Obama's Numbers
Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 7:43 am
Plan B Forum
have fun, relax, but above all ARGUE!
http://www.theplanbforum.com/forum/
Obama's Numbers
Page 1 of 1
Re: Obama's Numbers
Posted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 3:19 pm
Interesting numbers.
I personally think that the "Unemployment Rate" has lost its historical relevance due to the unprecedented number of people who have given up looking (e.g., deciding to live on one household income rather than 2), and decided to retire earlier than they otherwise would have, because of the bleak prospects for finding a suitable job at 62+ years old. Also, with the number of people on disability pensions exploding, it is obvious that this has become a viable option for people who never would have considered it in the past.
Perhaps a "Workforce Participation Rate" would be a better measure of assessing today's labor situation with that of past years.
The real question is, how much influence does a President have on any of this?
I personally think that the "Unemployment Rate" has lost its historical relevance due to the unprecedented number of people who have given up looking (e.g., deciding to live on one household income rather than 2), and decided to retire earlier than they otherwise would have, because of the bleak prospects for finding a suitable job at 62+ years old. Also, with the number of people on disability pensions exploding, it is obvious that this has become a viable option for people who never would have considered it in the past.
Perhaps a "Workforce Participation Rate" would be a better measure of assessing today's labor situation with that of past years.
The real question is, how much influence does a President have on any of this?
Re: Obama's Numbers
Posted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:10 pm
To a certain extent, while the POTUS is assigned these numbers he has limited ability to influence them -- the economic forces being greater than the ability of government to change them, especially for the better (i.e., government policies can more easily mess up a good economy than improve a poor economy).
I was glad to see the UE number decline and the new job numbers grow. However, as dgs notes, UE looks better almost solely because so many people have dropped out of the job market. This is slowly changing, but it is still the main driver of lower unemployment. Similarly, the new jobs are mostly lower trained service jobs (e.g., restaurants and the like) and not full time. Any growth in jobs is positive news, but we still have a long way to go before this economy is anything approaching healthy.
I was glad to see the UE number decline and the new job numbers grow. However, as dgs notes, UE looks better almost solely because so many people have dropped out of the job market. This is slowly changing, but it is still the main driver of lower unemployment. Similarly, the new jobs are mostly lower trained service jobs (e.g., restaurants and the like) and not full time. Any growth in jobs is positive news, but we still have a long way to go before this economy is anything approaching healthy.
Re: Obama's Numbers
Posted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:35 pm
When Obama leaves office the economy will improve.
Re: Obama's Numbers
Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:19 am
dales wrote:When Obama leaves office the economy will improve.
story
You know one of the most frequent reasons given for wanting to stop the Affordable Care Act from moving forward is that it will hurt small businesses and result in an undue burden on the states during implementation. So..uh..their response is to completely shut down the government causing almost a million people to lose their jobs, disrupting vital services, and doing away with loans to small business? Oh yeah, THAT makes sense.Republican Senators are threatening to force a government shutdown unless Democrats agree to give up on the Affordable Care Act. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) has gotten 14 of his colleagues to sign a letter pledging to block a bill to fund government operations unless Obamacare is defunded, according to conservative activist and Fox News contributor Erick Erickson.
The list includes such prominent members as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), a possible 2016 presidential candidate, and Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn (R-TX).
At the end of September, government funding under a March continuing resolution will run out. Without appropriations bills or another continuing resolution, the government would be forced to close.
A shutdown would likely cause 800,000 federal employees around the country to be furloughed, disrupting public services even further than sequestration cuts already have. A shutdown would also freeze many government programs like small business lending and environmental assessments for construction projects, exacerbating sequestration’s damage to the economy.
You know, there is a legal term for this when it is done in the private sector: it is extortion, plain and simple, a third-degree felony.
I think the reason Republicans are so intent on getting rid of the ACA is because they don't want to give the American people a chance to like it. The prototype in Massachusetts proved to be successful and people liked it. Republicans desperately want a ruined country by the 2014 elections and most definitely by 2016 so they can blame the Democrats and regain the White House. The Republican party does not care about what's best for America, only what's best for the Republican party.