Does this mean that Obama has actually done what he promised during his term as a president???
 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...udy-finds.html

The jobless rate in the U.S. could drop to as low as 6 percent by the first half of 2013, a bigger decrease than most economists currently project, according to research from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

The relationship between the number of Americans newly unemployed and those recently finding work indicates joblessness will continue to decline, according to economist Aysegul Sahin. The jobless rate held at a three-year low of 8.3 percent last month after falling by 0.8 percentage point in the year ended January, according to figures from the Labor Department.

?Simulations based on historical patterns suggest that the fall in the unemployment rate could be quicker than many forecasters predict,? Sahin wrote in a note on the bank?s Liberty Street Economics blog co-written by research associate Christina Patterson.
The analysis looked at flows into and out of unemployment since the end of World War II, likening it to water in a bathtub. The unemployment rate, or level of water in the tub, would be determined by the difference in the volume of water pouring in and draining out.

MORE HERE...

Bump for 12clicks to have his say...

Is Guantanamo still open for business?

Just in time for elections.

http://images.spoof-media.com/thespo...erOfInfo_b.jpg

"Everything is fine now people! Everyone will have a job next month! The figures prove it!!"

"There is nothing to worry about! Everyone relax! Your glorious leader has the situation well in hand!"





:1orglaugh



.:helpme

Wasn't it Vendzilla who previously said in another thread that it - the big drops in the unemployment rate - was a result of being tougher on immigration?

I think he's flip flopping.

Are you trying to pull a rabbit out of that hat?

Steady increase in the US population of those entering the job force, yet the size of the job force keeps going down, showing that there are less jobs. Unemployment rate reflects those that are getting unemployment insurance, a lot of people just aren't looking anymore and have given up

There's nothing to discuss if you say the unemployment rate is not dropping in this thread, and that the unemployment rate is dropping in another thread. Either it is, or it isn't. Which is it?

President doesn't have a whole lot to do with the unemployment rate. Shit takes time

The unemployment numbers are false as are the fudge able economic numbers.
Go look at durable good sales and get back to me. :)

Should add this link into the party:
http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/

And am I going to see you this week?

It could drop, or it could triple. Obama said that if unemployment is over 8% in 2012, he shouldn't be re-elected. Headline unemployment is 8.5% and real unemployment is about 14%. According to HIM, then, he shouldn't be re-elected.

It's a lot worse than the headline number suggests, of course. As Howard Bono explains:

1. Last year our population grew by 1,695,000, yet the labor force grew by only 274,000. That means 1,421,000 people who gave up looking for work aren't counted in the headline unemployment number.

2. Since 2008 our labor force (the number of people counted as able to work) has shrunk by over 1 million people. How does that happen if our population grows at almost 2 million people per year. Shouldn't the work force have grown by at least 4 or 5 million people in those three years?

I agree with Obama on this. He said he shouldn't be re-elected if unemployment is this high. I agree with him.

Why aren't the job creators creating the jobs? Who are the job creators again?

No. The unemployment rate is one of the most manipulated of all government statistics. They reduce the denominator simply by not including in it the people who have simply given up looking for work.

The statistic you want to look is not the unemployment rate, but rather the Labor Force Participation rate. That rate is published monthly by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics and can be found right here: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

It represents the percent of Americans 16-years-old and older who are employed. As of February of this year, the rate stands at 63.9%, which is just about at a 30-year low, which is terrible. As can be seen in this graph, the rate peaked right about the time Bush took office for the first time and has been plummeting ever since.

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/...3042359660.gif

The economy is still in the first stages of a depression, and there's nothing Obama can do about it except ask Bernanke to resign and appoint an Austrian School Economist to head the Fed, but that will never happen, so good luck, Americans!

Thanks for that, but the graph doesn't reflect much change in the labor force since 1980 except by a few points. Here's the graph since 1948 til now.

http://i.imgur.com/jWZca.png

Thanks, but let's do some math, ok?

in 2001, the US Population was estimated to be about 285 million of which at least 70% of the population was 16 or older which comes to about 200 million.

In 2012, the US Population is estimated to be about 313 million of which at least 70% of the population was 16 or older which comes to about 219 million.

In 2001, the LFPR was 67.2% which means about 134.4 million Americans were in the workplace.

In 2012, the LFPR was 63.9% which means about 139.9 million Americans were in the workplace.

This means that out of an additional 19 million additional people in the Labor Force, only 5.5 million of them are participating, which is 28.9%.

That is a horrific trend: 71% of all new available workers over the last 11 years are not working. Maybe in your world, those "few points" don't reflect much change, but for those of us with degrees in economics and a command of statistics it represents a catastrophe.

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lq...39ewo1_500.gif

Same old song and dance with the RepubliCrats, but since it's the only game in town, credit needs to be given where it is due.

The facts are, the economy was in the shitter when Obama took over, the country was mired in two of it's longest wars ever, and the reputation of the government abroad was at an all-time low.

In his time in office, Obama has stabilized the ship of state, taking steps which improved and strengthened the economy, he ended the war in Iraq, has a plan for ending the war in Afghanistan, and Obama has vastly improved our reputation in most parts of the world.

On the practical side, the Republicans have filibustered and used super-majority rules in the Senate to try and keep the President in stalemate, simply in order to try and defeat him in 2012. The 2010 elections which gave the Republican party the majority in the House further hindered Obama's agenda, nonetheless, he has been able to still make some progress, although not as much as he had wished to, due to the alignment of Congress.

I am hoping that Obama wins re-election, but equally important, that the Democrats retake the House, so that Obama can get more important legislation passed.

https://images.nonexiste.net/popular...ent-Obama.jpeg

ADG

You're looking at a small downward trend, obviously because it's in your favor. You have a career in climate change!

Quantitative Easing.... It's always worked before!!!


(not)

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-...29279554_n.jpg

Wishful thinking.

Here's the REAL Obama economic record:

http://www.conservative.org/acuf/issue-199/issue199com2

:warning

:helpme

:(

A lot of nice yelling here - how about some solutions? Anyone?

Minimize the Federal Government almost completely. Eliminate all income and capital gains taxes. Allow each State to compete.

That certainly seems to be a 100% unbiased source.

This is funny, yes new shit jobs are coming in, telemarketing etc. boost the numbers, But... many many people are losing their jobs, like drug reps and many other people in the medical field.

Projections through 2020.
The projected labor force growth over the next 10 years will be affected by the aging of the baby-boom generation; as a result, the labor force is projected to grow at a slower rate than in the last several decades.
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2012/01/art3full.pdf

I will take a plunge and say that about 50% of Americans are straight up nuts, either way.

Good night.

yeah he's done some stuff but 4 years is way too early to see the change. if you remember he said that before he was elected. he's ignored things that the people want they all do. too bad the peoples vote doesnt mean shit.

:2 cents: This is so obvious it hurts. You knew this would happen.

Lets revisit this post later in 2013 and then again in 2014 to see how it all panned out. I'm going to bet not in his favor.

There are no solutions. The system is unsustainable. Long term jobs are not coming back to the USA. Why would they when you can get someone in China to do the job for 1/8 of the cost of an American? The US is only going to dig deeper into debt. Government is going to grow even more over the next 4 years under Obama. More banks will fail. More bailouts. QE3. And so on and so forth.

The best they can do is keep kicking the can down the road until the road eventually ends and blow just enough smoke up everyone's ass that it gives people hope that a "recovery" is just around the corner.

He didn't even make the correct promises to begin with, so it's irrelevant whether he kept them or not...

Yep. I would also expect gas prices to stay high through the summer then as the fall comes and the election gets closer the prices will fall and be much lower by election day.

If you can't attack the message, attack the messenger, huh?

Those same words were said when Carter was president, then Reagan came in

My problem with that is that only half the nation will be represented. There is suppose to be a balance.

I'm all for the war in Afghanistan and Iraq to be over and congrats to Barry on that, so why are we bombing Pakistan?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...82J08320120320

Reminds me of this Commercial

You impressed me again