The Labor Department said employers added 114,000 jobs in September. It also said the economy created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than the department had initially estimated.
and
The rate declined from 8.1 percent because the number of people who said they were employed soared by 873,000 — an encouraging sign for an economy that's been struggling to create enough jobs.
How does 200,000 (114,000 + 86,000) turn into 873,000?
but again seasonal hiring does not begin on that day ...
that's just the busiest day with the best sales.
Um.. Pandora, you can't say "again."
"Again" would suggest that you had already said that. And you didn't.
You said that many people had already finished their Christmas shopping by Thanksgiving and laughed at the idea that the biggest day for retail was the day after.
You called that idea "funny stuff." And said "give me a break."
And now you acknowledge that the best day for retail sales is in fact... Black Friday.
Nobody said that seasonal hiring starts on Black Friday. But you said that it had already been done in the alternate dimension where you live and used the presence of decorations at your local mall as "proof" of this.
unemployment numbers are really part of the smoke and mirrors ... yet another "stat" that acts like a ping pong ball in the great partisan scam ...
Exactly. This report means nothing to actual votes. Folks don't vote based on a number. They vote based on their own reality - do I think I have a job that I want, or do I not care to work - is the real measure of how the "unemployment" rate effects the election. Nobody out of work that wants a job is going to vote one way because the reported number is 10% or 2%. They are going to vote because they don't have a job. Now, that may not matter to them (whether they have a job or not). But, if it does, the reported number doesn't matter.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Exactly. This report means nothing to actual votes. Folks don't vote based on a number. They vote based on their own reality - do I think I have a job that I want, or do I not care to work - is the real measure of how the "unemployment" rate effects the election. Nobody out of work that wants a job is going to vote one way because the reported number is 10% or 2%. They are going to vote because they don't have a job. Now, that may not matter to them (whether they have a job or not). But, if it does, the reported number doesn't matter.
the report is everything ... which is what is tragic ... the reality is that a lot of people believe these stats are indicative of the state of the country ... it doesn't really matter if the number is politicized because frankly what isn't these days!? ...
just look at this board ... the obama supporters are touting it as being indicative of strengthening economy while the anti-obama crowd is questioning its authenticity ... back to the partisanship again ...
Honestly, I've never really thought that unemployment numbers matter nearly as much as others claim they do.
The president has been polling very well through higher unemployment numbers and just like the debate and the conventions... this isn't really going to matter much.
The idea that people are thoughtfully pouring over facts and numbers and tax forecasts and foreign policy intricacies is just wrong. Nobody is doing that. People choose who they're voting for for MANY reasons... some of them daft and some of them sound. On both sides. And we all know that.
However... since we've heard SO much drum banging for the last 4 years about job numbers, I figured it was worth bringing up. And it was.
(and for the record, I also don't think that the president gets full credit for those numbers, either. As much as we'd like to think differently, a president seldom has much power over the economy)
Exactly. This report means nothing to actual votes. Folks don't vote based on a number. They vote based on their own reality - do I think I have a job that I want, or do I not care to work - is the real measure of how the "unemployment" rate effects the election. Nobody out of work that wants a job is going to vote one way because the reported number is 10% or 2%. They are going to vote because they don't have a job. Now, that may not matter to them (whether they have a job or not). But, if it does, the reported number doesn't matter.
the report is everything ... which is what is tragic ... the reality is that a lot of people believe these stats are indicative of the state of the country ... it doesn't really matter if the number is politicized because frankly what isn't these days!? ...
just look at this board ... the obama supporters are touting it as being indicative of strengthening economy while the anti-obama crowd is questioning its authenticity ... back to the partisanship again ...
it's all smoke and mirrors ...
Exactly. So, basically those that believe one way or the other (i.e. have already picked sides) are viewing the numbers (Whatever they might be) through that prism and will not convince the other side otherwise.
That's why I say - to those that it really impacts (truly undecided), the number in and of itself means nothing. We can argue it's meaning all we want. If a job means something to them, they will vote based on whether they have a job or not (or, move on to the next issue that matters to them to make a decision). Not because you or I interpret some number one way or the other.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
unemployment numbers are really part of the smoke and mirrors ... yet another "stat" that acts like a ping pong ball in the great partisan scam ...
Exactly. This report means nothing to actual votes. Folks don't vote based on a number. They vote based on their own reality - do I think I have a job that I want, or do I not care to work - is the real measure of how the "unemployment" rate effects the election. Nobody out of work that wants a job is going to vote one way because the reported number is 10% or 2%. They are going to vote because they don't have a job. Now, that may not matter to them (whether they have a job or not). But, if it does, the reported number doesn't matter.
The reported number can matter to someone who is still undecided at this point. Many people in here have commented all year that what really matters this election is jobs, and if unemployment is at 8% or below in Nov then it's pretty much a lock for Obama.
Why doesn't the dept of labor count those that have given up?
Releasing these numbers a month before the election doesn't surprise me at all, I would have thought more of you would have seen through it.
I'm guessing the real unemployment is somewhere in the teens.
on edit: someone just beat me to it
The BLS has been measuring unemployment the same way for ages, and they always release their numbers at the beginning of every month. I guess your statement that you thought more of us would have seen through it is implying that the numbers are somehow fudged to give Obama a pre-election bump? I would think you'd be able to see what the bls report is about rather than either be so jaded that you can't acknowledge good news about the economy, or have your heels so dug in that you refuse to recognize that Obama may have done something effective over the last 4 years.
The reported number can matter to someone who is still undecided at this point. Many people in here have commented all year that what really matters this election is jobs, and if unemployment is at 8% or below in Nov then it's pretty much a lock for Obama.
I agree. I think the number matters for the undecided voters and that it looks good for Obama.
unemployment numbers are really part of the smoke and mirrors ... yet another "stat" that acts like a ping pong ball in the great partisan scam ...
Exactly. This report means nothing to actual votes. Folks don't vote based on a number. They vote based on their own reality - do I think I have a job that I want, or do I not care to work - is the real measure of how the "unemployment" rate effects the election. Nobody out of work that wants a job is going to vote one way because the reported number is 10% or 2%. They are going to vote because they don't have a job. Now, that may not matter to them (whether they have a job or not). But, if it does, the reported number doesn't matter.
The reported number can matter to someone who is still undecided at this point. Many people in here have commented all year that what really matters this election is jobs, and if unemployment is at 8% or below in Nov then it's pretty much a lock for Obama.
You're missing the point. The NUMBER doesn't matter. The folks that don't have a job (but want one) does.
So, the number is an INDICATOR to be interpreted as to how the election might go. And that interpretation is based on prior occurences/elections (i.e. so even then, other mitigating factors may make this not as indicitive as it's been in the past). So, if the INDICATOR is wrong, or not taking in enough information, there may also be explanations of this latter fact (e.g. low labor force participation rate).
But, folks aren't making their minds up based on a number. It's been alluded to even here on the forums - folks make up their minds on how the current situation effects THEM.
But, keep arguing the number. What you or I think about it is irrelevant other than as a PREDICTOR.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Exactly. This report means nothing to actual votes. Folks don't vote based on a number. They vote based on their own reality - do I think I have a job that I want, or do I not care to work - is the real measure of how the "unemployment" rate effects the election. Nobody out of work that wants a job is going to vote one way because the reported number is 10% or 2%. They are going to vote because they don't have a job. Now, that may not matter to them (whether they have a job or not). But, if it does, the reported number doesn't matter.
The reported number can matter to someone who is still undecided at this point. Many people in here have commented all year that what really matters this election is jobs, and if unemployment is at 8% or below in Nov then it's pretty much a lock for Obama.
You're missing the point. The NUMBER doesn't matter. The folks that don't have a job (but want one) does.
So, the number is an INDICATOR to be interpreted as to how the election might go. And that interpretation is based on prior occurences/elections (i.e. so even then, other mitigating factors may make this not as indicitive as it's been in the past). So, if the INDICATOR is wrong, or not taking in enough information, there may also be explanations of this latter fact (e.g. low labor force participation rate).
But, folks aren't making their minds up based on a number. It's been alluded to even here on the forums - folks make up their minds on how the current situation effects THEM.
But, keep arguing the number. What you or I think about it is irrelevant other than as a PREDICTOR.
You're narrowing the field too much and basically focusing on unemployed, undecided, likely voters. How many people does that actually make up? What matters is the perception of the undecided voters. Many of those people have jobs and will be hearing over the next four weeks how the economy is getting better (jobs numbers having a big influence in that) under Obama. Can Romney convince them to vote for him instead, a question mark and a gamble? nope.
"But, folks aren't making their minds up based on a number. It's been alluded to even here on the forums - folks make up their minds on how the current situation effects THEM."
(Sorry I can't figure out how to properly use the selctive quote feature)
I respectively disagree. Plenty of people make up their minds based upon a number or numbers. I live on a block, (town, city, state, etc.) with 10 houses, I'm employed and 8 of the houses have a head of household who is unemployed. 3 or 4 of them find jobs prior to the election. I wasn't directly affected as I never lost my job. But my perception is that things have gotten better. Maybe not as great as I would have liked, but better than before. Also, 3 or 4 years ago, as an example, there were 30 causualities a month in Iraq. That number creeps up or down, whether to 0 or to 1,000. I'm not serving in Iraq but my perception is either things are better or things are worse. And people vote based on their perceptions of what is going on nationally, whether it affects them directly or not. Or I'm young and I don't have a 401K but my retired dad is living off his and I've seen the Dow go from 10,200 to 13,600, and maybe it'll hit 14,000 or above by election day and I figure why change who occupies the White House. Again, not directly affected but I believe things are improving.
As an aside, shouldn't we discount the percentage of the unemployed lacking a high school degree? I mean if you can't finish high school, what employer is going to take their chances on you? And why should they? Now nothing against folks who don't finish high school as I know plenty of people who never finished and became successful but come on, I'd like to know how many of you self proclaimed pro business, republican and independent board members, if you own or owned a business, would hire someone whithout a GED or high school diploma, particularly when the labor pool has a pleathora of college grads. And, why is it that there are jobs requiring highly skilled employees not being filled because the talent doesn't exist?
Me thinks if the unemployment rate stays below 8% and the stock market rises to 14,000 or above prior to election day, Obama gets re-elected. But I still fear the slime money and Willard Mitt Romney's ability to steal the election (see Pennsylvania).
September jobs report a huge boost for Obama as unemployment rate tumbles
US economy added 114,000 jobs last month as unemployment falls to 7.8%, the lowest level since Obama took office
Dominic Rushe in New York and Ewen MacAskill in Fairfax
guardian.co.uk, Friday 5 October 2012
Barack Obama's hopes of holding on to the White House have received a major boost from new figures showing that the US unemployment rate has dropped below 8% for the first time since he took office in January 2009.
The US added 114,000 new jobs in September, in line with expectations. But August's disappointing jobs figure was dramatically revised upwards from 96,000 to 142,000, helping to bring the unemployment rate down to 7.8%.
"Today, I believe that as a nation we are moving forward again," Obama told a raucous campaign rally in Fairfax, Virginia, on Friday a few hours after the figures were published. "This morning, we found out that the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest level since I took office."
Acknowledging that the economy was not out of the woods yet, he added: "Now, every month's figures reminds us that we have still got too many of our friends and neighbours struggling to pay the bills ... But now is certainly not the time to talk down the economy and score a few political points. It's a reminder that this country has come too far too turn back now."
Dan Greenhaus, chief global strategist at BTIG, described the report as "pretty darn good". Greenhaus highlighted the fact that the total number of employed persons rose by "a whopping" 873,000 while the number of unemployed persons declined by 456,000, the largest increase in employment since January 2003....
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
Fuel just hit $6/gallon in California, hope these newly employed can walk to work.
I wonder if they count the homeless people I see asking for money when leaving Detroit to cross back into Canada...somehow I doubt it...and I highly doubt 7.8 is even close to an accurate number of unemployed.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
A gallon of regular gas was $5.69 Thursday in Calabasas, while a gallon of super costs $5.89 with cash and $5.99 with credit. Such prices are causing pain at the pump for many drivers who might see an 11-cent increase by later this morning, which means some could be paying more than $6 a gallon.
Yeah I rounded up. I rounded up .1 cents a gallon.
"But, folks aren't making their minds up based on a number. It's been alluded to even here on the forums - folks make up their minds on how the current situation effects THEM."
(Sorry I can't figure out how to properly use the selctive quote feature)
I respectively disagree. Plenty of people make up their minds based upon a number or numbers. I live on a block, (town, city, state, etc.) with 10 houses, I'm employed and 8 of the houses have a head of household who is unemployed. 3 or 4 of them find jobs prior to the election. I wasn't directly affected as I never lost my job. But my perception is that things have gotten better. Maybe not as great as I would have liked, but better than before. Also, 3 or 4 years ago, as an example, there were 30 causualities a month in Iraq. That number creeps up or down, whether to 0 or to 1,000. I'm not serving in Iraq but my perception is either things are better or things are worse. And people vote based on their perceptions of what is going on nationally, whether it affects them directly or not. Or I'm young and I don't have a 401K but my retired dad is living off his and I've seen the Dow go from 10,200 to 13,600, and maybe it'll hit 14,000 or above by election day and I figure why change who occupies the White House. Again, not directly affected but I believe things are improving.
As an aside, shouldn't we discount the percentage of the unemployed lacking a high school degree? I mean if you can't finish high school, what employer is going to take their chances on you? And why should they? Now nothing against folks who don't finish high school as I know plenty of people who never finished and became successful but come on, I'd like to know how many of you self proclaimed pro business, republican and independent board members, if you own or owned a business, would hire someone whithout a GED or high school diploma, particularly when the labor pool has a pleathora of college grads. And, why is it that there are jobs requiring highly skilled employees not being filled because the talent doesn't exist?
Me thinks if the unemployment rate stays below 8% and the stock market rises to 14,000 or above prior to election day, Obama gets re-elected. But I still fear the slime money and Willard Mitt Romney's ability to steal the election (see Pennsylvania).
Peace.
You've made up you're mind. Maybe your neighbors, too. If they have not, I doubt they care what the numbers say. They're living it.
I think obamas getting re elected. I think the numbers and reality mean nothing. Funny that every liberal on here won't even acknowledge the labor force participation rate unless it is to say romney supporters are spinning.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
A gallon of regular gas was $5.69 Thursday in Calabasas, while a gallon of super costs $5.89 with cash and $5.99 with credit. Such prices are causing pain at the pump for many drivers who might see an 11-cent increase by later this morning, which means some could be paying more than $6 a gallon.
Yeah I rounded up. I rounded up .1 cents a gallon.
Let's not forget about the Chevron refinery that blew up.
"Among the recent disruptions, an Aug. 6 fire at a Chevron Corp. refinery in Richmond left one of the region's largest refineries producing at a reduced capacity, and a Chevron pipeline that moves crude to Northern California also was shut down.
There also was a power failure that affected an Exxon Mobil Corp. refinery in Torrance, but a company spokeswoman said Friday that the refinery has resumed normal operations and would be able to meet all of its contractual commitments."
J Welch was a great ceo-visionary for ge but he was destroyed today for his lead accusatory comments on the 7.8% number, where is that whack job sinnunu when you need him? they roll out a Fortune 500 hero (mine included) instead and he is just destroyed.
THIS is the news cycle of the 21st century folks. Romney had 48 hours and that is gonzo.
San Diego Sports Arena - Oct 25, 2000 MGM Grand - Jul 6, 2006 Cox Arena - Jul 7, 2006 New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival - May 1, 2010 Alpine Valley Music Theater - Sep 3-4 2011 Made In America, Philly - Sep 2, 2012 EV, Houston - Nov 12-13, 2012 Dallas-November 2013 OKC-November 2013 ACL 2-October 2014 Fenway Night 1, August 2016 Wrigley, Night 1 August 2018 Fort Worth, Night 1 September 2023 Fort Worth, Night 2 September 2023 Austin, Night 1 September 2023 Austin, Night 2 September 2023
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
i can post a picture of dow jones at XXXXX or S & P at XXXX, does that mean Obama kix ass?
Your better than that!
San Diego Sports Arena - Oct 25, 2000 MGM Grand - Jul 6, 2006 Cox Arena - Jul 7, 2006 New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival - May 1, 2010 Alpine Valley Music Theater - Sep 3-4 2011 Made In America, Philly - Sep 2, 2012 EV, Houston - Nov 12-13, 2012 Dallas-November 2013 OKC-November 2013 ACL 2-October 2014 Fenway Night 1, August 2016 Wrigley, Night 1 August 2018 Fort Worth, Night 1 September 2023 Fort Worth, Night 2 September 2023 Austin, Night 1 September 2023 Austin, Night 2 September 2023
"But, folks aren't making their minds up based on a number. It's been alluded to even here on the forums - folks make up their minds on how the current situation effects THEM."
(Sorry I can't figure out how to properly use the selctive quote feature)
I respectively disagree. Plenty of people make up their minds based upon a number or numbers. I live on a block, (town, city, state, etc.) with 10 houses, I'm employed and 8 of the houses have a head of household who is unemployed. 3 or 4 of them find jobs prior to the election. I wasn't directly affected as I never lost my job. But my perception is that things have gotten better. Maybe not as great as I would have liked, but better than before. Also, 3 or 4 years ago, as an example, there were 30 causualities a month in Iraq. That number creeps up or down, whether to 0 or to 1,000. I'm not serving in Iraq but my perception is either things are better or things are worse. And people vote based on their perceptions of what is going on nationally, whether it affects them directly or not. Or I'm young and I don't have a 401K but my retired dad is living off his and I've seen the Dow go from 10,200 to 13,600, and maybe it'll hit 14,000 or above by election day and I figure why change who occupies the White House. Again, not directly affected but I believe things are improving.
As an aside, shouldn't we discount the percentage of the unemployed lacking a high school degree? I mean if you can't finish high school, what employer is going to take their chances on you? And why should they? Now nothing against folks who don't finish high school as I know plenty of people who never finished and became successful but come on, I'd like to know how many of you self proclaimed pro business, republican and independent board members, if you own or owned a business, would hire someone whithout a GED or high school diploma, particularly when the labor pool has a pleathora of college grads. And, why is it that there are jobs requiring highly skilled employees not being filled because the talent doesn't exist?
Me thinks if the unemployment rate stays below 8% and the stock market rises to 14,000 or above prior to election day, Obama gets re-elected. But I still fear the slime money and Willard Mitt Romney's ability to steal the election (see Pennsylvania).
Peace.
You've made up you're mind. Maybe your neighbors, too. If they have not, I doubt they care what the numbers say. They're living it.
I think obamas getting re elected. I think the numbers and reality mean nothing. Funny that every liberal on here won't even acknowledge the labor force participation rate unless it is to say romney supporters are spinning.
And I can't begin to explain it as I flunked Econ 101 in my college days and its so dry my eyes hurt. But I think this is what you're referring to? Can someone explain it in layman's terms? I think it says it really isn't going to matter who is president for the long term trend is influenced by so many varying factors. But I could be badly mistaken.
"Among the recent disruptions, an Aug. 6 fire at a Chevron Corp. refinery in Richmond left one of the region's largest refineries producing at a reduced capacity, and a Chevron pipeline that moves crude to Northern California also was shut down.
There also was a power failure that affected an Exxon Mobil Corp. refinery in Torrance, but a company spokeswoman said Friday that the refinery has resumed normal operations and would be able to meet all of its contractual commitments."
November of 2008. (Bush was still president back then but... it wasn't his fault, either. That's a photo chop. Which anyone can tell by looking at it.)
Comments
and
How does 200,000 (114,000 + 86,000) turn into 873,000?
:think:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-jobless-rate-falls-7-123110106.html
The Labor Department's number of 873,000 is from a broad survey of households.
Apparently, the Labor Department uses the broad survey of households to report the unemployment rate.
I wonder what the average discrepancy between employers vs. household on jobs reported monthly is?
Um.. Pandora, you can't say "again."
"Again" would suggest that you had already said that. And you didn't.
You said that many people had already finished their Christmas shopping by Thanksgiving and laughed at the idea that the biggest day for retail was the day after.
You called that idea "funny stuff." And said "give me a break."
And now you acknowledge that the best day for retail sales is in fact... Black Friday.
Nobody said that seasonal hiring starts on Black Friday. But you said that it had already been done in the alternate dimension where you live and used the presence of decorations at your local mall as "proof" of this.
Exactly. This report means nothing to actual votes. Folks don't vote based on a number. They vote based on their own reality - do I think I have a job that I want, or do I not care to work - is the real measure of how the "unemployment" rate effects the election. Nobody out of work that wants a job is going to vote one way because the reported number is 10% or 2%. They are going to vote because they don't have a job. Now, that may not matter to them (whether they have a job or not). But, if it does, the reported number doesn't matter.
the report is everything ... which is what is tragic ... the reality is that a lot of people believe these stats are indicative of the state of the country ... it doesn't really matter if the number is politicized because frankly what isn't these days!? ...
just look at this board ... the obama supporters are touting it as being indicative of strengthening economy while the anti-obama crowd is questioning its authenticity ... back to the partisanship again ...
it's all smoke and mirrors ...
The president has been polling very well through higher unemployment numbers and just like the debate and the conventions... this isn't really going to matter much.
The idea that people are thoughtfully pouring over facts and numbers and tax forecasts and foreign policy intricacies is just wrong. Nobody is doing that. People choose who they're voting for for MANY reasons... some of them daft and some of them sound. On both sides. And we all know that.
However... since we've heard SO much drum banging for the last 4 years about job numbers, I figured it was worth bringing up. And it was.
(and for the record, I also don't think that the president gets full credit for those numbers, either. As much as we'd like to think differently, a president seldom has much power over the economy)
Exactly. So, basically those that believe one way or the other (i.e. have already picked sides) are viewing the numbers (Whatever they might be) through that prism and will not convince the other side otherwise.
That's why I say - to those that it really impacts (truly undecided), the number in and of itself means nothing. We can argue it's meaning all we want. If a job means something to them, they will vote based on whether they have a job or not (or, move on to the next issue that matters to them to make a decision). Not because you or I interpret some number one way or the other.
The reported number can matter to someone who is still undecided at this point. Many people in here have commented all year that what really matters this election is jobs, and if unemployment is at 8% or below in Nov then it's pretty much a lock for Obama.
The BLS has been measuring unemployment the same way for ages, and they always release their numbers at the beginning of every month. I guess your statement that you thought more of us would have seen through it is implying that the numbers are somehow fudged to give Obama a pre-election bump? I would think you'd be able to see what the bls report is about rather than either be so jaded that you can't acknowledge good news about the economy, or have your heels so dug in that you refuse to recognize that Obama may have done something effective over the last 4 years.
I agree. I think the number matters for the undecided voters and that it looks good for Obama.
You're missing the point. The NUMBER doesn't matter. The folks that don't have a job (but want one) does.
So, the number is an INDICATOR to be interpreted as to how the election might go. And that interpretation is based on prior occurences/elections (i.e. so even then, other mitigating factors may make this not as indicitive as it's been in the past). So, if the INDICATOR is wrong, or not taking in enough information, there may also be explanations of this latter fact (e.g. low labor force participation rate).
But, folks aren't making their minds up based on a number. It's been alluded to even here on the forums - folks make up their minds on how the current situation effects THEM.
But, keep arguing the number. What you or I think about it is irrelevant other than as a PREDICTOR.
You're narrowing the field too much and basically focusing on unemployed, undecided, likely voters. How many people does that actually make up? What matters is the perception of the undecided voters. Many of those people have jobs and will be hearing over the next four weeks how the economy is getting better (jobs numbers having a big influence in that) under Obama. Can Romney convince them to vote for him instead, a question mark and a gamble? nope.
(Sorry I can't figure out how to properly use the selctive quote feature)
I respectively disagree. Plenty of people make up their minds based upon a number or numbers. I live on a block, (town, city, state, etc.) with 10 houses, I'm employed and 8 of the houses have a head of household who is unemployed. 3 or 4 of them find jobs prior to the election. I wasn't directly affected as I never lost my job. But my perception is that things have gotten better. Maybe not as great as I would have liked, but better than before. Also, 3 or 4 years ago, as an example, there were 30 causualities a month in Iraq. That number creeps up or down, whether to 0 or to 1,000. I'm not serving in Iraq but my perception is either things are better or things are worse. And people vote based on their perceptions of what is going on nationally, whether it affects them directly or not. Or I'm young and I don't have a 401K but my retired dad is living off his and I've seen the Dow go from 10,200 to 13,600, and maybe it'll hit 14,000 or above by election day and I figure why change who occupies the White House. Again, not directly affected but I believe things are improving.
As an aside, shouldn't we discount the percentage of the unemployed lacking a high school degree? I mean if you can't finish high school, what employer is going to take their chances on you? And why should they? Now nothing against folks who don't finish high school as I know plenty of people who never finished and became successful but come on, I'd like to know how many of you self proclaimed pro business, republican and independent board members, if you own or owned a business, would hire someone whithout a GED or high school diploma, particularly when the labor pool has a pleathora of college grads. And, why is it that there are jobs requiring highly skilled employees not being filled because the talent doesn't exist?
Me thinks if the unemployment rate stays below 8% and the stock market rises to 14,000 or above prior to election day, Obama gets re-elected. But I still fear the slime money and Willard Mitt Romney's ability to steal the election (see Pennsylvania).
Peace.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012 ... employment
September jobs report a huge boost for Obama as unemployment rate tumbles
US economy added 114,000 jobs last month as unemployment falls to 7.8%, the lowest level since Obama took office
Dominic Rushe in New York and Ewen MacAskill in Fairfax
guardian.co.uk, Friday 5 October 2012
Barack Obama's hopes of holding on to the White House have received a major boost from new figures showing that the US unemployment rate has dropped below 8% for the first time since he took office in January 2009.
The US added 114,000 new jobs in September, in line with expectations. But August's disappointing jobs figure was dramatically revised upwards from 96,000 to 142,000, helping to bring the unemployment rate down to 7.8%.
"Today, I believe that as a nation we are moving forward again," Obama told a raucous campaign rally in Fairfax, Virginia, on Friday a few hours after the figures were published. "This morning, we found out that the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest level since I took office."
Acknowledging that the economy was not out of the woods yet, he added: "Now, every month's figures reminds us that we have still got too many of our friends and neighbours struggling to pay the bills ... But now is certainly not the time to talk down the economy and score a few political points. It's a reminder that this country has come too far too turn back now."
Dan Greenhaus, chief global strategist at BTIG, described the report as "pretty darn good". Greenhaus highlighted the fact that the total number of employed persons rose by "a whopping" 873,000 while the number of unemployed persons declined by 456,000, the largest increase in employment since January 2003....
I think you're calling out for more federal money to develop alternative transportation modes!
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local ... 18521.html
Gas prices in California skyrocketed overnight in some areas, jumping 19 cents per gallon to $4.54 in Los Angeles.
I see you're rounding up to the nearest dollar and then adding one.
Which of course is ALSO how the Fox "news" twits are raving about how unemployment is actually at 9% today.
:fp:
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
http://gma.yahoo.com/california-gas-pri ... ories.html
A gallon of regular gas was $5.69 Thursday in Calabasas, while a gallon of super costs $5.89 with cash and $5.99 with credit. Such prices are causing pain at the pump for many drivers who might see an 11-cent increase by later this morning, which means some could be paying more than $6 a gallon.
Yeah I rounded up. I rounded up .1 cents a gallon.
You've made up you're mind. Maybe your neighbors, too. If they have not, I doubt they care what the numbers say. They're living it.
I think obamas getting re elected. I think the numbers and reality mean nothing. Funny that every liberal on here won't even acknowledge the labor force participation rate unless it is to say romney supporters are spinning.
Let's not forget about the Chevron refinery that blew up.
Here is a prediction for gas prices to rise:
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/08 ... s-20120808
And here is confirmation:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7656 ... rices.html
"Among the recent disruptions, an Aug. 6 fire at a Chevron Corp. refinery in Richmond left one of the region's largest refineries producing at a reduced capacity, and a Chevron pipeline that moves crude to Northern California also was shut down.
There also was a power failure that affected an Exxon Mobil Corp. refinery in Torrance, but a company spokeswoman said Friday that the refinery has resumed normal operations and would be able to meet all of its contractual commitments."
J Welch was a great ceo-visionary for ge but he was destroyed today for his lead accusatory comments on the 7.8% number, where is that whack job sinnunu when you need him? they roll out a Fortune 500 hero (mine included) instead and he is just destroyed.
THIS is the news cycle of the 21st century folks. Romney had 48 hours and that is gonzo.
MGM Grand - Jul 6, 2006
Cox Arena - Jul 7, 2006
New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival - May 1, 2010
Alpine Valley Music Theater - Sep 3-4 2011
Made In America, Philly - Sep 2, 2012
EV, Houston - Nov 12-13, 2012
Dallas-November 2013
OKC-November 2013
ACL 2-October 2014
Fenway Night 1, August 2016
Wrigley, Night 1 August 2018
Fort Worth, Night 1 September 2023
Fort Worth, Night 2 September 2023
Austin, Night 1 September 2023
Austin, Night 2 September 2023
weak sauce,
i can post a picture of dow jones at XXXXX or S & P at XXXX, does that mean Obama kix ass?
Your better than that!
MGM Grand - Jul 6, 2006
Cox Arena - Jul 7, 2006
New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival - May 1, 2010
Alpine Valley Music Theater - Sep 3-4 2011
Made In America, Philly - Sep 2, 2012
EV, Houston - Nov 12-13, 2012
Dallas-November 2013
OKC-November 2013
ACL 2-October 2014
Fenway Night 1, August 2016
Wrigley, Night 1 August 2018
Fort Worth, Night 1 September 2023
Fort Worth, Night 2 September 2023
Austin, Night 1 September 2023
Austin, Night 2 September 2023
Interesting read right in this link: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/ ... ctions.pdf
And I can't begin to explain it as I flunked Econ 101 in my college days and its so dry my eyes hurt. But I think this is what you're referring to? Can someone explain it in layman's terms? I think it says it really isn't going to matter who is president for the long term trend is influenced by so many varying factors. But I could be badly mistaken.
Peace.
Let's not forget about the Chevron refinery that blew up.
Here is a prediction for gas prices to rise:
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/08 ... s-20120808
And here is confirmation:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7656 ... rices.html
"Among the recent disruptions, an Aug. 6 fire at a Chevron Corp. refinery in Richmond left one of the region's largest refineries producing at a reduced capacity, and a Chevron pipeline that moves crude to Northern California also was shut down.
There also was a power failure that affected an Exxon Mobil Corp. refinery in Torrance, but a company spokeswoman said Friday that the refinery has resumed normal operations and would be able to meet all of its contractual commitments."
Yeah... from a parody article written last February.
http://vespalexington.com/2012/02/gas-p ... overshoot/
Honestly... do you not have a Google machine?
If you're that easy to fool, it explains why you support Ron F-ing Paul. :fp:
Oh wait... no sorry...
A parody article written in May of 2011.
http://bossip.com/377034/catching-bin-l ... -sike3920/
Oh look... They were also that same price in December of 2010.
http://yourdaddy.net/2010/12/12/gas-pri ... a-georgia/
OH... no... wait...
November of 2008. (Bush was still president back then but... it wasn't his fault, either. That's a photo chop. Which anyone can tell by looking at it.)
http://www.newworldparty.org/2008/11/unions.html
:fp: