Unemployment Hits 5 1/2 Year Low

[KCFlyer]

Yeah...talk about an unhappy camper

Most demolibs i've seen or met see doom and gloom even when the sun's shining....go figure. B)

How about all the cheeriness we heard coming from the right from 1992 until 2000?

 

[delldude]

The (Uneducated) need to knows these FACTS so they can make an intelligent reasoned decision as to what to write on these boards and elsewhere, and what to believe and of course how to think about today’s realities set in motion eons ago.

Apparently you have misunderstood the lefts message and purpose....they wish to sit down amongst the radical muslims,open a dialog and come to a peaceful resolution to the dilema at hand.
Soon after they sit down...the peaceful people will hand the Demolibs their heads on a platter.... 😉 literally... 😱

 

[local 12 proud]

Yeah...talk about an unhappy camper

Most demolibs i've seen or met see doom and gloom even when the sun's shining....go figure. B)

Its that Democrat Cradle to Grave on the government nipple mentality, besides its easier to blame someone else for all their shortcomings in life. 🙄

 

[KCFlyer]

Apparently you have misunderstood the lefts message and purpose....they wish to sit down amongst the radical muslims,open a dialog and come to a peaceful resolution to the dilema at hand.
Soon after they sit down...the peaceful people will hand the Demolibs their heads on a platter.... 😉 literally... 😱

Sorry to burst your bubble dell. First off.. a whole bunch of "demolibs" wish we would never have cut and ran in the pursuit of bin laden. A whole bunch of us "demolibs" would have preferred to have the rest of the worlds support before invading a country. A whole bunch of us demolibs wish that, if we were dead set on invading a country that posed no threat to us, Bush and Rummy had heeded their generals (you know...the guys who have actually fought a war) suggestion to send in about a hundred thousand more troops to conduct the war.

That Cheney Kool-Aid really must taste good. It helps you forget about the comments made during the "planning" of this war:

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, to U.S. troops in Aviano, Italy: "It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."

Or the "tricky Dick" of the new millenium

March 16, Vice President Cheney, on NBC's Meet the Press: "I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . . . I think it will go relatively quickly, . . . (in) weeks rather than months."

 

[delldude]

Sorry to burst your bubble dell. First off.. a whole bunch of "demolibs" wish we would never have cut and ran in the pursuit of bin laden. A whole bunch of us "demolibs" would have preferred to have the rest of the worlds support before invading a country. A whole bunch of us demolibs wish that, if we were dead set on invading a country that posed no threat to us, Bush and Rummy had heeded their generals (you know...the guys who have actually fought a war) suggestion to send in about a hundred thousand more troops to conduct the war.

That Cheney Kool-Aid really must taste good. It helps you forget about the comments made during the "planning" of this war: Or the "tricky Dick" of the new millenium

Beg to differ there guy......your style Demo-lib is a rogue within the party....I must say I respect your style of dedication to our country and our way of life.But you can not sit there and tell me the likes of Kerry,Dean,Pelosi,Kennedy or Clinton share your view.Last time I checked the core dems are/have been replaced by a radical group of liberals which is most dangerous to our country and our way of life.And its gone so far as to alienate the dems core of big money contributers for campaign financing.


BTW...you don't seem the kind of demolib that would sit down with them probably without a big gun and someone watching your donkey..(no pun intended 😉

 

[KCFlyer]

But you can not sit there and tell me the likes of Kerry,Dean,Pelosi,Kennedy or Clinton share your view.

Actually you are right...Hillary seems to have been more of a Bush supporter than many republicans, judging by her voting record.

 

[delldude]

Actually you are right...Hillary seems to have been more of a Bush supporter than many republicans, judging by her voting record.

IMHO Hillary is a fence jumper or opportunist for her own personal gain.Setting herself to look pretty for '08.What disturbs me most about her political posturing is how many fail to see this and when and if she gets in she'll go from creating a centrist type personna and go to the extreme left,and now you're stuck with her or whomever.

 

[Leto2]

When someone is no longer collecting unemployment insurance, they can no longer be directly counted. The amount of people not employed and not collecting unemployment ins and looking for work is estimated, and not very well.

Did you just make this up or something? I've never heard this and would like to see your source.

Here's mine:
How the Government Measures Unemployment - Bureau of Labor and Statistics
"The basic concepts involved in identifying the employed and unemployed are quite simple:
* People with jobs are employed.
* People who are jobless, looking for jobs, and available for work are unemployed.
* People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force."

It's all acedemic anyway. People don't vote based on THE economy, they vote based on THIER economy. You can lie and spin all you want about a lot of things, but you cant rig the numbers on joe workers paycheck.

Actually, the BLS employment numbers can't really lie. There's really no spin to them either -- employment is either up or down and is either high or low. Right now it is pretty low and falling. Wages are also up.
This means that the average worker Joe is doing better.

 

[delldude]

Did you just make this up or something? I've never heard this and would like to see your source.

Here's mine:
How the Government Measures Unemployment - Bureau of Labor and Statistics
"The basic concepts involved in identifying the employed and unemployed are quite simple:
* People with jobs are employed.
* People who are jobless, looking for jobs, and available for work are unemployed.
* People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force."
Actually, the BLS employment numbers can't really lie. There's really no spin to them either -- employment is either up or down and is either high or low. Right now it is pretty low and falling. Wages are also up.
This means that the average worker Joe is doing better.

Your standard Pitbull/Sentrido/CH.12 response is those who have run out of U/C are no longer counted....seems you just blew a hole in that theory.

 

[Ch. 12]

Your standard Pitbull/Sentrido/CH.12 response is those who have run out of U/C are no longer counted....seems you just blew a hole in that theory.

So sorry to both of you. "looking for a job" means you have been unemployed for less than 6 months. Ask any economist. It's too late tonight but since you're in need of something concrete (sentrido's little snippets are just verbage and don't define what "employable" or "looking for a job" mean), I'll be more than happy to get official gov't info for you tomorrow.

 

[sentrido]

Did you just make this up or something? I've never heard this and would like to see your source.

Here's mine:
How the Government Measures Unemployment - Bureau of Labor and Statistics
"The basic concepts involved in identifying the employed and unemployed are quite simple:
* People with jobs are employed.
* People who are jobless, looking for jobs, and available for work are unemployed.
* People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force."
Actually, the BLS employment numbers can't really lie. There's really no spin to them either -- employment is either up or down and is either high or low. Right now it is pretty low and falling. Wages are also up.
This means that the average worker Joe is doing better.

The average joe is doing better than last quarter. He hasn't done better 6 years. Think about that. If you start with 10, and in six years its worth 8, but you gain 1, are you doing better?

 

[Ch. 12]

So sorry to both of you. "looking for a job" means you have been unemployed for less than 6 months. Ask any economist. It's too late tonight but since you're in need of something concrete (xxxx little snippets are just verbage and don't define what "employable" or "looking for a job" mean), I'll be more than happy to get official gov't info for you tomorrow.

sorry...I accidentally mentioned sentrido rather than leto for posting the grossly abbreviated version of unemployment figures. My apologies, Sentrido...you get it.

Going back to Leto's "info" on unemployment...well it just so happens that I found, rather easily, on the same site that yes...if you are receiving "unemployment" which is the only way that they can measure if you are really "seeking a job" (since they don't call every person every night now do they?), once unemployment runs out...which is in six months, you are no longer counted as actively seeking therefore you aren't counted in the equation b/c you are no longer part of the active or seeking workforce.

And regarding wage "increases"...they are down significantly since 2000 and recent gains don't even cover inflation. How is that a good thing?

 

[Leto2]

Going back to Leto's "info" on unemployment...well it just so happens that I found, rather easily, on the same site that yes...if you are receiving "unemployment" which is the only way that they can measure if you are really "seeking a job" (since they don't call every person every night now do they?), once unemployment runs out...which is in six months, you are no longer counted as actively seeking therefore you aren't counted in the equation b/c you are no longer part of the active or seeking workforce.

Hmm. Couldn't find that, although I didn't look too much. Could you please point it out for me? (I seriously would like to see what you are referring to.)

Aren't lots of people seeking jobs that aren't on unemployment?

This is what I found:

"The questions used in the interviews are carefully designed to elicit the most accurate picture of each person's labor force activities. Some of the major questions that determine employment status are: (The capitalized words are emphasized when read by the interviewers.) 1. Does anyone in this household have a business or farm? 2. LAST WEEK, did you do ANY work for (either) pay (or profit)? If the answer to question 1 is "yes" and the answer to question 2 is "no," the next question is: 3. LAST WEEK, did you do any unpaid work in the family business or farm? For those who reply "no" to both questions 2 and 3, the next key questions used to determine employment status are: 4. LAST WEEK, (in addition to the business,) did you have a job either full or part time? Include any job from which you were temporarily absent. and 5. LAST WEEK, were you on layoff from a job? and 6. What was the main reason you were absent from work LAST WEEK? For those who respond "yes" to question 5 about being on layoff, the following questions are asked: 7. Has your employer given you a date to return to work? and, if "no," 8. Have you been given any indication that you will be recalled to work within the next 6 months? If the responses to either question 7 or 8 indicate that the person expects to be recalled from layoff, he/she is counted as unemployed. For those who were reported as having no job or business from which they were absent or on layoff, the next question is: 9. Have you been doing anything to find work during the last 4 weeks? For those who say "yes," the next question is: 10. What are all of the things you have done to find work during the last 4 weeks? If an active method of looking for work, such as those listed at the beginning of this section, is mentioned, the following question is asked: 11. LAST WEEK, could you have started a job if one had been offered? If there is no reason, except temporary illness, that the person could not take a job, he/she is considered to be not only looking but also available for work and is counted as unemployed."

It seems to me like anyone looking for work that isn't working is unemployed.

 

[UAL_TECH]

Hmm. Couldn't find that, although I didn't look too much. Could you please point it out for me? (I seriously would like to see what you are referring to.)

Aren't lots of people seeking jobs that aren't on unemployment?

This is what I found:

"The questions used in the interviews are carefully designed to elicit the most accurate picture of each person's labor force activities. Some of the major questions that determine employment status are: (The capitalized words are emphasized when read by the interviewers.) 1. Does anyone in this household have a business or farm? 2. LAST WEEK, did you do ANY work for (either) pay (or profit)? If the answer to question 1 is "yes" and the answer to question 2 is "no," the next question is: 3. LAST WEEK, did you do any unpaid work in the family business or farm? For those who reply "no" to both questions 2 and 3, the next key questions used to determine employment status are: 4. LAST WEEK, (in addition to the business,) did you have a job either full or part time? Include any job from which you were temporarily absent. and 5. LAST WEEK, were you on layoff from a job? and 6. What was the main reason you were absent from work LAST WEEK? For those who respond "yes" to question 5 about being on layoff, the following questions are asked: 7. Has your employer given you a date to return to work? and, if "no," 8. Have you been given any indication that you will be recalled to work within the next 6 months? If the responses to either question 7 or 8 indicate that the person expects to be recalled from layoff, he/she is counted as unemployed. For those who were reported as having no job or business from which they were absent or on layoff, the next question is: 9. Have you been doing anything to find work during the last 4 weeks? For those who say "yes," the next question is: 10. What are all of the things you have done to find work during the last 4 weeks? If an active method of looking for work, such as those listed at the beginning of this section, is mentioned, the following question is asked: 11. LAST WEEK, could you have started a job if one had been offered? If there is no reason, except temporary illness, that the person could not take a job, he/she is considered to be not only looking but also available for work and is counted as unemployed."

It seems to me like anyone looking for work that isn't working is unemployed.

Thousands Want to Work at Times Square M&M World

Got Job?
B) UT