New number ... 7.5 % !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HAHAHAHAHA!! I did too, like why are we painting that wall? We just painted it 4 months ago!

- - - Updated - - -

So what was the graph intended to do if not tell us what they thought the stimulus would do? Was it simply for the bright colors?

 

Leftninny Word Dance time again...already?

So, we're following 'Clinton didn't use the EXACT WORDS "imminent threat", so all of his warmings about the danger of Saddam WMDs DON'T COUNT", with, " despite the Obama team using the above chart CLEARLY SHOWING THEY PREDICTED UNEMPLOYMENT TO BE UNDER 6%, by the FOURTH QUARTER, of the THIRD YEAR after the "Porkulus", if they didn't say THAT EXACT PHRASE..."..well, you get it...

"Leftninny Word Dance"..woohoo!!!

By one of its greatest players.

 

It compared the effects of the economy with and without the stimulus, based on forecasts of the economy at that time (200.

Economic forecasts are, as the report states, often inaccurate. Remember Bush telling us that with his tax cuts the Govt would pay down the debt by $2 trillion?

The forecast of the economy was off. The recession was far worse than data from 2008 suggested. But the prediction of what the stimulus would do -- save or create 2-4 million jobs and lower the overall unemployment rate by 1 to 1.5 percentage points, was pretty accurate, according to numerous independent and bi-partisan reports, including the CBO.

To suggest that that report was some kind of "assurance" or "promise" as the RW media protrayed it a million times is bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

The biggest mistake in the report was not appreciating how the RW media will distort and deceive anything it can.

- - - Updated - - -

Based on the 2008 data then available, they underestimated how bad the Great Recession was going to be. So what?

 

Dude your head is spinning so fast you could get a job at LAX as a landing beacon

 

I could write a book on government idiocy and waste/irrationality of the military, might some day.


“The 8 percent figure cited by Romney, and many other Republicans, comes from a transition staff-written projection written by economists Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein that was issued weeks before Obama was sworn in and long before there even was a stimulus plan before Congress.” [Associated Press, 4/5/2012]

 

Totally bogus number.What part of the Lowest Participation rate wince WWII
don't you understand.Or THE lowest employment among youth since record
keeping of youth employment { 1946 }.
Real Unemploymnet is double what you're being spoon fed.What part of
negative growth { revisted up a few ticks } as of december of last quarter
are you struggling with.Or -0.1%

 

The part I don't understand is how you can be so wrong, so often.

That is not even close to accurate. Do you just make this stuff up as you go along thinking no one will pick it up?

The participation rate today is 63.3%. It was below 60% for most of the 1960s.

http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab1.htm

The part I don't understand is how you can be so wrong so often.

In the fourth quarter [2012], real GDP increased 0.4 percent.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

And since then we've gotten the 1stQ 2013 intial report:

Real gross domestic product ... increased at an annual rate of 2.5 percent in the first quarter of 2013

Same source.

What part of 15 straight quarters of positive growth do you not understand?

 

They are!

This is as comical as it gets.

 

These numbers mean nothing to me. A sudden change in numbers could be because Obama's 2 year extension ran out. People will find a way when even the government says enough is enough. Let's say it much earlier and help everyone out!

 

And when Obama actually DOES something like what is suggested here, the Righties have a perfect right to scream like stuck pig.

But as in so many of the fantasies the Obama-haters like to spin about him, it is necessary for Obama to actually DO the crimes in order for the Righties' piteous sobbing to be rational and meaningful!

 

Nothing like lying about the court martial policy. The joke of christianity under attack.

Funny how you will believe anything that reflects poorly on democrats and nothing that reflects poorly on republicans. But I suppose that is just another example of emotional belief trumping actual fact.

 

Yer numbers and economic facts are all wet behind the ears.
This Government is secretly involved in a conspiracy to abuse
Waste & Fraud to the likes of which our economy has never known.
What part of 1 out of 5 americans being on Food Stamps and 20% of
todays children are In Poverty do you grapple with.
I get it just trust what drool this Government hands out.
Like the bull that ObamaCare will automatically lower premiums and
cover more { it is cutting back on Senior care }.
Doctors are fleeing the industry.
How come no mention of G.E. getting a special White House exemption
from paying any domestic taxes on profits.How many power plants has Obama
shut down,while G.E. is granted license to use their power plant equipment.

 

I appreciate anything negative you can find is "comical" to you. It would be to those invested in failure for political purposes.

But while part time jobs increased last month, the total number of part time employed for economic reasons is down by 57,000 over the past three months, while total private sector jobs is up 649,000.

Sorry to rain on your parade.

- - - Updated - - -

LMFAO! The numbers were just fine until I showed you you were wrong, and now they are "wet behind the ears."

Classic.

 

The Pentagon has already confirmed TWICE about reports of a new policy
to court martial service members who share their Faith in the military.
Just like you won't hear much about Obama funding Al Qaeda in Syria.

 

Yep, agreed, in terms of unemployment 7.5% is better than 8%..but is it enough, given the time span of nearly 5 years, to jump for joy and praise obutthead over it?

Hardly.

 

And it's FACT that the Pentagon consulted with that nutbag Mikey Weinstein about the policies of religion in the military. This is the same whacko that said speaking about Christianity is treason and that it is equivalent to rape.

Really? This is the sort of psychotic moron that's going to influence policy?

I wonder if any muslims serving in our military will be allowed to interrupt their duty day to go pray on their rug?

They better not...

 

We really don't understand growth out of thin air.

Steady growth that's hysterical.

 

Good point. We have structural problems which need to be addressed. A major one is the fact that over the past 30 years, the portion of the nation's wealth and income controlled by the richest 1% has doubled to 20% of income and 40% of wealth. That equates to about $1.3 trillion a year more of the nation's income going to the 1% instead of the middle classes every year. Our "trickle down" philosophy has starved that great engine of spending, the middle class, of income and wealth. So it is no surprise that this recovery, like the one before it and the one before that, is slower and more sluggish.



We need to address that inequality and reverse the redistribution of income and wealth to the 1 and 10%.

We also need to avoid devasting speculative asset bubbles like the housing market that has caused so much pain. Our tax system now favors speculative investment over earning and production by more than a 2:1 ratio. Investment income is taxed at a max 15% rate and housing gains are taxed at even less than that. We need to address this imbalance and effective penalty for earning and production to encourage folks to focus on earning and not speculative investment.

Finally, we should not be cutting spending at this time. If we compare the last time we had a robust recovery, the early 1980s, we have the following:

US Govt spending increase, 1981-1984: +25%.

US Govt spending increase, 2009-2012: +0.6%

Total Government employment, 1981-1984: -27,000

Total Government employment, 2009-2012: -730,000

Can we really expect to have an equivalent recovery with such a lower level of spending increases and such a higher level of government terminations?

 

Its about chaplins aggressively "sharing" their faith in the course of their duties. NOt about regular soliders.
Its about chaplins overstepping themselves since their mandate is to minister to all denominations.

 

Nice try, but the current numbers haven't been changed with the revised methodology that will refigure past numbers, not just going forward.

 

How many times has the government changed the way the numbers are calculated since Hussein Obama took office?

 

None, that I'm aware of.

Edit: The BLS did make a change "to allow respondents to report longer durations of unemployment."

Anything else?

 

Statistics are like maple sap. Cook them long enough and they'll come out sweet.

 

Well obviously you miss the point entirely. Same problem I have with the republicans when their demagogue in power. The BLS provides statistical information, and numerous charts that taken singly or cherry picked can be easily manipulated or misinterpreted since the data itself can be taken out of context if not utilizing all the information made available or provided. One thing the BLS statistics do not do is provide a measuring stick for how great a job the POTUS is doing. That is total BS doesn't matter which party's demagogue is in charge.

The BLS used to admit this clearly on their mission statement before the web site was revamped a few years ago. Why do you suppose they deleted that pertinent information? Because they can, and they did. They also used to give you the exact number of times the definition of unemployment was redefined over the past 70 years, but now they just say it has been redefined but the definition didn't change anything (wink, wink). Then why redefine it if the definition still remained the same? Idiocy only a certified sheeple would accept without reservation.

IOW it, the BLS, is not an exact science. It's a work in progress.

Let me put it another way. When the media/government presents statistical data they always assure the sheeple that the information provided by the statistical data is within a specific/particular degree of accuracy. And why do we know this? Because they tell us it is true. Now if they "KNOW" the information is true within a specific/particular degree of accuracy, then by all rational logic that would mean they have the actual/factual numbers already or how could they determine the degree of accuracy? But if they have the actual/factual numbers already, why would they need to use the statistical information which obviously isn't accurate? Why not just use the actual source used to determine the actual/factual numbers from the reliable source?

Because they, the best government corporate money can buy is using the tools of propaganda, IAW "lying", and the corporate media is co-conspirators in the fraud.

The BLS information is not a measuring stick for grading the performance of the political party that has control of the keys to the White House. It is a complex gathering of inaccurate but in the ball park figures to help the government determine problem areas (states, counties, and cities/towns), so they can offer solutions within the governments power to help rectify the situation they may be experiencing (like high unemployment) or at least provide some assistance to keep the matter from escalating or getting worse, in the following years after the great depression, that haven't been used for that specific purpose in decades.

 

Yep.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics.
Mark Twain

Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable.
Mark Twain

Be able to analyze statistics, which can be used to support or undercut almost any argument.

Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamppost: for support, not illumination.

And my personal favorite;

Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.