[NYT] Hiring Is Strong and Jobless Rate Declines to 6.1%

Coldest winter in almost 30 years Maggie Mae.

 

It's actually an LSAT litigationy word.

It was cold here in Q1.

As we drive the bus, we had to slow down - that's why you experienced a slowdown in the back, amig-bro.

 

Watch out, he may use that anecdote to "prove" that climate change is a hoax. lol

 

Nope, people just tried to ignore your idiocy.

You used GDP as a benchmark for...what?

There's no easier manipulated number than GDP itself.

 

that underscores how severely the US economy was damaged by the inept W.

 

Here are Bush’s numbers: It’s 8.657 million jobs gained, and 7.121 million jobs lost, for a net job-creation number of 1.536 million. Pathetic. It’s interesting to look back over the numbers from 2001. The economy stank. The month of 9/11, we lost 242,000 jobs. Want to ascribe that just to the attacks? In August, we’d lost 158,000. The decent Bush years were 2004, 2005, 2006, and part of 2007, but even then the numbers were hoppy and inconsistent: 307,000 jobs added in May 2004 and just 74,000 in June, for instance.

And what about Obama’s numbers? I’d betting that even if you’re an Obama partisan, you think they’re not all that different from Bush’s. After all, 2009 was miserable: minus 798,000, minus 701,000, minus 826,000, and so on. The numbers went into the black in early 2010, but dipped back into the red in the summer. But remember, since October 2010, every report has been positive—the now 45 straight months of job growth that the president and his team, to little avail, crow about.

But they’ve added up, because under Obama, the economy has added 11.643 million jobs and lost 5.155, for a net gain of 6.488 million jobs. That’s a 4.952 million advantage over Bush. Now, 6.5 million jobs doesn’t put Obama up there in Clinton (22 million) and Reagan (around 16 million) territory. But remember—he has 30 months to go yet. Let’s say we average a gain of 250,000 a month the rest of the way. That’s another 7.5 million. And that would put him up in Reagan territory. And that seems conservative, if anything. If the recovery gets genuinely humming, we could start seeing months between 300,000 and 400,000 next year. It seems unlikely to happen, but God would it be hilarious if Obama, with everything the Republicans in Congress have done to keep the economy in a state of contraction, ended up surpassing Reagan.

It is not up for discussion nor debate. Those are facts. All one has to do is reference the Misery Index, which has detailed numbers regarding the unemployment rate. Regardless of what category you look at, the UE has gone down. It's not opinion. And it's not as if the numbers from 2009 to 2014 are any more manipulated than 1900 to 2009. Conservatives and Republicans do not want to hear the truth because they cannot handle the truth. You see, that's opinion. But it's an opinion based on listening to 1,000s of cons and Repubs over the past 5 years. You tell them Reagan had the highest UE rate since the Depression and they call you a liar. You can't even give facts to some of these people. It's a denial unlike any I've seen in my lifetime.

Misery Index. Look it up. And THAT, my friends, shuts down this argument once and for all. Period. End of story. Game over. Lights out.

 

Yep, no longer than it took Reagan back in 1983-1984.

 

Hypocritical bigtexxx. Reasoning that because he didn't respond to your post, it's irrefutable and you've won the argument.

If that were the case, then you, bigtexxx, have lost every single thread you have posted in.