a bit more hope and change

Originally Posted By: HunterBear71Is that news or a political attack ad?

HB. it's the TRUTH. wish all the media outlets would show that
rolleyes.gif
 
Originally Posted By: HunterBear71Is that news or a political attack ad?

Ya want news, HB, here's some breaking news for ya. This is that wonderful recovery your "fine man" is responsible for regardless of his futile attemts to blame it on Bush, or the tea party, or the republicans, or, or, or........


Quote:
Romney, GOP pounce on dismal May jobs report
Published

June 01, 2012
FoxNews.com

May 30, 2012: Dozens of people line up to seek a job at the Wells Fargo call center in Salem, Ore. (AP)

A distressing May employment report -- with the fewest number of new jobs created in a year, as unemployment rose to 8.2 percent -- elicited swift criticism of President Obama by Republican leaders and presidential nominee Mitt Romney, as each hammered home their election-year message: The president has had three years to create more jobs and revive the U.S. economy -- and he's "failed."

“Today’s weak jobs report is devastating news for American workers and American families,” Romney said. “It is now clear to everyone that President Obama’s policies have failed to achieve their goals and that the Obama economy is crushing America’s middle class.”

Earlier Friday, House Speaker John Boehner said the president’s “failed policies have made high unemployment and a weak economy the sad new normal for families and small businesses.”

He was joined by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor who declared, "The American people really deserved better... and under new leadership I believe we can do better.”

Democrats were quick to defend the president.

“Problems in the job market were long in the making and will not be solved overnight,” said Alan Kruger, chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers. “The economy lost jobs for 25 straight months beginning in February 2008, and over 8 million jobs were lost as a result of the Great Recession. We are still fighting back from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression."

Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee said the president and the rest of the party have made progress but more is needed.

“We have made progress, said Van Hollen, D-Md. “Today's jobs numbers show we need to make further progress. But let's learn the right lessons from what happened in the past. Because if we diagnose wrongly, then we won't have the right prescription.”

The president is expected to speak this afternoon about the report.

U.S. employers created 69,000 jobs in May, the fewest in a year, and the unemployment rate ticked up. The dismal jobs figures are also fan fears that the economy is sputtering, with stock prices falling on Wall Street.

The Labor Department also says the economy created far fewer jobs in the previous two months than first thought. It revised those figures down to show 49,000 fewer jobs created.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/.../#ixzz1wYPZ6gzl

Regards,
hm
 
Most people I've run into think the unemployment numbers published by the government come from the number of people who are receiving unemployment compensation. Not true. They haven't changed their methodology in about 40 years, and this is the way it is done.

They run 2 polls every month. One is a poll of employers, and the other is a poll of workers. The number we usually see published is the result of the poll of workers. They ask if they are employed, how many hours per week they work, etc. Anyone who answers that they are not employed, they ask if they are seeking work. If the answer is yes, then they are counted as the unemployed.

Basically, the numbers published are the people who are not working at all, and who are actively seeking work. Those who are not seeking work for whatever reason (such as being unable to find a job that pays enough to cover child care so they become a stay at home mom) are not counted in the unemployed numbers. Those who take a part time job at McDonalds are not counted in the unemployed numbers.

So, the unemployment numbers do not give an accurate picture of the economic conditions. You can lose your $25/hr job at the plant, take a job working 20 hours per week at $7.50/hr, and you are not counted as unemployed. If you go back to school because you are seeking retraining, then you are not counted as unemployed. If you take early retirement, or any retirement, you are not counted as unemployed. If you are disabled and receiving disability compensation and not seeking work, then you are not counted.

Basically, it comes down to this. If you do not have any job, and are looking for work, then you are counted in the unemployment numbers, regardless of whether or not you are drawing unemployment compensation.
 
no, it won't be fixed over night, but we've had 3 1/2 years for his policies to take effect.

his way just isn't working.
 
Originally Posted By: Stu Farishno, it won't be fixed over night, but we've had 3 1/2 years for his policies to take effect.

his way just isn't working.


No matter if you are left wing, right wing, or moderate, if you look at it honestly then the Obama administration has been a dismal failure. Even the left wing would have to admit that if they were honest with themselves. How many promises did he make on the campaign trail that he has failed to keep? We are still in Afghanistan. Gitmo is still open. Unemployment is still high. Instead of the universal single payer healthcare he promised he got a hodgepodge of crap and then announced victory. Terrorists are still being tried in military courts.

The only campaign promise I can think of that he actually kept was to get us out of Iraq. And he did that on the timeline established by Bush.

He had two years of unfettered control of this country, with a House controlled by Democrats and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, and STILL he failed to live up to nearly all of his campaign promises.
 
Last edited:
Ivers is on the right track. The problem is most Americans are never counted. The BLS does it's own random poll of 60,000 households. And like most polls of any type, they are notoriously flawed and subject to gross manipulation. Does anyone doubt that the dept heads of BLS know who they answer to. Do we have any reason to suspect there would be any perfidy in this administration? Why certainly not, zero says his admin is transparent doesn't he? Here it is straight from the horses mouth.

There are about 60,000 households in the sample for this survey. This translates into approximately 110,000 individuals, a large sample compared to public opinion surveys which usually cover fewer than 2,000 people. The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, all of the counties and county-equivalent cities in the country first are grouped into 2,025 geographic areas (sampling units). The Census Bureau then designs and selects a sample consisting of 824 of these geographic areas to represent each State and the District of Columbia. The sample is a State-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each State. (For a detailed explanation of CPS sampling methodology, see Chapter 1, of the BLS Handbook of Methods.)

Every month, one-fourth of the households in the sample are changed, so that no household is interviewed more than 4 consecutive months. This practice avoids placing too heavy a burden on the households selected for the sample. After a household is interviewed for 4 consecutive months, it leaves the sample for 8 months, and then is again interviewed for the same 4 calendar months a year later, before leaving the sample for good. This procedure results in approximately 75 percent of the sample remaining the same from month to month and 50 percent from year to year.

Each month, 2,200 highly trained and experienced Census Bureau employees interview persons in the 60,000 sample households for information on the labor force activities (Please note nothing is mentioned regarding the competence of these employees, think ACORN types)(jobholding and jobseeking) or non-labor force status of the members of these households during the survey reference week (usually the week that includes the 12th of the month). At the time of the first enumeration of a household, the interviewer prepares a roster of the household members, including their personal characteristics (date of birth, sex, race, Hispanic ethnicity, marital status, educational attainment, veteran status, and so on) and their relationships to the person maintaining the household. This information, relating to all household members 15 years of age and over, is entered by the interviewers into laptop computers; at the end of each day's interviewing, the data collected are transmitted to the Census Bureau's central computer in Washington, D.C. (The labor force measures in the CPS pertain to individuals 16 years and over.) In addition, a portion of the sample is interviewed by phone through three central data collection facilities. (Prior to 1994, the interviews were conducted using a paper questionnaire that had to be mailed in by the interviewers each month.)

Each person is classified according to the activities he or she engaged in during the reference week. Then, the total numbers are "weighted," or adjusted to independent population estimates (based on updated decennial census results). The weighting takes into account the age, sex, race, Hispanic ethnicity, and State of residence of the person, so that these characteristics are reflected in the proper proportions in the final estimates.

A sample is not a total count, and the survey may not produce the same results that would be obtained from interviewing the entire population. But the chances are 90 out of 100 that the monthly estimate of unemployment from the sample is within about 290,000 of the figure obtainable from a total census. Since monthly unemployment totals have ranged between about 7 and 11 million in recent years, the possible error resulting from sampling is not large enough to distort the total unemployment picture.

Because these interviews are the basic source of data for total unemployment, information must be factual and correct. Respondents are never asked specifically if they are unemployed, nor are they given an opportunity to decide their own labor force status. Unless they already know how the Government defines unemployment, many of them may not be sure of their actual classification when the interview is completed.

Similarly, interviewers do not decide the respondents' labor force classification. They simply ask the questions in the prescribed way and record the answers. Based on information collected in the survey and definitions programmed into the computer, individuals are then classified as employed, unemployed, or not in the labor force.(And who do you suppose programs the decision making capabilities into the computer? Could it be the same folks who consistently find thousands of uncounted votes in close races?)

All interviews must follow the same procedures to obtain comparable results. Because of the crucial role interviewers have in the household survey, a great amount of time and effort is spent maintaining the quality of their work. Interviewers are given intensive training, including classroom lectures, discussion, practice, observation, home-study materials, and on-the-job training. At least once a year, they attend day-long training and review sessions. Also, at least once a year, they are accompanied by a supervisor during a full day of interviewing to determine how well they carry out their assignments.

A selected number of households are reinterviewed each month to determine whether the information obtained in the first interview was correct. The information gained from these reinterviews is used to improve the entire training program.

Remainder of text here:
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: IversMost people I've run into think the unemployment numbers published by the government come from the number of people who are receiving unemployment compensation. Not true. They haven't changed their methodology in about 40 years, and this is the way it is done.

They run 2 polls every month. One is a poll of employers, and the other is a poll of workers. The number we usually see published is the result of the poll of workers. They ask if they are employed, how many hours per week they work, etc. Anyone who answers that they are not employed, they ask if they are seeking work. If the answer is yes, then they are counted as the unemployed.

Basically, the numbers published are the people who are not working at all, and who are actively seeking work. Those who are not seeking work for whatever reason (such as being unable to find a job that pays enough to cover child care so they become a stay at home mom) are not counted in the unemployed numbers. Those who take a part time job at McDonalds are not counted in the unemployed numbers.

So, the unemployment numbers do not give an accurate picture of the economic conditions. You can lose your $25/hr job at the plant, take a job working 20 hours per week at $7.50/hr, and you are not counted as unemployed. If you go back to school because you are seeking retraining, then you are not counted as unemployed. If you take early retirement, or any retirement, you are not counted as unemployed. If you are disabled and receiving disability compensation and not seeking work, then you are not counted.

Basically, it comes down to this. If you do not have any job, and are looking for work, then you are counted in the unemployment numbers, regardless of whether or not you are drawing unemployment compensation.

This is VERY informative, Ivers, thanks!

Your explanation confirms my anecdotal observation(s) of the dismal job market here in the Seattle area. If I understand you correctly, then it also explains the 'under reporting' of TRUE unemployment given that the many people who have pretty much given up on finding work are not even counted as unemployed.

I was young, but I remember the Carter years. This 'feels' much worse, in terms of unemployment and 'misery'--other than that we do not have the high inflation and interest rates we did then, but we DO have far fewer jobs and opportunity.

Keynesian economic policies PROLONGED the Great Depression and are doing so again today, IMHO.


The pendulum swings....

(Here is how I explained Keynesian vs. Austrian School Economics to my 15 year old son: ).
 
Originally Posted By: HunterBear71I thought we couldn't trust the doctored employment numbers provided by the government.

The numbers quoted above are those chosen and accepted by the administration. These numbers are the most optomistic statistics available. You will just have to wait for the dept. of labor to release statistics of the relationship (or percentage) of working aged citizens to available jobs, which is, indeed, a more accurate portrayal of "jobs created".

Regards,
hm
 
Originally Posted By: HunterBear71I thought we couldn't trust the doctored employment numbers provided by the government.

im thinking that in a few months that IF the numbers fall, these will be the very ones that YOU will use to try to convince us how great little barry really is.
 
Back
Top