Do You Think Republicans Are Happy That Unemployment Is Going Down And Obama Wi

[Freeper]

DemocratSinceBirth
Do You Think Republicans Are Happy That Unemployment Is Going Down And Obama Will Get The Credit?


14 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
   Yes
1 (7%)
   No
2 (14%)
   Are you kidding me?
11 (79%)
   0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002646259

These are the people who are buying the bullshit the media is selling on 0bama.

CaliforniaPeggy
1. I have this bumpersticker on my car:

Republicans: Keeping millions out of work to keep one man out of a job. Or words to that effect...

 

I know they're unhappy!

 

undeterred
3. Republicans are not happy people.

Like you goons are happy? Hell you fools can't stand for anyone to be happy, so you want the government to step in and make everyone just as miserable as you are.

[Duke Nukum]

Didn't Tom Daschle or his soul mate slobber over the stock market crash as every 15 points in decline was equal to 100 votes, or something like that?

Myself, I find this news very sad. I find it very sad that we have a President who only cares about America becoming a third world country and the bunch of stupid, envious primitives who cheer him on.

[BEG]

I would vote for Obama if it was guaranteed that everyone who has lost a job or is underemployed would find a good paying job again (and I was assured he wouldn't get to name another supreme court justice).

Nadin how many people have dropped out of the workforce DUmmies.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

Didn't Tom Daschle or his soul mate slobber over the stock market crash as every 15 points in decline was equal to 100 votes, or something like that?

Myself, I find this news very sad. I find it very sad that we have a President who only cares about America becoming a third world country and the bunch of stupid, envious primitives who cheer him on.

Dick Gephardt said for every 100 points the Dow drops, that's one seat they would pick up.  The Democrats think this way.  They assume everyone does.  

[WinOne4TheGipper]

I notice the OP's name is DemocratSinceBirth.  I guarantee you that for the nine months before birth, he was a Republican.

[Skul]

I'd love to see the unemployed rate go down.
That would great.
I just don't see it getting down to where it was when "The Bush", was President.
Didn't Nancy the Great, vilifiy GWB over a 6.5% rate or something?
Had Obama let private industry manage their own internal affairs, that rate would be far lower than the current reported 8.1%.
Government is the problem, not the solution.

[Duke Nukum]

Dick Gephardt said for every 100 points the Dow drops, that's one seat they would pick up.  The Democrats think this way.  They assume everyone does.  

Ah, thank you so much. It was bugging me I couldn't nadin it. I have a hard time keeping the two soul mates straight in my mind.

So there, take that DUmmies, your elected officials cheer on people's retirements being destroyed so you can acquire more power!

[DumbAss Tanker]

Unemployment is going down, but not as fast as employment is going down.

The unemployment is a stupid stat since it is a function of two different other stats that each shift their basis over time (Current survey answers and labor force size for that same week), and not in any particular relation to each other.  It is a crappy stat to actually use to compare two different time periods.  We use constant dollars to a stated base year in any economic comparisons over time, but not in this key published unemployment stat.  It is worse than meaningless, since it is actually misleading.

[NHSparky]

Funny thing, DUmmies, if you counted all those people who were working in 2008 who just "dropped out", you'd be closer to 15 percent unemployment.

How's that taste?

[obumazombie]

By hook or by crook, the unemployment rate will go below 8% just before the election to help bolster owebuma.

[Zeus]

US hiring slowed in April to just 115,000 jobs, unemployment rate dropped to 8.1 per cent
By Christopher S. Rugaber, The Associated Press |Associated Press – 13 hrs ago

THE POLITICAL DEBATE
A falling unemployment rate would seem to be good news for President Barack Obama's re-election hopes. Dating to 1956, no incumbent president has lost when unemployment fell in the two years leading to an election. On Election Day, unemployment will almost certainly be lower than it was two years earlier: 9.8 per cent in November 2010.
But for the past two months, the rate has fallen for the wrong reason: More than 500,000 Americans have stopped looking for jobs and are longer be counted as unemployed. Job growth averaged a healthy 252,000 from December through February. It slowed to 135,000 a month in March and April.
The question is whether voters will focus more on the falling unemployment rate (good for Obama) or on the modest job growth (not so good).

[delilahmused]

US hiring slowed in April to just 115,000 jobs, unemployment rate dropped to 8.1 per cent
By Christopher S. Rugaber, The Associated Press |Associated Press – 13 hrs ago

From the AP? Someone's going to lose their job for choosing truth over propaganda!

Cindie

[diesel driver]

US hiring slowed in April to just 115,000 jobs, unemployment rate dropped to 8.1 per cent
By Christopher S. Rugaber, The Associated Press |Associated Press – 13 hrs ago

Is that 115K TOTAL jobs, or is that 115K NET jobs?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the economy need to generate at least 300-400K total per month to show a net increase, otherwise, the workforce is shrinking. 

According to BLS, the civilian labor force participation rate declined in April to 63.6 percent, meaning there are LESS people employed, not more.

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) was little changed at 5.1
million in April, the employment-population ratio, at 58.4 percent, changed little.

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as
involuntary part-time workers) was essentially unchanged in April.  These individuals were
working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time
job.

In April, 2.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, essentially unchanged from
a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force,
wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They
were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the
survey.

Among the marginally attached, there were 968,000 discouraged workers in April, about the same as a
year earlier.  Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them.

THIS is what we have gotten for our additional $5 TRILLION in new debt.  Yeah, that Obama is an economic GENIUS alright.   

[Zeus]

Is that 115K TOTAL jobs, or is that 115K NET jobs?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the economy need to generate at least 300-400K total per month to show a net increase, otherwise, the workforce is shrinking. 

Yes I believe it's 250K/month for par.

yes they juggle the numbers around to make things out to be better than they actually are the problem is the avg joe on the street can't decipher the juggling act , they need an honest interpreter to break it down for them.

Where is Ross Perot when you need him 

[DLR Pyro]

By hook or by crook, the unemployment rate will go below 8% just before the election to help bolster owebuma.

It's like an old joke I heard about asking a lawyer what 2 + 2 equals.  The lawyer leans close you and asks in a conspiratorial voice "what do you want it to equal?"

[Kyle Ricky]

undeterred
3. Republicans are not happy people.

From what my sociology teacher in college told me. The murder-suicide rate among Liberals is higher that it is among Conservative. So if anyone is unhappy, it is the Libtards.

[miskie]

Half of the reason for the 'decline' is the way Team Obama computes jobs now - the short of it is when a job hasn't been filled for so long, that job as well as the unemployed person that once filled it cease to exist. On the surface it 'computes' since Team Obama is dropping one person as well as one job from the rolls, but in practice it results in a net decrease in unemployment percentage.

Here is some simple math to prove it :

Let's say there are a total of 1 million jobs, and a million employees to fill them, starting off at an unemployment rate of 0%.

Things get bad, and 100 thousand people are laid off. That figures at 10% - on your calculator enter 100,000 divided by 1,000,000 and then hit the percent key. - 10%.

After so long, Obama declares 5 thousand of those jobs no longer exist, and also removes 5 thousand unemployed from the rolls - So, on your calculator, enter 95,000 divided by 995,000 and hit the percent key.

The new number is now an unemployment rate of 9.55%, and not the 10% the average person would assume since both the number of jobs and the number of unemployed were adjusted "equally" (one to one).

And the DUmp celebrates ! "Obama brought the Unemployment rate Down !!!! Wheeeeeee!!!!" when the truth is Obama did nothing but change the formula. The same number of people are still unemployed.

[miskie]

Addendum :

I just explained this to someone else, & it generated confusion. The formula I used seems to be backwards, but it isn't.

We are not figuring out what's left, but are instead figuring out what's missing.

To explain it again, using more words & less math :

The number of unemployed is much smaller than the number of total jobs. If one subtracts "X" from both the unemployed as well as the number of jobs, the percentage of unemployed that are left is going to be smaller than the percentage of jobs available.

Let's say there are 10 unemployed from 100 jobs.

If I subtract 1 from 10, that is a 10 % decrease in unemployed.
If I subtract 1 from 100, that is a 1% decrease in available jobs.

It's the same argument that the liberals use against a flat tax- that paying the same rate consumes a larger percentage of a poor person's available income than a wealthy person's. -- Yet in this case, that same logic is okay when it comes to puffing up Obama's reelection chances.