the unions. The unions gutted themselves by pricing themselves out of the market. The only place that the unions haven't priced themselves out of a job are monopoly industries (railroads) and the public sector (not responsive to market forces). Unless, if by "you guys", you mean everyone who buys a shirt for $20 instead of $120.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 7:19:23 GMT -6
Tex Anita wants to know why people are working for a fraction of what they were working for before.. you have answered. We have to compete for working against those in the third world who are willing to work for a few $$$ per day.
The unions fought against free trade in favor of fair trade. I thought free trade was a good idea during the Clinton year... BOY WAS I MISTAKEN. Damn Clinton for free trade.
THAT is why people work for a fraction of what they used to. REVOKE free trade agreements, bring the jobs home, restore manufacturing in the US and see the middle class blossom.
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Oct 16, 2012 7:45:46 GMT -6
What a load of crap. Parroting of the punditocracy. If there were REALLY cooking of the books, that is fraud. Okay I agree on that point, but has happened to all the unemployed that lost benfits but are still unemployed. That number is not in any reportd form the DoL. What is that percentage? would it ch-ch-change increase or decrease the current 7.8%? I think it would. Why don't they say how many ran out of beneifts last week but are still unemployed?
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 7:52:29 GMT -6
The counter question is why dont we EXTEND the benefits? If it is REALLY THAT BAD trying to find a job, that means there are not any jobs to find, so why PENALIZE people by cutting their benefits?
Some here will say that there wont be any incentive to find a job if benefits are extended... WELL?? That implies that there are jobs to be filled.
You CANNOT have it both ways.
Either extend unemployment benefits because the economy is terrible and Obama is doing a terrible job, OR
The economy is great and there are jobs out there that are unfilled and people need to get off unemployment and get there but into those unfilled jobs.
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Oct 16, 2012 8:00:59 GMT -6
Gordon there are not that many jobs out there. Not enough to give everyone who lost theirs a new one. Many of the jobs lost will never, never come back. Companies that closed like Circuit City, and Mervyns in CA was will over 100,000 jobs. GM closed the plant in Union City, CA, I don;t know how many lost their jobs there but it at least 1000 or better. Where do these people go? New companies did not just sprout up and take their place. There are empty store fronts everywhere. I am sure it is the same in your area? Empty store fronts mean less business which means less jobs.
I do agree that they should extend benefits but 2 years was a long time.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 8:17:17 GMT -6
It is a shame that those jobs with American companies, which could employ Americans are located in China, or elsewhere around the world.
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Oct 16, 2012 8:30:41 GMT -6
It's a very Romney-esque move.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Oct 16, 2012 8:47:03 GMT -6
Tex Anita wants to know why people are working for a fraction of what they were working for before.. you have answered. We have to compete for working against those in the third world who are willing to work for a few $$$ per day. The unions fought against free trade in favor of fair trade. I thought free trade was a good idea during the Clinton year... BOY WAS I MISTAKEN. Damn Clinton for free trade. THAT is why people work for a fraction of what they used to. REVOKE free trade agreements, bring the jobs home, restore manufacturing in the US and see the middle class blossom. The way to compete is to become more productive. Protectionism can save a few high paying jobs for a while, but comes at the price of collapsing the entire industry a few years hence (British Leyland in the 70s). The economy and markets are constantly ch-ch-changing and unless you ch-ch-change with them and adapt, you can't prosper. Trying to short circuit the market with protectionism does not address the real problem, and just makes failure more comfortable until you run out of money to subsidize.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 8:59:47 GMT -6
Given that free trade has already collapsed those industries, I do not see how it can get any worse.
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Oct 16, 2012 9:00:42 GMT -6
It is a shame that those jobs with American companies, which could employ Americans are located in China, or elsewhere around the world. Gordon you are way off line on this one. Those were retail stores, not manufacturing companies. The went belly up at the start of the resssion. None of those job went to China.
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Oct 16, 2012 9:21:18 GMT -6
As far as your example of Circuit City is concerned, they are not entirely out of business -- they just closed their brick & mortar stores. www.circuitcity.com/
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Oct 16, 2012 10:07:22 GMT -6
What do you expect from employees and agencies created by and for big government? You don't think these people are predominately Democrats? These numbers are regularly revised after the initial announcement sometimes once or twice ... most often a month later.....like two days before the election on this one. I find the timing of this historic drop below 8% after 40 months suspect at best. Many of the part time worker's take that work because benefits run out. I say fine to that. If your area of industry is on the rocks you have to adjust and go to another. Sometime that means a big adjustment in wage and sometime going into a job on an entry or part time level. Is that great, no. Is it fair, yes. The USA must compete in the world market and free trade is the beginning of that. Remember we are free to trade overseas too. We have to be smarter than the rest...like we used to be. We must get off our asses and determine how we can compete. The attitude that we should reverse free trade is shortsighted. Free trade allows American workers to specialize in goods and services that they produce more efficiently than the rest of the world and to exchange them for goods and services that other countries produce at higher quality and lower cost. 95 percent of the world's consumers live outside of the United States. The global marketplace is important to American manufacturers. trade.gov/fta/This is a detailed article on how the unemployment numbers are researched and compiled. www.theblaze.com/stories/influential-september-jobs-report-unemployment-drops-to-7-8/
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 10:08:50 GMT -6
It is a shame that those jobs with American companies, which could employ Americans are located in China, or elsewhere around the world. Gordon you are way off line on this one. Those were retail stores, not manufacturing companies. The went belly up at the start of the resssion. None of those job went to China. Retail, you are correct Joe. But manufacturing, especially HEAVY manufacturing.. we are at the mercy of our "friends", those jobs are the ones that we should never have allowed to go elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Oct 16, 2012 12:14:54 GMT -6
Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai, Kia, and many other manufacturers are doing well building automobiles and trucks here in the US, without taxpayer bailouts. The difference is no UAW. I know several people who work for Toyota's San Antonio truck plant. They explain to me that the difference is that you start for less pay and benefits than GM. If you work hard and are productive, soon you will pass the GM workers. If you are a fuck up, you aren't promoted and if bad enough, you are fired. Rewards are passed out on merit rather than seniority. You are accountable and can be fired. What a novel concept!
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Oct 16, 2012 12:29:30 GMT -6
Were any of the Toyota employees at the San Antonio plant responsible for this? If so, maybe they need to re-think how their "meritocracy" works ...
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Oct 16, 2012 12:47:58 GMT -6
Tex, once again, more poor saps working for, as Anita put it "for a fraction of their previous wages", or in this case, a fraction of the wages their fathers earned.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Oct 16, 2012 17:17:43 GMT -6
The San Antonio workers had zilch to do with the car fires. They only build full size trucks.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Oct 16, 2012 17:25:27 GMT -6
US workers enjoyed a golden age for a couple of decades after WW2. Europe had been our main competitor before the war and their manufacturing base was devastated. Japan was on its ass. The rest of Asia was dirt poor. It was a great time in America and fun while it lasted.
That was then and now is now. Playing like it's 1953 and we have all the marbles doesn't make it so. We can't afford to live in Lala Land.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on Oct 16, 2012 23:59:12 GMT -6
. .....The unions fought against free trade in favor of fair trade...... Gordon, I am fascinated by your distinction between "free" trade and "fair" trade. In my book, "fair" is a null word. That is, it has ZERO meaning. That is to say, "fair" is so subjective a concept that it has no place in civilized discourse. What is your "fair" share of taxes? What is your "fair" duty to your countrymen? It cannot be defined, quantified, or enumerated. It is whatever you want it to be. Therefore, it has no meaning at all. But I suspect you have some more concrete definition in mind, and I'd be curious to hear what it is. Seriously, no snark intended, I'd like to know how you define it.
|
|