B2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1362 posts, RR: 60 Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1468 times:
The unemployment rate also declined to 5.5%.
evidence that wages are tanking big time.
That's flat not true:
The report did show some signs of strength in secondary numbers in the report. Average hourly wages were up 5 cents to $15.70, in line with forecasts, and the average hourly work week rose 0.1 to 33.7 hours, which was just below the forecast of 33.8."
There is something strange going on between the payroll survey that the BLS uses to calculate official job gains/losses, and the household surveys that are used to calculate the unemployment rate and related statistics. Also from the CNN article:
More importantly, the survey of households, used to compute the unemployment rate, showed 629,000 more people at work than in June. The other payroll number is based on a survey of employers. One economist said he believes this suggests problems with the employer survey.
"I don't have any faith that 32,000 jobs added reflects what's going on," said [Wachovia Securities senior economist Mark] Vitner, who had forecast a 280,000 gain in the payroll number. "The growing disconnect between the surveys is too much to dismiss."
Claims for new unemployment benefits are running under 350,000 per week, which is historically consistent with monthly payroll gains of 200,000-300,000 jobs. The continuing unemployment claims statistic, which is around 2.9 million, is also not consistent with stagnant or negative job growth.
In short, the statistics are contradictory: the arrows are pointing up and down at the same time. Certainly the payroll gains aren't where they should be, but there is a danger in relying too much on one number. If next month's payroll growth continues to be flat, and unemployment claims rise, and the household surveys come below expectations, then I'll agree we're in trouble. Otherwise, we're just reading tea leaves.
Galaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 26 Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1439 times:
From United States, joined May 2004, 425 posts, RR: 0
Posted Fri Aug 6 2004 19:05:58 UTC+1 and read 41 times:
Ah but wait until the spin doctors get their hands on it. As well as our die-hard Bush supporters on this board.
As opposed to all those Die hard Bush Haters on this board.
Somehow balance has to be maintained. Or would you prefer no one have opposite views?
"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
Air2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1325 times:
You know when i was in college several years ago taking economics courses we came across something called "structual unemployment" and that anything under 6% or so can be attributed to it.
Structural unemployment: Unemployment caused by a mismatch between workers' skills and skills needed for available jobs. Structural unemployment essentially occurs because resources, especially labor, are configured (trained) for a given technology but the economy demands goods and services using another technology. Employers seek workers how have one type of skill and workers who seek employment have a different type of skill. This mismatch in skills, which is largely the result of technological progress, creates unemployment of the structural variety. Structural unemployment is one of four unemployment sources. The other three are cyclical unemployment, seasonal unemployment, and frictional unemployment. (ref: http://www.amosweb.com/cgi-bin/gls.pl?fcd=dsp&key=structural+unemployment
Look at the definitions of unemployment and decide where the current situation fits.
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 24 Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1290 times:
Even the New York Slimes was able to see that the way we count "jobs" is out of date and needs to updated. Way too many people are employed by small businesses or are self employed and yet these people are not counted in the "Establishment Survey".
Donder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, RR: 23 Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1263 times:
Oil continues to skyrocket in price
Again,how can you possibly blame Bush for this?The causes of high oil prices are soaring demand in a quickly industrialising China and smaller percentage rises in other industrialised economies especially the US.On the supply side most countries are producing flat out and the central banker of the oil world,Saudi Arabia, lacks the ability it has enjoyed in past times to manipulate the oil price.The (exaggerated)idea of drilling in the park in Alaska is opposed by many who are probably blaming the current high oil prices on Bush.
Secondly,we must remember the underlying factors in the US economy over the past few years.The bubble created by the tech industry was larger than that of the late 1920s, yet the US economy experienced a relatively small downturn.This is even more amazing given the effects of Sep11 (and we as aviation fans/workers should know this all too well.)
There are economic areas to attack Bush:the pork-laden energy bill and the profligate farm bill but many on the left are overplaying their hands when attacking Bush on the economy.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1228 times:
L-188. when the jobs being created go back into negatives, let's see you spin it for us.
The fact is, Bush is still the first President since the Depression to have a net jobs loss; many areas of the nation are still hemmoraging jobs; the jobs being created in their place aren't as high paying.
This economy isn't the greatest ever, even though Republicans keep saying that. This economy is a small fry compared to that which we had in the 90's.
Rsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2 Reply 18, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1204 times:
I am just wondering about somthing......
Once a person on unemployment loses there unemployment benefits they are no longer counted in the UE statistics so I wonder of those who have not found work by the end of their benefit period what the count for those people are and how that would size up against the JOB the ole Georgie boy claims he has created.............
Do I smell a possibility we are already in the negative and don't even know it???
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days ago) and read 1186 times:
Going to say it again, Clinton was lucky he hit a bubble.
So, with Mr. Clinton, it's all luck, but with Mr. Bush, it's all just good old GOP know-how?
ROTFL. Right. Well, luck or not, I haven't seen any of the last three GOP Presidents balance the budget. Clinton did. Maybe it's luck, but I think some economic brains, and not some half-assed belief in supply-side, trickle-down, voodoo economics had something to do with it.
And while the economy isn't great, it would have been a hell of a lot worse yet if the steps that Bush took in 2000, such as tax cuts and rebates wouldn't have happened.
Yes, those HUGE tax cuts, of about $250 for the average American! What an idea. Oh, and Bush got back like $45 grand, and Cheney like $340 grand. The only people that were helped at all from these tax cuts were the rich-the same rich who already spend all the money they want, and have no clue what to do with all the money they have. Trickle-down is the biggest fucking like the GOP has ever tried to pull on Americans-and you sop it up like it was something great.
And you keep on lying that you're not a Republican.
By all rights we should have been talking depression, not mild recession like we had now.
That was probably the most ludicrous thing you've ever said. We were nowhere near a depression; we wouldn't have been close to a depression. Such ass-kissing for Bush, in such a delusional way, is really tainting what little credibilty you have, which isn't much.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29513 posts, RR: 59 Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days ago) and read 1182 times:
We were nowhere near a depression; we wouldn't have been close to a depression
Well you where correct on the 1st part, we didn't get near one, on the second part of that sentence you swung on and missed
Yes, those HUGE tax cuts, of about $250 for the average American! What an idea. Oh, and Bush got back like $45 grand, and Cheney like $340 grand
Boy it must be nice to be able to consider $250 a small amount of money. Unfortunatly that isn't my case. And it is hardly unfair that a percentage drop in rates results in somebody making less getting less of a refund then somebody making more.
I think you unreasonable rabid hatred of GW is getting in the way of your common sense Alpha1.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days ago) and read 1175 times:
Boy it must be nice to be able to consider $250 a small amount of money.
Well, considering Cheney could build a nice-sized house with what he got, and I can get maybe a trip and a half of groceries, you don't have a freaking clue what you're talking about. If $250 is a lot to you, you're dirt poor, and I'm not buying that load of manure.
Again, if you really want to help generate economic movement, give a $5000 tax cut to middle class Americans, where that money won't be lost among millions that one doesn't know what to do with. You'd see people putting down payments on cars; or on home improvements, or on vacations.
When you give it to the wealthiest, it doesn't generate economic activity. Not when thoe people already have more than enough to spend.
I think you unreasonable rabid hatred of GW is getting in the way of your common sense Alpha1.
What is unreasonable and rabid is your constant fibs on not being a Republican. No one buys that on here.
And again, I don't hate Bush. I hate his policies. Now, Cheney, I come close to hating that bastard, who should be behind bars. Bush is to pitiful to hate.
Rsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2 Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days ago) and read 1174 times:
>Boy it must be nice to be able to consider $250 a small amount of money<
$250.00 is just about enough to pay my gas to go earn a living and insurance for one month, not exactly enough for the new STOVE that GWB spoke of.......L188 remember that $250.00 is per year....jeez I hope I didnt ruin your spin.
This will be the month that Bush either will win or lose the White House....GWBs Daddy lost the White House in Aug of 1992 when Clinton proved he knew what really was right for the USA and lets not spin it with Whitewater and Monica......
But I dont think Bush cares if he continues to live on Pen Ave.....he's already set for life with the riches of Iraq.
Did You Ever Think Freedom Could Be this Bad
25 Airplay: I am astonished that the so-called "most powerful country in the world" can't figure out if the economy is "good" or "bad". I've read so many spins on
26 Espion007: hehe i dont care-i got his signature on a message from him. Can you say EBAY??
27 B2707SST: Once a person on unemployment loses there unemployment benefits they are no longer counted in the UE statistics so I wonder of those who have not foun
28 B2707SST: More information on the BLS household survey: Early each month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor announces the tot
29 Dan-air: Again, if you really want to help generate economic movement, give a $5000 tax cut to middle class Americans, where that money won't be lost among mil
30 Donder10: Again, if you really want to help generate economic movement, give a $5000 tax cut to middle class Americans, where that money won't be lost among mil
31 MaverickM11: "The fact is, Bush is still the first President since the Depression to have a net jobs loss" The unprecedented terrorist attack, skyrocketing fuel pr
32 Alpha 1: The unprecedented terrorist attack, skyrocketing fuel price, and two wars wouldn't have anything to do with that....nooooo of course not. Well, let's