US Unemployment drops again

[Rochard]

Unemployment dropped to 5.6%. (Cue Vendzilla to tell us about how we are all making less, or less of us are looking for jobs, or how we need to re-evaluate how we have computed unemployment since the beginning of time.)

Unemployment rate drops to 5.6% as economy creates 252,000 jobs | MSNBC

Just out of curiosity, what is the unemployment rate in other countries?

[Milfer]

Barack Obama is going "Good" can't we re elect him 3rd time?

[Bryan G]

6.5% here in Canada.

[Captain Kawaii]

Fake numbers = Meanignless

[directfiesta]

See..... Elect the GOP in both houses ... and everything is back to hooky dooky !!!!

[12clicks]

I thought all of the dumb were squeezed out of the biz

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Unemployment dropped to 5.6%. (Cue Vendzilla to tell us about how we are all making less, or less of us are looking for jobs, or how we need to re-evaluate how we have computed unemployment since the beginning of time.)

Unemployment rate drops to 5.6% as economy creates 252,000 jobs | MSNBC

Just out of curiosity, what is the unemployment rate in other countries?

The Labor Force Participation is the lowest it's been since 1978.

[Buff]

Alternate Unemployment Charts

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Buff

The Labor Force Participation is the lowest it's been since 1978.

Exactly, but he doesn't understand math

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Exactly, but he doesn't understand math

Doom & Gloom we can always count on the GFY conservatives for Doom & Gloom in light of good news..

[Vendzilla]

The post-recession economy has undergone the slowest recovery in 70 years. In addition to more than 6 percent unemployment five years after the recession officially ended, labor force participation has fallen sharply since the recession began in December 2007. Today, 6.9 million fewer Americans are working or searching for work. The drop in unemployment since 2009 is almost entirely due to the fact that those not looking for work do not count as unemployed. Demographic factors explain less than one-quarter of the decreased labor force participation. The rest comes from increased school enrollment and more people collecting disability benefits. Over 6 percent of U.S. adults are now on Social Security Disability Insurance


so as any person that's not an idiot can see, this is not good news!

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by Buff

The Labor Force Participation is the lowest it's been since 1978.

And?

Our population is getting older; Less of our population is looking for employment.

You can try to make this out as a bad thing, but it seems to me the unemployment rate is a somewhat accurate gauge of our true unemployment figures. Six years ago when our unemployment was at it's high, a large percentage of my local friends were out of work and looking for jobs. Oddly enough, now that the unemployment rate is down none of my friends are looking for jobs.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Rochard

And?

Our population is getting older; Less of our population is looking for employment.

You can try to make this out as a bad thing, but it seems to me the unemployment rate is a somewhat accurate gauge of our true unemployment figures. Six years ago when our unemployment was at it's high, a large percentage of my local friends were out of work and looking for jobs. Oddly enough, now that the unemployment rate is down none of my friends are looking for jobs.

Richard, Wrong as usual

Don?t blame waves of retirement for that fact: the Census Bureau reported that, from 2005 to 2010, older Americans actually became more likely to be employed. The percentage of 65-69 year-olds remaining in the workforce jumped from 26 percent to 32 percent over a ten-year-period ending in 2012. Among those 70-74 the jump was even more startling: from 14 percent to 19.5 percent. Meanwhile workers in the prime of their lives have simply left the playing field.

And Richard, the world doesn't revolve around your group of friends!

Under Obama, more people have been added to food stamps than job rolls

Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth - Forbes

[kane]

The problem is that our current economy is suffering from more than 20 years of shitty government policies that encourage companies to go overseas and pull jobs out of the US. This means that most of the jobs being created are either higher paying jobs that require an education and work experience or lower paying jobs that simply don't pay that much.

This isn't going to change until out leaders from both parties do things that help create an environment where companies will want to create middle income jobs here in America.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by kane

The problem is that our current economy is suffering from more than 20 years of shitty government policies that encourage companies to go overseas and pull jobs out of the US. This means that most of the jobs being created are either higher paying jobs that require an education and work experience or lower paying jobs that simply don't pay that much.

This isn't going to change until out leaders from both parties do things that help create an environment where companies will want to create middle income jobs here in America.

While i agree, i also love to prove the Obama cheerleaders wrong.

I blame NAFTA for jobs moving overseas

Obama hasn't done shit for problem of unemployment.

Stimulus was what 800 billion? Where are those jobs he promised?

[kane]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

While i agree, i also love to prove the Obama cheerleaders wrong.

I blame NAFTA for jobs moving overseas

Obama hasn't done shit for problem of unemployment.

Stimulus was what 800 billion? Where are those jobs he promised?

Like I said, this is a culmination of 20 years of bad policies finally coming to fruition and NAFTA is one of them. Republicans and democrats are both to blame. I know you drop everything on Obama's lap and he is part of the problem for certain, but it isn't all his fault. There was likely little he could have done to actually turn the economy around.

The current climate in DC is so toxic that getting anything done is nearly impossible these days.

[RummyBoy]

Originally Posted by Milfer

Barack Obama is going "Good" can't we re elect him 3rd time?

Exactly, and expect to see more dodgy numbers as we approach the election because its only the incumbent that has the power to do that. Then you consider the low level of labour participation, the people holding multiple jobs, the massive number (around 50 million) on food stamps. I think there's a whole load of other things that people in US consider also...... what things? (I forgot)

These days most people will believe what they get from their government and the media but its one in the same. Blogs and people like Tyler (ZeroHedge) and John Williams (ShadowStats) are much better sources.....

Ferguson is the kind of example of discontentment which explodes for a given reason, covering up a another reason (a poor economy) which usually hits the poorest first. It's like if you've had a bad day and you come home and you have a row with your wife over a small issue because you're pissed off about something else in your life. Why take it out on her?

[RummyBoy]

This guy (former CNN) puts it well at 10:20

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Rochard

And?

Our population is getting older; Less of our population is looking for employment.

this is just simply not true.

while population is getting older, they are an increasing % of the workforce especially compared to younger.


Older Workers: BLS Spotlight on Statistics

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by kane

Like I said, this is a culmination of 20 years of bad policies finally coming to fruition and NAFTA is one of them. Republicans and democrats are both to blame. I know you drop everything on Obama's lap and he is part of the problem for certain, but it isn't all his fault. There was likely little he could have done to actually turn the economy around.

The current climate in DC is so toxic that getting anything done is nearly impossible these days.

I don't put it all at Obama's feet, I just get tired of the Obama Cheerleaders thinking that just because the unemployment rate is down, their king Obama should be praised, when the economy is doing shit.

Reagan had it worse than Obama on economy and not only did he lower the unemployment rate, but the work force grew at a huge rate and the median wage went up $4000 a year. Obama should have looked at what he did to accomplish that instead of spending so much fucking time lying about how Obamacare will save us all!

And these fruit bats in this thread still believe his lies, which is just amazing!

[kane]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I don't put it all at Obama's feet, I just get tired of the Obama Cheerleaders thinking that just because the unemployment rate is down, their king Obama should be praised, when the economy is doing shit.

Reagan had it worse than Obama on economy and not only did he lower the unemployment rate, but the work force grew at a huge rate and the median wage went up $4000 a year. Obama should have looked at what he did to accomplish that instead of spending so much fucking time lying about how Obamacare will save us all!

And these fruit bats in this thread still believe his lies, which is just amazing!

The difference is that when Reagan was in office he wasn't facing NAFTA and 20 years of bad policy making. The recession hit and when we started to rebound companies that were paying decent wages here in the US re-opened and ramped back up, but they did it overseas. Reagan had the luxury of having companies actually rebuild in the US.

I read not too long ago that when the recession hit 20% of the jobs lost came from the higher paying range of $25+ per hour. 20% came from the lower paying jobs of $13/hr or less and 60% came from the mid range paying jobs of $14-$24/hr. During the recovery 20% of the jobs created come from the higher paying range, 20% from the mid range and 60% are lower paying jobs. This is because those companies that create the mid paying jobs left the country. That is the result of 2+ decades of bad policymaking. does Obama deserve some of the blame? Sure, but he is not solely to blame.

Of course it doesn't help that after the initial bailouts/stimulus the republicans filibustered every single bill that had anything to do with the economy that was put forth by the democrats.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by kane

The difference is that when Reagan was in office he wasn't facing NAFTA and 20 years of bad policy making. The recession hit and when we started to rebound companies that were paying decent wages here in the US re-opened and ramped back up, but they did it overseas. Reagan had the luxury of having companies actually rebuild in the US.

I read not too long ago that when the recession hit 20% of the jobs lost came from the higher paying range of $25+ per hour. 20% came from the lower paying jobs of $13/hr or less and 60% came from the mid range paying jobs of $14-$24/hr. During the recovery 20% of the jobs created come from the higher paying range, 20% from the mid range and 60% are lower paying jobs. This is because those companies that create the mid paying jobs left the country. That is the result of 2+ decades of bad policymaking. does Obama deserve some of the blame? Sure, but he is not solely to blame.

Of course it doesn't help that after the initial bailouts/stimulus the republicans filibustered every single bill that had anything to do with the economy that was put forth by the democrats.

I'm all for the republicans blocking more stimulus, it was about 800 billion dollars and didn't do what it was promised to do.

As far as what Reagan had against him, he had to repair all the shit Carter left behind and there was a lot.

[kane]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I'm all for the republicans blocking more stimulus, it was about 800 billion dollars and didn't do what it was promised to do.

As far as what Reagan had against him, he had to repair all the shit Carter left behind and there was a lot.

The republicans didn't block the stimulus, they authored most of it under Bush. They blocked everything Obama and the democrats did after that.

Sure, Reagan had to fix Carter's mess, but like I said, when companies came back online and started growing again they were't leaving the country like they are now because Reagan was't facing an environment that made it better for companies to work offshore than create jobs in the US.

[Robbie]

I'm not of the belief that Carter "made a mess".

OPEC caused a gas shortage by cutting back production which all but destroyed the U.S. economy.

For whatever reason, Carter's failure was his inability to get OPEC to go back to their higher production levels.

And for whatever reason...they did just that while Reagan was in office.

Lower fuel prices always stimulate the economy (just like it's doing right now)

[Quine]

Here's a excerpt from the Economics in One Lesson (by Henry Hazlitt):

The Fetish of Full Employment

The economic goal of any nation, as of any individual, is to get the greatest results with the least effort. The whole economic progress of mankind has consisted in getting more production with the same labor. It is for this reason that men began putting burdens on the backs of mules instead of on their own; that they went on to invent the wheel and the wagon, the railroad and the motor truck. It is for this reason that men used their ingenuity to develop 100,000 labor-saving inventions.

All this is so elementary that one would blush to state it if it were not being constantly forgotten by those who coin and circulate the new slogans. Translated into national terms, this first principle means that our real objective is to maximize production. In doing this, full employment?that is, the absence of involuntary idleness?becomes a necessary by-product. But production is the end, employment merely the means. We cannot continuously have the fullest production without full employment. But we can very easily have full employment without full production.

Primitive tribes are naked, and wretchedly fed and housed, but they do not suffer from unemployment. China and India are incomparably poorer than ourselves, but the main trouble from which they suffer is primitive production methods (which are both a cause and a consequence of a shortage of capital) and not unemployment. Nothing is easier to achieve than full employment, once it is divorced from the goal of full production and taken as an end in itself. Hitler provided full employment with a huge armament program. The war provided full employment for every nation involved. The slave labor in Germany had full employment. Prisons and chain gangs have full employment. Coercion can always provide full employment

[nico-t]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

I thought all of the dumb were squeezed out of the biz

you're still here

[nico-t]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I'm all for the republicans blocking more stimulus, it was about 800 billion dollars and didn't do what it was promised to do.

As far as what Reagan had against him, he had to repair all the shit Carter left behind and there was a lot.

you look at politics like a supporter of a sports team, it's pretty sad.
"ma team better than yours, eveything ma team does is good, ur team fucks it up"
ignorance is bliss i guess.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by nico-t

you look at politics like a supporter of a sports team, it's pretty sad.
"ma team better than yours, eveything ma team does is good, ur team fucks it up"
ignorance is bliss i guess.

This just shows you how FUCKING STUPID you are by not reading anything I say, just making a STUPID comment from your hip like most STUPID people do.

I don't give a RAT's ass about one political party over the other, I don't like the PRESIDENT, it's STUPID people that can't comprehend that some people just don't like the president, not because he's black, not because he's a democrat, but because he's a bad leader.

My synopsis of your grasp of the subject at hand which as shown by your participation and lack of comprehension is that you have all the Intelligence Quotient of a Walmart greeter that was hired from the short bus.

I will even explain it in more detail, Intelligence Quotient is a mathematical equation that uses your Mental Age and divides it by your Chronological age, thereby giving you your IQ. Which I am lead to believe your mental age is that of about 15, given I don't know your chronological age, I am of the belief your IQ is right around 70, just enough to be able to tie your shoes with 3 tries.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Robbie

I'm not of the belief that Carter "made a mess".

OPEC caused a gas shortage by cutting back production which all but destroyed the U.S. economy.

For whatever reason, Carter's failure was his inability to get OPEC to go back to their higher production levels.

And for whatever reason...they did just that while Reagan was in office.

Lower fuel prices always stimulate the economy (just like it's doing right now)

I was off the coast of Iran in the last few months of the Carter administration, Carter had ZERO effect in that matter and Reagan took office and we all went home.

Inflation was terrible under Carter as well and yes Reagan got OPEC to produce more which killed the USSR economy, just like lower prices are doing now to Russia. Do you remember the price freeze that Carter did? I don't agree with everything that Reagan did, but the US was in a lot better place when we got him in office.

Also under Carter we had gotten way behind in military technology. Reagan fixed that. Our fleet was in really bad shape! Carter cut the military budget 6 billion in his first month of office.

And as far as Opec I believe, the embargo was put in place because of the US giving Israel weapons, then the government put in regulations on the oil industry. Reagan got rid of those regulations which got the production back up and gas prices down

[Buff]

Originally Posted by crockett

Doom & Gloom we can always count on the GFY conservatives for Doom & Gloom in light of good news..

Uh... 1st, I am not a conservative.
2nd, calling this good news would be like traveling to Zimbabwe and exchanging $10 for 3.6 million Zimbabwe dollars and thinking you're rich.

The problem with leftists is that they have no understanding of economics, accounting, or finance.

[GAMEFINEST]

We doing good for now.

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by nico-t

you're still here

Yeah. It's probably hard for you to keep up only looking nights and weekends.

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Unemployment dropped to 5.6%. (Cue Vendzilla to tell us about how we are all making less, or less of us are looking for jobs, or how we need to re-evaluate how we have computed unemployment since the beginning of time.)

Unemployment rate drops to 5.6% as economy creates 252,000 jobs | MSNBC

Just out of curiosity, what is the unemployment rate in other countries?

I make less, my gross income has been going down about 34% per year. my health ins has risen from $325 per month to $517. twice the deductible with prescriptions rising over 700%.. at least gas prices are going down... and I'm sure the Obama camp has presented the statistics in the best possible way.. not saying 'lied' however lying is a know faucet of the obama admin

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Grapesoda

I make less, my gross income has been going down about 34% per year. my health ins has risen from $325 per month to $517. twice the deductible with prescriptions rising over 700%.. at least gas prices are going down... and I'm sure the Obama camp has presented the statistics in the best possible way.. not saying 'lied' however lying is a know faucet of the obama admin

Yeah the first thing Obama did in office was to give the FDA control over a few things and they made it illegal to ship cigarettes using the US Mail. I lost a couple grand a month on that!

[$5 submissions]

It's nice to have a little good news right before the Big Crash.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I was off the coast of Iran in the last few months of the Carter administration, Carter had ZERO effect in that matter and Reagan took office and we all went home.

yep, took him a few minutes ... and Bingo ... all went home :

The hostages were formally released into United States custody the day after the signing of the Algiers Accords, just minutes after the new American president, Ronald Reagan, was sworn into office.

damn, that guy rocked !!!!

[seeandsee]

congrats to obama, give him 4 more yrs like putin did it, change something

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

yep, took him a few minutes ... and Bingo ... all went home :

damn, that guy rocked !!!!

That story is true. The details were worked out with Iran ahead of time. They refused to release the hostages until Pres. Carter was officially out of office. Reagan's behind the scenes people had all the negotiations done. They were released simultaneously with Reagan being sworn in:

"Reagan's inaugural address was 2,452 words long. It utilized the vista offered by the West Front, invoking the symbolism of the Presidential memorials and Arlington National Cemetery in the distance. As Reagan was giving his address, 52 Americans held hostage in Iran for the previous 444 days were released."

Nothing to do with Reagan being great. Everything to do with the Iranians hatred of Pres. Carter.
And I kind of admire Carter in a way for being the kind of guy that those motherfuckers hated that bad.

Carter was a shitty president for other reasons. He was probably one of the more intelligent men to hold office for sure...but as I understand it, he was reluctant to delegate and wanted to micro-manage everything himself.
Which wasn't a good thing in that position.

Reagan, was nowhere near as smart of a guy as Carter. But his personality made people more willing to work WITH him (the Democrat Congress for instance) and he surrounded himself with very capable people and knew how to be a leader and get the most out of his staff.

[SuckOnThis]

Carter spent four years as commander in chief of the world?s largest and most lethal military without dropping one bomb, launching one missile, or firing one shot.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Carter spent four years as commander in chief of the world?s largest and most lethal military without dropping one bomb, launching one missile, or firing one shot.

That SHOULD be standard operating procedure.

That military is theoretically to defend our country from invasion from another country.
But that quickly turned in to defending our "interests" around the world.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Robbie

That story is true. The details were worked out with Iran ahead of time. They refused to release the hostages until Pres. Carter was officially out of office. Reagan's behind the scenes people had all the negotiations done. They were released simultaneously with Reagan being sworn in:

"Reagan's inaugural address was 2,452 words long. It utilized the vista offered by the West Front, invoking the symbolism of the Presidential memorials and Arlington National Cemetery in the distance. As Reagan was giving his address, 52 Americans held hostage in Iran for the previous 444 days were released."

Nothing to do with Reagan being great. Everything to do with the Iranians hatred of Pres. Carter.
And I kind of admire Carter in a way for being the kind of guy that those motherfuckers hated that bad.

Carter was a shitty president for other reasons. He was probably one of the more intelligent men to hold office for sure...but as I understand it, he was reluctant to delegate and wanted to micro-manage everything himself.
Which wasn't a good thing in that position.

Reagan, was nowhere near as smart of a guy as Carter. But his personality made people more willing to work WITH him (the Democrat Congress for instance) and he surrounded himself with very capable people and knew how to be a leader and get the most out of his staff.

Reagan worked very well with other leaders. He worked with the other side in politics as well. Carter had people in his own party that didn't want to work with him. After the gas rationing, he became very unpopular.

But I will say one thing about Reagan, his speeches were legendary. He brought the people together as a whole, not divided by party!

I still remember getting the word we were heading home the day after Reagan took office. We were between the fleet and the coast during the 444 day war for almost 6 months to protect the fleet.

[Relentless]

Gas prices are down. The moment they rise all the charts will look worse as well. Nothing is fundamentally different so we are in the same cyclical mess as always. Single payer healthcare, real student loan reform, etc would have a more meaningful impact.

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Robbie

That SHOULD be standard operating procedure.

That military is theoretically to defend our country from invasion from another country.
But that quickly turned in to defending our "interests" around the world.

this is an unrealistic statement Robbie, the military has ALWAYS deafened a nation states interest around the world (trade routes). not sure why you wouldn't know that?

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

But I will say one thing about Reagan, his speeches were legendary. He brought the people together as a whole, not divided by party!

I agree that he gave great speeches (just like Obama). But I disagree that he brought everyone together.

I remember the news constantly attacking him every night. Newspapers wrote articles hating on him. He was pretty much HATED by liberals.
They would say he was "out of touch" "too old" "confused"...I remember reading that he and Nancy Reagan sat down regularly with astrologers and fortune tellers and that he was influenced by all that on his policies.

Hell, even popular music attacked him. Remember Don Henley singing: "This tired old man that we elected King"
Or Genesis and the video to "Land Of Confusion"

No, I don't remember it quite like that at all. This was the way Reagan was treated by the liberals of society:

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by Relentless

Gas prices are down. The moment they rise all the charts will look worse as well. Nothing is fundamentally different so we are in the same cyclical mess as always. Single payer healthcare, real student loan reform, etc would have a more meaningful impact.

The only reform student loans need is to not have them backed by the government and make them cancelable in bankruptcy

[KillerK]

Originally Posted by Robbie

That story is true. The details were worked out with Iran ahead of time. They refused to release the hostages until Pres. Carter was officially out of office. Reagan's behind the scenes people had all the negotiations done. They were released simultaneously with Reagan being sworn in:

"Reagan's inaugural address was 2,452 words long. It utilized the vista offered by the West Front, invoking the symbolism of the Presidential memorials and Arlington National Cemetery in the distance. As Reagan was giving his address, 52 Americans held hostage in Iran for the previous 444 days were released."

Nothing to do with Reagan being great. Everything to do with the Iranians hatred of Pres. Carter.
And I kind of admire Carter in a way for being the kind of guy that those motherfuckers hated that bad.

Carter was a shitty president for other reasons. He was probably one of the more intelligent men to hold office for sure...but as I understand it, he was reluctant to delegate and wanted to micro-manage everything himself.
Which wasn't a good thing in that position.

Reagan, was nowhere near as smart of a guy as Carter. But his personality made people more willing to work WITH him (the Democrat Congress for instance) and he surrounded himself with very capable people and knew how to be a leader and get the most out of his staff.

How can you not say that makes someone very smart, if they know to surround themselves with the right people and work with others, that's pretty smart.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by KillerK

How can you not say that makes someone very smart, if they know to surround themselves with the right people and work with others, that's pretty smart.

I didn't mean he wasn't a smart guy compared to the average person. I just meant relative to the people surrounding him.

Many times a great leader isn't the smartest guy in the room. But he has the ability to get the smart guys to believe in him and follow his lead. Reagan had that gift for sure.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Robbie

No, I don't remember it quite like that at all. This was the way Reagan was treated by the liberals of society:

I grew up around Republicans, didn't see liberals really till I got in this business.

The cold war ended because of his policy, I can't think of a more liberal thing.

I had a couple conversations with gays that say they hated Reagan, they said he was anti gay, he couldn't even say the word AIDS till 87 according to them. They were misinformed

Reagan spoke out against the Briggs initiative that would have made it illegal for gays to be teachers

Reagan's secretary was asked about aids in 83 and the answer was it was at the top of Reagan's list and in 85 Reagan was asked about AIDS funding and Reagan said that the government had already funded 500 million toward research. Remember his best friend was Rock Hudson and that he did serve as the President of SAG. Not a position of someone anti gay.

These are the actions of a liberal person, so if the liberals had a problem with that, they can go fuck themselves. Reagan was a very progressive president in many ways.

Yeah he's my favorite president, I'm getting married in the same church that he did this summer and my daughter served on the USS Ronald Reagan.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by Grapesoda

I make less, my gross income has been going down about 34% per year. my health ins has risen from $325 per month to $517. twice the deductible with prescriptions rising over 700%.. at least gas prices are going down... and I'm sure the Obama camp has presented the statistics in the best possible way.. not saying 'lied' however lying is a know faucet of the obama admin

Everyone's income is down. Our net worth is down too. But that's not because of Obama, that's because of the recession that hit during the last administration.

This is where the Republican party fails.... They want to roll out every freaking possible excuse. "Oh, we need to adjust the way we've been doing unemployment for the past sixty years" or "We need to look at the people who have given up looking for jobs" or "the labor force is less". My favorite is "welfare is at an all time high". This is all bull shit and smoke screens. We do not "suddenly" need to adjust the way we figure out unemployment, but if you insist let's do it - all it's going to do is push ALL of the numbers up, and you will still see the same trends. The labor force is less because our labor force is older, and more people than ever before have retire. And I never understood this "People have given up looking for jobs" - Well, if that's the case, I guess they didn't really need them.

And then there is the welfare thing. That's funny. People didn't go on welfare because Obama is in office; People went on welfare because they lost their jobs and then lost their houses. And that wasn't because of Obama.

Obama isn't superman. Unemployment isn't down because he's a genius; It's down because it couldn't get any freaking higher. The economy isn't up because Obama is a genius, the economy is up because it couldn't have gotten any more worse.

Nah. Let's not accept the truth. Let's just spit put bullshit numbers to confuse everyone. Or let's just "insist these numbers aren't correct" and insist we have to "use a different method to get better figures".

[Relentless]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

The only reform student loans need is to not have them backed by the government and make them cancelable in bankruptcy

That's two large reforms and I agree on both counts, but I'd go further.

I'd add transparency laws with teeth so all schools need to release the percentage of revenue spent on current students each year. I'd do away with 'college degree requirements' on most governmental jobs. I like Obamas community college act idea, if it can be tied to minimum credit requirements and standardized testing minimums because it creates downward pressure on low end school pricing. I'd regulate the incoming class size of schools based on the employment records of their last 4 years of graduates and create other initiatives designed to incentivize schools to help student gain employment post graduation.

There are a lot of things that would help. Charging 200K for a degree with no employment on the horizon just so they can securitize and sell student debt the way they packaged and sold mortgage debts isn't good for the country.