PDA

View Full Version : unemployment below 8%



John Smith
10-05-2012, 06:09 PM
More signs of slow but steady progress.

Yes, we'd all like faster progress, but going in the right direction is better than going in the wrong direction and it generally takes a great deal longer to fix something than it takes to break it; that includes the economy.

hanleyclifford
10-05-2012, 06:30 PM
More signs of slow but steady progress.

Yes, we'd all like faster progress, but going in the right direction is better than going in the wrong direction and it generally takes a great deal longer to fix something than it takes to break it; that includes the economy. May we discuss this again in January when all these minimum wage seasonal jobs evaporate?

Keith Wilson
10-05-2012, 10:02 PM
Too early for Christmas retail jobs, and seasonally adjusted. No, this was genuinely good news. Not great, but OK.

(Unless, of course, you're one of the fine upstanding American lunatics who think it's all a conspiracy by the BLS to reelect Obama. ;))

ljb5
10-05-2012, 10:16 PM
May we discuss this again in January when all these minimum wage seasonal jobs evaporate?

No.

We should have discussed this four years ago when, instead of adding 114,000 jobs, the economy shed 432,000.

If you'd like to consider the seasonal nature of jobs, consider this:

George Bush was president through eight Septembers. The jobs numbers for those months were: -243, -55, 109, 161, 66, 157, 73, -432.

In other words, this a pretty good September by historical standards.

hanleyclifford
10-05-2012, 10:27 PM
Good statistics, ljb5; and Obama will (rightly) get a boost from the September figures. However, we will discuss it again in January. (maybe sooner)

ljb5
10-05-2012, 10:34 PM
However, we will discuss it again in January. (maybe sooner)

Golly, I certainly hope so!

Next month, the "4 years ago" will be -489, and the following month it will be -803.

December will be -661 and January will be -818.

If you like making comparisons, we'll have a great time. If you're a Republican, you're screwed.

Let's talk in January!

================================================== ===================

It's interesting to note that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has monthly job reports going back to February, 1939.

Of nearly 900 months, only two were worse than January 09, which was Bush's last month in office.

Looking forward to January! Talk to you then!

skipper68
10-05-2012, 10:38 PM
I call BS,as MILLIONS are not employed, so are off the "OFFICIAL" rolls.
Same as many are NOT registering for voting-DUH-we already are.. registered. UGHH-

hanleyclifford
10-05-2012, 11:03 PM
Golly, I certainly hope so!

Next month, the "4 years ago" will be -489, and the following month it will be -803.

December will be -661 and January will be -818.

If you like making comparisons, we'll have a great time. If you're a Republican, you're screwed.

Let's talk in January!

================================================== ===================

It's interesting to note that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has monthly job reports going back to February, 1939.

Of nearly 900 months, only two were worse than January 09, which was Bush's last month in office.

Looking forward to January! Talk to you then! Remember, we are interested in the numbers that will contribute to the re election of a President, not the numbers that harken back to a recession.

skipper68
10-05-2012, 11:09 PM
Nice post.:)

ljb5
10-05-2012, 11:15 PM
Remember, we are interested in the numbers that will contribute to the re election of a President, not the numbers that harken back to a recession.

Oh, that's odd.

I thought you were interested in electing a president that will harken back to a recession.

Ronald Reagan asked, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?"... and Mitt Romney replied, "Yes! But I can do something about that!"

hanleyclifford
10-05-2012, 11:19 PM
Oh, that's odd.

I thought you were interested in electing a president that will harken back to a recession. You have been talking all night from an assumption, a premise, that is simply not true. You assume that I am a Republican favoring Romney. If you could disabuse yourself of that we could probably have some interesting discussions. Remember that of which Assumption is the Mother.

ljb5
10-05-2012, 11:30 PM
You have been talking all night from an assumption, a premise, that is simply not true. You assume that I am a Republican favoring Romney.

Nah, Hanley, I don't really think about you that much.

You've shown a bit of ankle and I don't desire to see more.

If it's okay with you, I'll just respond to the stuff you post and we needn't make it any more interesting.

Rum_Pirate
10-06-2012, 01:31 AM
The rate dropped so much it appears that some are questioning the accuracy/validity etc

Data released this week by the Labor Department (http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm) showed 367,000, an increase of 4,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 363,000. The 4-week moving average was 375,000, unchanged.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data

US jobless data: how has unemployment changed under Obama?Unemployment in America is back to pre-recession levels. See how it has changed over time
• Get the data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data#data)
• Click here for interactive map (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/sep/08/us-unemployment-obama-jobs-speech-state-map)



Share (http://www.facebook.com/dialog/feed?app_id=180444840287&link=http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data&display=popup&redirect_uri=http://static-serve.appspot.com/static/facebook-share/callback.html&show_error=false)268



http://static.guim.co.uk/static/d3b885e2ba88ec4c06936edb9c284cc301233b9a/common/images/icon-email.pngEmail (?subject=From%20the%20Guardian:%20US%20jobless%20 data:%20how%20has%20unemployment%20changed%20under %20Obama?&body=I%20thought%20you%20might%20be%20interested%2 0in%20this%20link%20from%20the%20Guardian:%20US%20 jobless%20data:%20how%20has%20unemployment%20chang ed%20under%20Obama?%20-%20http://gu.com/p/3xn3k/em)


http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/10/4/1349363795359/jan2009.gifUS unemployment interactive. Click here to explore it (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/sep/08/us-unemployment-obama-jobs-speech-state-map)

The US jobless figures are out today and show American unemployment has taken a drop to 7.8% - below the 8.2% Barack Obama (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/barack-obama) inherited in 2009.
The US added another 114,000 jobs last month, (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm) and there are now 12.1 million unemployed people, down by 456,000.
The official data (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm) shows:


• The unemployment rate has gone down by 0.3%-points since August
• The unemployment rate for men down at 7% in September
• Rates for other groups are:
Women, 7%
Teenagers, 23.7%
White, 7%
Black, 13.4%
Hispanic, 9.9%
Asian, 4.8%
This shows what's happened since January 2009, when President Obama took over. This is the first time it has gone below 8% in four years:

US unemploymentUS unemploymentJul-09Jul-09Jan-10Jan-10Jul-10Jul-10Jan-11Jan-11Jul-11Jul-11Jan-12Jan-12Jul-12Jul-128%8%9%9%10%10%Months since Obama became President / % of workfo...Months since Obama became President / % of workfo...



Roll over line to get numbers. Download this data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data#data)Data released this week by the Labor Department (http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm) showed 367,000, an increase of 4,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 363,000. The 4-week moving average was 375,000, unchanged.









Roll over line to get numbers. Download this data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data#data)

Rum_Pirate
10-06-2012, 01:32 AM
We've mapped the unemployment data by state - you can explore it here. It goes up to December last year because we're waiting for updated state by state figures next week:
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/10/4/1349363795359/jan2009.gif (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/sep/08/us-unemployment-obama-jobs-speech-state-map)US unemployment interactive. Click image to explore it

Rum_Pirate
10-06-2012, 01:32 AM
You can download the full data below (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data#data). What can you do with it?
Data summary
US unemployment by stateClick heading to sort table. Download this - and more - data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data#data)

State

August 2012, 000s

August 2012, %

July 2012, %

January 2009, %

% point difference to US national figure

%-point change Jan 2009 to March 2012



Latest state data (more coming out next week). Percentages are % of labor force (seasonally adjusted) unemployed, aged 16 and over
SOURCE: BLS (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm)





US totals

8.1
8.3
7.8

0.3


Alabama
183.3
8.5
8.3
7.8
0.4
0.7


Alaska
28.4
7.8
7.6
7.9
-0.3
-0.1


Arizona
249.8
8.3
8.3
7
0.2
1.3


Arkansas
100.1
7.3
7.3
6.4
-0.8
0.9


California
1935
10.6
10.7
10.1
2.5
0.5


Colorado
224.4
8.2
8.3
6.6
0.1
1.6


Connecticut
171
9
8.5
7.3
0.9
1.7


Delaware
30.2
6.9
6.8
6.7
-1.2
0.2


District of Columbia
31.2
8.8
8.9
9.3
0.7
-0.5

Rum_Pirate
10-06-2012, 01:33 AM
Florida
817.6
8.8
8.8
8.6
0.7
0.2


Georgia
439.7
9.2
9.2
8.6
1.1
0.6


Hawaii
38.9
6.1
6.3
6.1
-2
0


Idaho
57.1
7.4
7.5
6.6
-0.7
0.8


Illinois
593.8
9.1
8.9
7.9
1
1.2


Indiana
260
8.3
8.2
9.2
0.2
-0.9


Iowa
90
5.5
5.3
4.8
-2.6
0.7


Kansas
92.5
6.2
6.3
5.8
-1.9
0.4


Kentucky
174.9
8.5
8.3
8.7
0.4
-0.2


Louisiana
153.8
7.4
7.6
5.1
-0.7
2.3


Maine
54
7.6
7.6
7.8
-0.5
-0.2


Maryland
217.4
7.1
7
6.2
-1
0.9


Massachusetts
218.8
6.3
6.1
7.4
-1.8
-1.1


Michigan
436.6
9.4
9
11.6
1.3
-2.2


Minnesota
175.1
5.9
5.8
7.6
-2.2
-1.7

Rum_Pirate
10-06-2012, 01:34 AM
Mississippi
121.8
9.1
9.2
8.7
1
0.4


Missouri
214
7.2
7.2
8
-0.9
-0.8


Montana
32.4
6.3
6.4
5.6
-1.8
0.7


Nebraska
40.8
4
4
4.3
-4.1
-0.3


Nevada
165.9
12.1
12
9.4
4
2.7


New Hampshire
41.9
5.7
5.4
5.1
-2.4
0.6


New Jersey
454.9
9.9
9.8
7.3
1.8
2.6


New Mexico
59.7
6.5
6.6
5.1
-1.6
1.4


New York
872.1
9.1
9.1
7
1
2.1


North Carolina
451.6
9.7
9.6
9.7
1.6
0


North Dakota
11.6
3
3
4.2
-5.1
-1.2


Ohio
413.4
7.2
7.2
8.8
-0.9
-1.6


Oklahoma
91.2
5.1
4.9
5
-3
0.1


Oregon
175.7
8.9
8.7
9.9
0.8
-1


Pennsylvania
524.5
8.1
7.9
7
0
1.1


Rhode Island
59.2
10.7
10.8
10.3
2.6
0.4


South Carolina
204.9
9.6
9.7
10.4
1.5
-0.8


South Dakota
19.7
4.5
4.4
4.4
-3.6
0.1


Tennessee
264.4
8.5
8.4
8.6
0.4
-0.1


Texas
901.9
7.1
7.1
6.4
-1
0.7


Utah
78.7
5.8
6
4.6
-2.3
1.2


Vermont
19
5.3
5
6.8
-2.8
-1.5


Virginia
255.3
5.9
5.9
6
-2.2
-0.1


Washington
301.7
8.6
8.5
7.8
0.5
0.8


West Virginia
60
7.5
7.3
5.3
-0.6
2.2


Wisconsin
229.1
7.5
7.3
6.9
-0.6
0.6


Wyoming
17.4
5.7
5.6
3.7
-2.4
2



Download the data• DATA: download the full spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbcGhOdG0zTG1EWkVNWFB6a09vXzB4V kE&hl=en_GB)

John Smith
10-06-2012, 07:52 AM
May we discuss this again in January when all these minimum wage seasonal jobs evaporate?

I can't help but think what these numbers would look like today if Obama had gotten any support from the Republicans.

I used to argue with people that Clinton balanced the budget in spite of the Republican congress, and Bob Novak agreed. On "Capital Gang" he whined that the Republicans caved in every year, including during the impeachment, and gave Clinton what Clinton wanted.

Now we have a recover that continues slowly but steadily and Obama has managed this in spite of the Republicans.

John Smith
10-06-2012, 07:57 AM
Golly, I certainly hope so!

Next month, the "4 years ago" will be -489, and the following month it will be -803.

December will be -661 and January will be -818.

If you like making comparisons, we'll have a great time. If you're a Republican, you're screwed.

Let's talk in January!

================================================== ===================

It's interesting to note that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has monthly job reports going back to February, 1939.

Of nearly 900 months, only two were worse than January 09, which was Bush's last month in office.

Looking forward to January! Talk to you then!

They ask the question, "Are you better off than you were for years ago?" to imply to all those who don't think that we are worse off than we were then.

It's more of the Right wing dishonesty.

I might have missed it, but aside from the one response of a Ron Paul statement, it seems that none of our conservative friends here can point to anything since '92 that the Republicans states as fact that turned out to be fact or something they predicted and got right.

This famous question is a form of push polling. Remember the SC campaign against McCain where they asked people if it would change their opinion if they learned McCain had a black child? Never said he had one; merely implied.

John Smith
10-06-2012, 07:58 AM
I call BS,as MILLIONS are not employed, so are off the "OFFICIAL" rolls.
Same as many are NOT registering for voting-DUH-we already are.. registered. UGHH-

YOu can back that up with some links to reliable sources?

John Smith
10-06-2012, 07:59 AM
Remember, we are interested in the numbers that will contribute to the re election of a President, not the numbers that harken back to a recession.

Seems to me if they could manipulate these numbers for political reasons, unemployment would have gone below 8% a year ago.

John Smith
10-06-2012, 08:02 AM
The rate dropped so much it appears that some are questioning the accuracy/validity etc

Data released this week by the Labor Department (http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm) showed 367,000, an increase of 4,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 363,000. The 4-week moving average was 375,000, unchanged.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data

US jobless data: how has unemployment changed under Obama?

Unemployment in America is back to pre-recession levels. See how it has changed over time
• Get the data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data#data)
• Click here for interactive map (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/sep/08/us-unemployment-obama-jobs-speech-state-map)



Share (http://www.facebook.com/dialog/feed?app_id=180444840287&link=http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data&display=popup&redirect_uri=http://static-serve.appspot.com/static/facebook-share/callback.html&show_error=false)268

http://static.guim.co.uk/static/d3b885e2ba88ec4c06936edb9c284cc301233b9a/common/images/icon-email.pngEmail


http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/10/4/1349363795359/jan2009.gifUS unemployment interactive. Click here to explore it (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/sep/08/us-unemployment-obama-jobs-speech-state-map)

The US jobless figures are out today and show American unemployment has taken a drop to 7.8% - below the 8.2% Barack Obama (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/barack-obama) inherited in 2009.
The US added another 114,000 jobs last month, (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm) and there are now 12.1 million unemployed people, down by 456,000.
The official data (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm) shows:

• The unemployment rate has gone down by 0.3%-points since August
• The unemployment rate for men down at 7% in September
• Rates for other groups are:
Women, 7%
Teenagers, 23.7%
White, 7%
Black, 13.4%
Hispanic, 9.9%
Asian, 4.8%

This shows what's happened since January 2009, when President Obama took over. This is the first time it has gone below 8% in four years:

US unemploymentUS unemploymentJul-09Jul-09Jan-10Jan-10Jul-10Jul-10Jan-11Jan-11Jul-11Jul-11Jan-12Jan-12Jul-12Jul-128%8%9%9%10%10%Months since Obama became President / % of workfo...Months since Obama became President / % of workfo...



Roll over line to get numbers. Download this data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data#data)Data released this week by the Labor Department (http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm) showed 367,000, an increase of 4,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 363,000. The 4-week moving average was 375,000, unchanged.







Roll over line to get numbers. Download this data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/07/us-jobless-unemployment-data#data)



Some still question our president's birth certificate.

Some still think tax cuts for the weatlhy create jobs.

ljb5
10-06-2012, 08:20 AM
The rate dropped so much it appears that some are questioning the accuracy/validity etc

Yup. We've got a separate thread on that.

Bunch of whiners and crybabies.

They have no evidence to support their claims. Their skepticism is supported by nothing other than political motivation.

That shows a lack of integrity. Don't go along with it.

wardd
10-06-2012, 09:26 AM
Some still question our president's birth certificate.

Some still think tax cuts for the weatlhy create jobs.

beyond that they don't think

i call it truncated thinking, a specialty of the right

hanleyclifford
10-06-2012, 09:32 AM
beyond that they don't think

i call it truncated thinking, a specialty of the right Rather like truncated quoting: from the master of truncated posts himself.

wardd
10-06-2012, 09:42 AM
Rather like truncated quoting: from the master of truncated posts himself.

meaning?

Garret
10-06-2012, 04:06 PM
meaning?

You're short?

ccmanuals
10-06-2012, 04:22 PM
Not unlike the Romney/handkerchief story.

or the birth certificate story.