Home› A Moving Train

Interesting chart

CH156378CH156378 Posts: 1,539
edited May 2011 in A Moving Train
http://www.oliverwillis.com/wp-content/ ... sector.jpg
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • BinauralJamBinauralJam Posts: 14,158
    8-)
  • SatansFutonSatansFuton Posts: 5,399
    "Interesting Chart" is an oxymoron.
    "See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    if that chart is legit then it is pretty interesting.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,437
    Looks good to me. :)
    "Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
    -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

    "Try to not spook the horse."
    -Neil Young













  • butterjambutterjam Posts: 215
    Correlation does not imply causation.

    Furthermore, it is broken down by just who is president and over a period that seems to benefit Obama versus Bush. What happened in the period before 2008? How about we break it down by what party controlled congress?

    I get a kick out of people who find some chart that fits their agenda and use it as an arguement.

    By no means am I a Bush supporter. But I like to try and get the whole picture instead of just a partial one that will suit my beliefs.
  • Gary CarterGary Carter Posts: 14,067
    311jj wrote:
    Correlation does not imply causation.

    Furthermore, it is broken down by just who is president and over a period that seems to benefit Obama versus Bush. What happened in the period before 2008? How about we break it down by what party controlled congress?

    I get a kick out of people who find some chart that fits their agenda and use it as an arguement.

    By no means am I a Bush supporter. But I like to try and get the whole picture instead of just a partial one that will suit my beliefs.
    well said
    Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
    Sammi: Wanna just break up?

  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 9,196
    311jj wrote:
    Correlation does not imply causation.

    Furthermore, it is broken down by just who is president and over a period that seems to benefit Obama versus Bush. What happened in the period before 2008? How about we break it down by what party controlled congress?

    I get a kick out of people who find some chart that fits their agenda and use it as an arguement.

    By no means am I a Bush supporter. But I like to try and get the whole picture instead of just a partial one that will suit my beliefs.

    Was there an argument?
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    that chart goes back to the time of the now famous "dey tuk urr jerbs" and shows the progression to today.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIzivCJ9pzU
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    311jj wrote:
    Correlation does not imply causation.

    Furthermore, it is broken down by just who is president and over a period that seems to benefit Obama versus Bush. What happened in the period before 2008? How about we break it down by what party controlled congress?

    I get a kick out of people who find some chart that fits their agenda and use it as an arguement.

    By no means am I a Bush supporter. But I like to try and get the whole picture instead of just a partial one that will suit my beliefs.

    I'm a big fan of the correlation does not imply causation...it's hard to dismiss this chart...unless of course one wants to quickly dismiss this chart...

    I guess one could say "what about the Johnson administration" and "what was the effect on jobs by Nixon's resignation"...those statements don't make this chart an less compelling...
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,158
    Still a long way to go, but it is positive to see the recovery picking up speed.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • butterjambutterjam Posts: 215
    I'm dismissing what this chart is implying, that Bush is a job killer and Obama is the a job saver. Both are out of control spenders and are their policies are bad economically for this country in the long run. It was inevitable that at some point we will start to see job growth after all of the jobs that were lost.
  • zarocatzarocat Posts: 1,901
    edited May 2011
    Are these jobs not basically part time jobs without benefits & health care ?

    Just asking ...
    Post edited by [Deleted User] on
    1996: Toronto
    1998: Barrie
    2000: Montreal, Toronto, Auburn Hills
    2003: Cleveland, Buffalo, Toronto, Montreal
    2004: Boston X2, Grand Rapids
    2005: Kitchener, London, Hamilton, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto
    2006: Toronto X2
    2009: Toronto
    2011: PJ20, Montreal, Toronto X2, Hamilton
    2012: Manchester X2, Amsterdam X2, Prague, Berlin X2, Philadelphia, Missoula
    2013: Pittsburg, Buffalo
    2014: Milan, Trieste, Vienna, Berlin, Stockholm, Oslo, Detroit
    2016: Ottawa, Toronto X2
    2018: Padova, Rome, Prague, Krakow, Berlin, Barcelona
    2022: Ottawa, Hamilton, Toronto
    2023: Chicago X2
    2024: New York X2
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    311jj wrote:
    I'm dismissing what this chart is implying, that Bush is a job killer and Obama is the a job saver. Both are out of control spenders and are their policies are bad economically for this country in the long run. It was inevitable that at some point we will start to see job growth after all of the jobs that were lost.

    I dismiss this post as opinion and conjecture... ;)
  • butterjambutterjam Posts: 215
    inmytree wrote:
    311jj wrote:
    I'm dismissing what this chart is implying, that Bush is a job killer and Obama is the a job saver. Both are out of control spenders and are their policies are bad economically for this country in the long run. It was inevitable that at some point we will start to see job growth after all of the jobs that were lost.

    I dismiss this post as opinion and conjecture... ;)


    Yes that is my opinion. I think it is pretty valid. Would you like to offer your opinion?
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    311jj wrote:
    inmytree wrote:
    311jj wrote:
    I'm dismissing what this chart is implying, that Bush is a job killer and Obama is the a job saver. Both are out of control spenders and are their policies are bad economically for this country in the long run. It was inevitable that at some point we will start to see job growth after all of the jobs that were lost.

    I dismiss this post as opinion and conjecture... ;)


    Yes that is my opinion. I think it is pretty valid. Would you like to offer your opinion?

    Sure...I think the chart speaks for itself....during the bush years lots of jobs were lost...and since Obama took over lots of jobs have been gained...

    it's fairly clear to me...
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,158
    I see a correlation with the rise of the Tea Party as well. ;)
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • EmBleveEmBleve Posts: 3,019
    zarocat wrote:
    Are these jobs not basically part time jobs without benefits & health care ?

    Just asking ...
    Excellent point, and I would venture to guess they are.
  • EmBleveEmBleve Posts: 3,019
    311jj also brings up some good points about biased information fitting an agenda-- although the chart is interesting, if true, albeit misleading---considering that my boyfriend got laid off TWICE in 2010 from 2 different jobs in the private sector (once early in the year, once at the end of the year), and my aunt got laid off from her job at a private hospital in mid '10. This during the time that the chart indicates private sector jobs were on the rise. hmm.
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    Jason P wrote:
    I see a correlation with the rise of the Tea Party as well. ;)

    good point...all those yellie teabaggers taking it to the streets probably created a few jobs at the local hardees/meeting centers... ;)
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    EmBleve wrote:
    311jj also brings up some good points about biased information fitting an agenda-- although the chart is interesting, if true, albeit misleading---considering that my boyfriend got laid off TWICE in 2010 from 2 different jobs in the private sector (once early in the year, once at the end of the year), and my aunt got laid off from her job at a private hospital in mid '10. This during the time that the chart indicates private sector jobs were on the rise. hmm.

    hmmm.....I guess you may have a point...since your bf and aunt lost their jobs...no one else anywhere could have taken a new job...

    discussion over...
  • EmBleveEmBleve Posts: 3,019
    inmytree wrote:
    EmBleve wrote:
    311jj also brings up some good points about biased information fitting an agenda-- although the chart is interesting, if true, albeit misleading---considering that my boyfriend got laid off TWICE in 2010 from 2 different jobs in the private sector (once early in the year, once at the end of the year), and my aunt got laid off from her job at a private hospital in mid '10. This during the time that the chart indicates private sector jobs were on the rise. hmm.

    hmmm.....I guess you may have a point...since your bf and aunt lost their jobs...no one else anywhere could have taken a new job...

    discussion over...
    um, I don't think I said that at all. And my bf DID take a new job, from which he was laid off a few months later. Apparently your life is perfect and you're untouched by any of this. Good for you.
    oh...and I'm sure they're not the only ones.
  • arqarq Posts: 8,049
    Well I'm still waiting for this to hit me in a positive way, I'm tired of eating tuna and old bread :?
    "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it"
    Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Why not (V) (°,,,,°) (V) ?
  • EmBleveEmBleve Posts: 3,019
    I heard that, arq! :)
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    EmBleve wrote:
    inmytree wrote:
    EmBleve wrote:
    311jj also brings up some good points about biased information fitting an agenda-- although the chart is interesting, if true, albeit misleading---considering that my boyfriend got laid off TWICE in 2010 from 2 different jobs in the private sector (once early in the year, once at the end of the year), and my aunt got laid off from her job at a private hospital in mid '10. This during the time that the chart indicates private sector jobs were on the rise. hmm.

    hmmm.....I guess you may have a point...since your bf and aunt lost their jobs...no one else anywhere could have taken a new job...

    discussion over...
    um, I don't think I said that at all. And my bf DID take a new job, from which he was laid off a few months later. Apparently your life is perfect and you're untouched by any of this. Good for you.
    oh...and I'm sure they're not the only ones.

    then what was your point...I guess I missed it...

    and yes, my life is perfect... :lol:

    seriously, we're talking about a chart of jobs lost and added for the bush/obama years...I think you're assuming I'm saying the jobs picture is perfect...I'm not...I'm simply saying that chart is telling and I find it interesting that some will automatically dismiss this chart...that's all, nothing more...
  • EmBleveEmBleve Posts: 3,019
    inmytree wrote:

    then what was your point...I guess I missed it...

    and yes, my life is perfect... :lol:

    seriously, we're talking about a chart of jobs lost and added for the bush/obama years...I think you're assuming I'm saying the jobs picture is perfect...I'm not...I'm simply saying that chart is telling and I find it interesting that some will automatically dismiss this chart...that's all, nothing more...
    I believe I stated my point in that this chart is interesting at face value, but it is more than likely misleading. I didn't say anything about automatically dismissing it, I just don't find it representative of what I see or experience on a daily basis. That's all, nothing more. Who is to say if jobs have been added in the Obama years?? Not me.. I can only speak from the reality of my situation (and extended), and it certainly does not resemble what this chart implies.
  • butterjambutterjam Posts: 215
    inmytree wrote:

    then what was your point...I guess I missed it...

    and yes, my life is perfect... :lol:

    seriously, we're talking about a chart of jobs lost and added for the bush/obama years...I think you're assuming I'm saying the jobs picture is perfect...I'm not...I'm simply saying that chart is telling and I find it interesting that some will automatically dismiss this chart...that's all, nothing more...

    That chart is the last year of Bush and the first two of Obama.

    How about this one:

    http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docume ... &ref=fpblg

    This better fits my agenda that both presidents are an economic wreck to our country. Don't dismiss this chart either.
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    311jj wrote:
    inmytree wrote:

    then what was your point...I guess I missed it...

    and yes, my life is perfect... :lol:

    seriously, we're talking about a chart of jobs lost and added for the bush/obama years...I think you're assuming I'm saying the jobs picture is perfect...I'm not...I'm simply saying that chart is telling and I find it interesting that some will automatically dismiss this chart...that's all, nothing more...

    That chart is the last year of Bush and the first two of Obama.

    How about this one:

    http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docume ... &ref=fpblg

    This better fits my agenda that both presidents are an economic wreck to our country. Don't dismiss this chart either.

    duuuuh ok...

    obama-private-sector-1.jpg

    docpage-recoverystats1-1.jpg
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    EmBleve wrote:
    inmytree wrote:

    then what was your point...I guess I missed it...

    and yes, my life is perfect... :lol:

    seriously, we're talking about a chart of jobs lost and added for the bush/obama years...I think you're assuming I'm saying the jobs picture is perfect...I'm not...I'm simply saying that chart is telling and I find it interesting that some will automatically dismiss this chart...that's all, nothing more...
    I believe I stated my point in that this chart is interesting at face value, but it is more than likely misleading. I didn't say anything about automatically dismissing it, I just don't find it representative of what I see or experience on a daily basis. That's all, nothing more. Who is to say if jobs have been added in the Obama years?? Not me.. I can only speak from the reality of my situation (and extended), and it certainly does not resemble what this chart implies.

    well then...since you know all, we should just move on... :thumbup:
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 9,196
    311jj wrote:
    inmytree wrote:

    then what was your point...I guess I missed it...

    and yes, my life is perfect... :lol:

    seriously, we're talking about a chart of jobs lost and added for the bush/obama years...I think you're assuming I'm saying the jobs picture is perfect...I'm not...I'm simply saying that chart is telling and I find it interesting that some will automatically dismiss this chart...that's all, nothing more...

    That chart is the last year of Bush and the first two of Obama.

    How about this one:

    http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docume ... &ref=fpblg

    This better fits my agenda that both presidents are an economic wreck to our country. Don't dismiss this chart either.

    I'll dismiss the chart because at the bottom right is say January 2010 (whoopsies!)
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 9,196
    EmBleve wrote:
    inmytree wrote:

    then what was your point...I guess I missed it...

    and yes, my life is perfect... :lol:

    seriously, we're talking about a chart of jobs lost and added for the bush/obama years...I think you're assuming I'm saying the jobs picture is perfect...I'm not...I'm simply saying that chart is telling and I find it interesting that some will automatically dismiss this chart...that's all, nothing more...
    I believe I stated my point in that this chart is interesting at face value, but it is more than likely misleading. I didn't say anything about automatically dismissing it, I just don't find it representative of what I see or experience on a daily basis. That's all, nothing more. Who is to say if jobs have been added in the Obama years?? Not me.. I can only speak from the reality of my situation (and extended), and it certainly does not resemble what this chart implies.

    What you see and experience on a daily basis is not representative of the rest of the country (this is a big beef of mine--when people make conclusions on their own surroundings and people they know). There has been 12 consecutive months of private sector job growth. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics is to say if jobs have been added, because they gather info. You don't appear to be gathering info outside of people you know.
Sign In or Register to comment.