Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNBC)   Experts expected an increase of 206,000 jobs in March and for the unemployment rate to stay at 8.3%. The rate dropped to 8.2% with 120,000 jobs added. Exactly what kind of experts are they, again?   (cnbc.com ) divider line
    More: Stupid, unemployment  
•       •       •

1576 clicks; posted to Business » on 06 Apr 2012 at 5:05 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



240 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-04-06 05:35:57 PM  

Mrtraveler01: EWreckedSean: Mrtraveler01: EWreckedSean: Mrtraveler01: EWreckedSean: foo monkey: SlothB77: more people removed the labor pool. by the time they are done, the labor pool will consist only of people employed.

[Citation needed]

Link (new window)

A blog?

Better? (new window)

Yes it is. But isn't that because more of the Baby Boomers are retiring?

I don't know how you can blame Obama for that.

When did I blame anybody? I just gave him the source he asked for.

Fair enough. But people who are saying that this is proof that Obama's manipulating the numbers or something else similarly nonsensical has no clue how numbers work.


Honestly with unemployment I kind of think they throw darts at a dart board...
 
2012-04-06 05:37:26 PM  

rnld: Why Would I Read the Article: rnld: No I don't. Please find the Obama quote on this.

The paper that predicted that was written by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein. Romer was thereafter shortly hired as the head of Obama's council of economic advisers, and Bernstein went on to become the chief economist and economic policy advisor for Biden.

So yeah, it's pretty safe to say that even if Obama never actually uttered those words himself (and he may have, I dunno for sure), it's pretty obvious that he was pushing the "unemployment under 8% if you pass my stimulus bill" canard.

Bush left office Jan 20th 2009. By Feb '09 the unemployment rate was already 8.1%


Damn Obama's quick...
 
2012-04-06 05:38:11 PM  

SkinnyHead: rnld: SkinnyHead: They remember how Obama promised to keep unemployment under 8 percent if we passed his stimulus plan.

No I don't. Please find the Obama quote on this.

Sure you do. Don't you remember that stimulus graph the Obama used to sell his stimulus plan? Obama's graph promised us an unemployment rate of 6% by 2012. That's way off.


You just admitted Obama never said what you quoted him as saying. Provide the graph.
 
2012-04-06 05:38:40 PM  
Let's see,
We could elect Democrats who try to help the poor and middle class. Or we could elect Republicans who try to eat the poor and middle class. Tough choice (Hint: no it isn't).
 
2012-04-06 05:39:29 PM  

EWreckedSean: rnld: Why Would I Read the Article: rnld: No I don't. Please find the Obama quote on this.

The paper that predicted that was written by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein. Romer was thereafter shortly hired as the head of Obama's council of economic advisers, and Bernstein went on to become the chief economist and economic policy advisor for Biden.

So yeah, it's pretty safe to say that even if Obama never actually uttered those words himself (and he may have, I dunno for sure), it's pretty obvious that he was pushing the "unemployment under 8% if you pass my stimulus bill" canard.

Bush left office Jan 20th 2009. By Feb '09 the unemployment rate was already 8.1%

Damn Obama's quick...


Yeah, thats it.
 
2012-04-06 05:40:33 PM  

tinyarena: Let's see,
We could elect Democrats who try to help the poor and middle class. Or we could elect Republicans who try to eat the poor and middle class. Tough choice (Hint: no it isn't).


So basically: vote Democratic, because Republicans tank the economy.

Now we can sit and wait for some paid trolls--the only Republican supporters left, really--to try to distract and generally be retarded. That's how it works, right?
 
2012-04-06 05:42:36 PM  
88 million completely out of the workforce. This is the only real number that matters.
 
2012-04-06 05:43:49 PM  

tinyarena: Let's see,
We could elect Democrats who try to help the poor and middle class. Or we could elect Republicans who try to eat the poor and middle class. Tough choice (Hint: no it isn't).


Clearly you hate the rich and just have class envy.

/sarcasm
 
2012-04-06 05:44:02 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: 88 million completely out of the workforce. This is the only real number that matters.


Ya, let's put Grandma to work.
 
2012-04-06 05:44:15 PM  
I'm not especially interested in the monthly numbers - give me a three or six month rolling average to filter out some of the statistical noise. Oh, and don't include any month's figures in your calculations until the revision comes out.
 
2012-04-06 05:45:32 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: 88 million completely out of the workforce. This is the only real number that matters.


Still farking that chicken huh?

How many of those people are retired?
 
2012-04-06 05:46:19 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: 88 million completely out of the workforce. This is the only real number that matters.


Considering there are 311 million people in the US including infants to retired folks, how stupid do you have to be to believe that 88 million people have left the workforce?
 
2012-04-06 05:48:13 PM  

rnld: Considering there are 311 million people in the US including infants to retired folks, how stupid do you have to be to believe that 88 million people have left the workforce?


bigsteve3OOO-level stupid apparantly
 
2012-04-06 05:51:40 PM  
What are the demographic qualifications they use for the "not in the labor force" number? Presumably they have age cutoffs of some sort, right? (That is, they don't include children in that number right? But at what point *do* they start counting people?)
 
2012-04-06 05:56:19 PM  
Sure, Obama took a shrinking economy that was losing jobs, and turned it around in to a growing economy that is adding jobs. And sure, the change in direction in growth and jobs corresponds to exactly when the stimulus package was passed - showing it changed consumer and business confidence.

But it didn't *completely* fix everything yet, and some months things aren't improving as *fast* as predicted. And some people are leaving the work force - most of those are either old people retiring, or young people staying in school longer (which in the long term is good for the economy). So clearly, we should go back to the policies that created the recession in the first place.

Yes, great logic. This is the same reasoning that says if a gun control law doesn't stop 100% of a given illegal activity, its a complete failure and should never have been enacted, because partially solving a problem is worse than doing nothing

Conservatives actually think they're making some kind of valid argument this way, because by showing the other guy isn't 100% right you've somehow not only shown he's 100% wrong, but you've also shown that your own alternative approach is therefore 100% right.

Did any of these people ever take a college freshman rhetoric class? Or if they did, have they just lived too much of the Breitbart lifestyle to remember any of it?
 
2012-04-06 05:56:25 PM  

Guntram Shatterhand: tinyarena: Let's see,
We could elect Democrats who try to help the poor and middle class. Or we could elect Republicans who try to eat the poor and middle class. Tough choice (Hint: no it isn't).

So basically: vote Democratic, because Republicans tank the economy.

Now we can sit and wait for some paid trolls--the only Republican supporters left, really--to try to distract and generally be retarded. That's how it works, right?



I got a free sandwich from Mitt damnit!

I've also paid MORE taxes under Fartbongo!

/might have something to do with the two raises I've recieved since he was elected...

 
2012-04-06 06:00:33 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: 88 million completely out of the workforce. This is the only real number that matters.



www.aceshowbiz.com

"Thank you, but I prefer it my way."
 
2012-04-06 06:01:03 PM  

SkinnyHead: James!: SkinnyHead: To keep up with population growth, the economy needs to add 127,000 jobs every month. If there were only 120,000 jobs added last month, that's not keeping up. That's going backwards.

Good luck putting that on a bumper sticker.

People don't need bumper stickers to know that they're suffering out there. They remember how Obama promised to keep unemployment under 8 percent if we passed his stimulus plan. That didn't happen. And they remember how Obama promised them a summer of recovery. That's been postponed for several years now. People are tired of all this hoping and changing. They're ready for a new president to restore the economy.


Uh....yeah.

As disappointed as I am with obama, I would sooner vote for Jabba the Hutt than Gingrich, santorum, or Romney.
 
2012-04-06 06:02:31 PM  

nyseattitude: I got a free sandwich from Mitt damnit!


That's because as long as women are making sammiches, there will be plenty of sammiches for all!
 
2012-04-06 06:04:48 PM  
Romney really needs to start bring up rhetoric on our nation's debt right now and warning what's going on in Europe is coming our way just like World War I and World War II.
 
2012-04-06 06:05:43 PM  
Exactly what kind of experts are they, again?

The socialist kind, duh.
 
2012-04-06 06:07:20 PM  
Well since my last number did not seem to be important; lets try another. Since the year 2000, over 40,000 factories in America have shuttered their doors. The value of a countries currency is directly related to the value it produces. We, America, produce less value now; and, our currency is worth less. And yes I blame Bush too not just the Butcher of Libya.
 
2012-04-06 06:07:25 PM  

Funk Brothers: Romney really needs to start bring up rhetoric on our nation's debt right now and warning what's going on in Europe is coming our way just like World War I and World War II.


...and so, my friends, I'm saying that electing me will be like WWIII.
 
2012-04-06 06:07:36 PM  

EnviroDude: When it comes to this administration reporting unemployment, who believes anything they say?


Perhaps you would prefer an independent, non-partisan source?

Link (new window, PDF)
 
2012-04-06 06:08:06 PM  
The obvious solution is to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans and for corporations. After that causes a predictable drop in the unemployment rate, we should then cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans and for corporations, followed shortly thereafter by much-needed tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and for corporations.

Am I doing it right?
 
2012-04-06 06:15:33 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: Well since my last number did not seem to be important; lets try another. Since the year 2000, over 40,000 factories in America have shuttered their doors. The value of a countries currency is directly related to the value it produces. We, America, produce less value now; and, our currency is worth less. And yes I blame Bush too not just the Butcher of Libya.


Hey, your last lie didn't work, so let's just try a second, even bigger lie! That's sure to fix your credibility.
 
2012-04-06 06:19:35 PM  
with a record number of people no longer in the labor force, or course the unemployment number goes down.

linky

is it too much to just look at the number of people employed rather than these easily manipulated percentages?
 
2012-04-06 06:22:06 PM  

rnld: Why Would I Read the Article: rnld: No I don't. Please find the Obama quote on this.

The paper that predicted that was written by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein. Romer was thereafter shortly hired as the head of Obama's council of economic advisers, and Bernstein went on to become the chief economist and economic policy advisor for Biden.

So yeah, it's pretty safe to say that even if Obama never actually uttered those words himself (and he may have, I dunno for sure), it's pretty obvious that he was pushing the "unemployment under 8% if you pass my stimulus bill" canard.

Bush left office Jan 20th 2009. By Feb '09 the unemployment rate was already 8.1%


and what you are missing is that 7,000,000 people left the workforce since 0bama took office, so just looking at percentages means absolutely nothing.
 
2012-04-06 06:23:32 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: rnld: Why Would I Read the Article: rnld: No I don't. Please find the Obama quote on this.

The paper that predicted that was written by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein. Romer was thereafter shortly hired as the head of Obama's council of economic advisers, and Bernstein went on to become the chief economist and economic policy advisor for Biden.

So yeah, it's pretty safe to say that even if Obama never actually uttered those words himself (and he may have, I dunno for sure), it's pretty obvious that he was pushing the "unemployment under 8% if you pass my stimulus bill" canard.

Bush left office Jan 20th 2009. By Feb '09 the unemployment rate was already 8.1%

and what you are missing is that 7,000,000 people left the workforce since 0bama took office, so just looking at percentages means absolutely nothing.


We should just work grandma until she dies, right? People are never allowed to retire.

You DO realize that when you retire, you leave the workforce, right?
 
2012-04-06 06:24:38 PM  

The Dog Ate My Homework: The obvious solution is to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans and for corporations. After that causes a predictable drop in the unemployment rate, we should then cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans and for corporations, followed shortly thereafter by much-needed tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and for corporations.

Am I doing it right?


the obvious solution is to continue the retarded democrat immigration policies that have been responsible for creating significantly lower wages and unemployment for actual citizens. amidoingitright?


In the upcoming immigration debate, lawmakers should pay attention to the dismal performance of wages in the United States over the past few decades. The hourly pay for blue-collar manufacturing jobs and nonmanagerial service work -- the kinds of employment that many immigrants pursue -- has fallen 3 percent in real terms since July 2003. As a result, hourly pay is almost exactly the same today as it was in 1973. The median male worker -- half of all male workers earn less than he does and half earn more -- was paid $15.24 an hour in 1973. In 2004, in inflation-adjusted dollars, the man at the center of the job market earned $15.26

"This is an amazingly sobering statistic," said Jared Bernstein, director of the Living Standards and Labor Markets program at the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank. "Over a period when the economy grew by 150 percent, when productivity increased by 80 percent, the typical man's earnings went nowhere."

And, as might be expected, most foreign workers in the U.S. are paid quite poorly. More than half of Mexican immigrants -- 57 percent -- who work in manufacturing, and 60 percent of those who work in agriculture, make less than $300 a week. If these workers are supporting a family of three, they are living below the poverty line, according to a recent survey by the Pew Hispanic Center.

But do these immigrants' low wages undermine the wages of Americans? George J. Borjas, a professor of economics at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, thinks they do. He contends that between 1980 and 2000, legal and illegal immigration reduced the average annual earnings of native-born men by an estimated $1,700, or roughly 4 percent. And among the 10 million or so American-born men without a high school education -- men who are competing for many of the jobs that immigrants seek -- the estimated impact was even greater, reducing wages by 7.4 percent over that time period. According to Borjas's calculations, the presence of additional workers in the job market caused this reduction in earnings, regardless of the immigrants' legal status or whether they were in the country permanently or temporarily.

A 2003 study by economists at the Federal Reserve Banks in Atlanta and Dallas found, "An increase in the fraction of workers in an occupation group who are foreign born tends to lower the wages of natives in blue-collar occupations." In a conclusion that should resonate in today's political debate about legalizing illegal immigrants, these economists noted that immigrants who are in the country longer and who upgrade their legal status -- getting a green card or similar documentation -- have more of a negative impact on low-skilled native workers than do newly arrived immigrants. "This suggests that immigrants become substitutes for natives only as they spend more time in the U.S."

t is true that even Borjas, the prime proponent of a link between immigration and wages, does not claim that migrants are the only force behind wage stagnation over much of the last generation. But the onus is on those who deny any link -- especially business leaders who import workers and tout immigration as a win-win proposition -- to explain why the labor market for low-skilled workers functions differently from any other market. When the supply of most things -- oil and grain, for instance -- increases, the price tends to go down. Why wouldn't the price of low-skilled labor stagnate or decrease when migrants swell the available supply of potential workers?

"We should be clear," said Mark Anderson, former president of the Food and Allied Service Trades Department of the AFL-CIO. "In many of the jobs immigrants compete for, there is not a true shortage of resident workers. Rather, there is a shortage of such workers willing to labor at the wage being offered by the employer."


http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=19e29952-7bba-4306-8b45-81 80 75b0dbd0%40sessionmgr113&vid=1&hid=111&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d %3d#db=ulh&AN=19471174 (new window)
 
2012-04-06 06:28:50 PM  

Mrtraveler01: bigsteve3OOO: 88 million completely out of the workforce. This is the only real number that matters.

Still farking that chicken huh?

How many of those people are retired?


It isn't the total, it is the increment that matters.

Since 0bama took office about 7,000,000 have left the workforce.
I know that you want to believe that that is because many of them cashed in their 401ks and cashed out of the huge equity in their house in order to retire and raise unicorns. I am pretty sure that that is not what happened.

Remember some current retirees die every year too.
 
2012-04-06 06:35:21 PM  
when you make the denominator smaller, the value of your fraction will go up.

them experts weren't expecting obama to mess with the denominator like that.

he's a slick one.
 
2012-04-06 06:35:48 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: tenpoundsofcheese: rnld: Why Would I Read the Article: rnld: No I don't. Please find the Obama quote on this.

The paper that predicted that was written by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein. Romer was thereafter shortly hired as the head of Obama's council of economic advisers, and Bernstein went on to become the chief economist and economic policy advisor for Biden.

So yeah, it's pretty safe to say that even if Obama never actually uttered those words himself (and he may have, I dunno for sure), it's pretty obvious that he was pushing the "unemployment under 8% if you pass my stimulus bill" canard.

Bush left office Jan 20th 2009. By Feb '09 the unemployment rate was already 8.1%

and what you are missing is that 7,000,000 people left the workforce since 0bama took office, so just looking at percentages means absolutely nothing.

We should just work grandma until she dies, right? People are never allowed to retire.
your dishonesty remains predictable. That is not what I said or implied

You DO realize that when you retire, you leave the workforce, right?


You DO realized that when retirees die, they aren't counted anymore too, right?

You think that 7,000,000 people retired in the last 3 years which would be NET of the number of current retirees who died in the last three years?

You really believe that 7M people retire every 3 years? Are you stupid or just dishonest about believing that?

I thought the trend was people retiring a lot later. Oh look, I am right again.
 
2012-04-06 06:39:54 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: Well since my last number did not seem to be important; lets try another. Since the year 2000, over 40,000 factories in America have shuttered their doors. The value of a countries currency is directly related to the value it produces. We, America, produce less value now; and, our currency is worth less. And yes I blame Bush too not just the Butcher of Libya.


www.aceshowbiz.com

"My way?"
 
2012-04-06 06:40:31 PM  

colon_pow: when you make the denominator smaller, the value of your fraction will go up.

them experts weren't expecting obama to mess with the denominator like that.

he's a slick one.


He didn't alter the rules for counting who's in the labor force.

If you flat out say you're not looking for a job, why should you be counted in the labor force?
 
2012-04-06 06:41:11 PM  

colon_pow: when you make the denominator smaller, the value of your fraction will go up.

them experts weren't expecting obama to mess with the denominator like that.

he's a slick one.


There's a penis in your chicken.
 
2012-04-06 06:42:31 PM  
10 thousand baby boomers retire everyday
 
2012-04-06 06:43:00 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: cameroncrazy1984: tenpoundsofcheese: rnld: Why Would I Read the Article: rnld: No I don't. Please find the Obama quote on this.

The paper that predicted that was written by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein. Romer was thereafter shortly hired as the head of Obama's council of economic advisers, and Bernstein went on to become the chief economist and economic policy advisor for Biden.

So yeah, it's pretty safe to say that even if Obama never actually uttered those words himself (and he may have, I dunno for sure), it's pretty obvious that he was pushing the "unemployment under 8% if you pass my stimulus bill" canard.

Bush left office Jan 20th 2009. By Feb '09 the unemployment rate was already 8.1%

and what you are missing is that 7,000,000 people left the workforce since 0bama took office, so just looking at percentages means absolutely nothing.

We should just work grandma until she dies, right? People are never allowed to retire.
your dishonesty remains predictable. That is not what I said or implied

You DO realize that when you retire, you leave the workforce, right?

You DO realized that when retirees die, they aren't counted anymore too, right?

You think that 7,000,000 people retired in the last 3 years which would be NET of the number of current retirees who died in the last three years?

You really believe that 7M people retire every 3 years? Are you stupid or just dishonest about believing that?

I thought the trend was people retiring a lot later. Oh look, I am right again.


10,000 Americans are retiring every day. That's 3.65 million a year.
 
2012-04-06 06:43:27 PM  
crap, i forgot

best part .....forevar
 
2012-04-06 06:50:42 PM  

James!: So the economy ISN'T collapsing?


Oh it is.

But you people aren't thinking long-term enough. The first step in
Obama's plan to destroy this country is be facilitating the recovery we're
now seeing. Then, after his 2nd term, the hidden traps he's been laying the
groundwork for will spring, ushering in a new socialist empire. Goodbye Freedom.

Obama plays the long game, this is pretty obvious by now.
 
2012-04-06 06:51:07 PM  

WHAR Jobs
0
\/
/\
Whar?

 
2012-04-06 06:51:37 PM  

EnviroDude: When it comes to this administration the government reporting unemployment, who believes anything they say?



If you think "your side" doesn't lie to you, you're a gullible fool.
 
2012-04-06 06:51:59 PM  
Maybe I'm the only one but it wouldn't suprise me if there weren't more than a few people leaving the labor pool because they're sick of the BS that companies think they can pull. Ever since the economic downturn started my company became more and more dickish. Unpaid overtime became the rule instead of the exception, the reduction of benefits every year, and policies that made taking vacation days that are part of the compensation package impossible were a non stop trend. I had access to the company's financial data and could see that we never had a loss and other than two quarters during the worst of the downturn, we had steadily increasing profits. When I left we had a record quarter. But treating the employees like dirt was justified by management due to "difficult economic times". Heck, lots of it didn't even have an economic benefit for the company, it was just the bully personality type that is attracted to management taking advantage of the fact that most employees couldn't afford to be without a job. It's a paradise out there right now for jerks.

So I'm out of there and am not planning on getting back into the labor market until things tilt back in favor of the employee. One good thing about not being able to take vacation and working non-stop overtime is that I didn't have a chance to spend money so I ended up with enough savings to say fark you.

/Ok, I can't hold out forever but if the economy isn't great in two years, then there are bigger problems anyway.
 
2012-04-06 06:52:44 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: cameroncrazy1984: tenpoundsofcheese: rnld: Why Would I Read the Article: rnld: No I don't. Please find the Obama quote on this.

The paper that predicted that was written by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein. Romer was thereafter shortly hired as the head of Obama's council of economic advisers, and Bernstein went on to become the chief economist and economic policy advisor for Biden.

So yeah, it's pretty safe to say that even if Obama never actually uttered those words himself (and he may have, I dunno for sure), it's pretty obvious that he was pushing the "unemployment under 8% if you pass my stimulus bill" canard.

Bush left office Jan 20th 2009. By Feb '09 the unemployment rate was already 8.1%

and what you are missing is that 7,000,000 people left the workforce since 0bama took office, so just looking at percentages means absolutely nothing.

We should just work grandma until she dies, right? People are never allowed to retire.
your dishonesty remains predictable. That is not what I said or implied

You DO realize that when you retire, you leave the workforce, right?

You DO realized that when retirees die, they aren't counted anymore too, right?

You think that 7,000,000 people retired in the last 3 years which would be NET of the number of current retirees who died in the last three years?

You really believe that 7M people retire every 3 years? Are you stupid or just dishonest about believing that?

I thought the trend was people retiring a lot later. Oh look, I am right again.


10,000 people retire every day. Over 3.5 million retire every year. Hm. Sounds like that's 10.95 million people! And how many did you say have left the labor force in the last 3 years?
 
2012-04-06 06:52:48 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: bigsteve3OOO: Well since my last number did not seem to be important; lets try another. Since the year 2000, over 40,000 factories in America have shuttered their doors. The value of a countries currency is directly related to the value it produces. We, America, produce less value now; and, our currency is worth less. And yes I blame Bush too not just the Butcher of Libya.

Hey, your last lie didn't work, so let's just try a second, even bigger lie! That's sure to fix your credibility.


LIE?

Link

Link

no it is true. and sad that partisan politics stops real growth. both sides want you poor and slave-like.
 
2012-04-06 06:53:04 PM  

thamike: colon_pow: when you make the denominator smaller, the value of your fraction will go up.

them experts weren't expecting obama to mess with the denominator like that.

he's a slick one.

There's a penis in your chicken.


i thought it tasted funny...
 
2012-04-06 06:54:31 PM  
There are lies, damn lies and statistical margins of error...

TODAY, the Bureau of Labour Statistics released its March employment report. There is a 90% chance that employment rose by between 20,000 and 220,000 jobs. The change in the number of unemployed from February to March was probably between (roughly) -400,000 and 150,000, and there's a good chance that the unemployment rate is between 8.1% and 8.5%. Reported changes for important subsectors are too small relative to the margin of error to be worth discussing.
 
2012-04-06 06:54:49 PM  
relcec:

Hi relcec, I like your post. Let me ask you a non-related question, but one that keeps coming to my mind. It involves the labor unions and off-shoring.

In my limited and simplistic analysis the process which lead to the collapse of American manufacturing goes something like this: Factories exploited laborers. The laborers formed unions and got labor laws passed. Factories figured they could manufacture cheaper overseas and so they left the US. I know, overly simplistic but essentially what happened.

My question is, how did the labor unions get out maneuvered? The off shoring happened right in front of them. They had the connections in government to do something about it. They for sure knew that unionization was hurting the bottom like of these corporations and that the corporations would react. Why weren't fierce laws passed to prevent the off-shoring? It's like they won the first battle and then,,,what happened?

I'm sure I'm missing something obvious but, if I were the labor unions, I would have realized there would be a reaction and fought to keep the jobs in the US. Otherwise, what's the point of protecting worker's rights when the entire factory can just up and leave?
 
2012-04-06 06:55:27 PM  

James!: FlashHarry: James!: So the economy ISN'T collapsing?

despite republicans' best efforts, no.

What I'm seeing here is a shaky but consistent recovery. I don't really think we want to change horses in midstream.


If democrats were better at talking points, they would stick with a line like this.
 
2012-04-06 06:57:37 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: cameroncrazy1984: bigsteve3OOO: Well since my last number did not seem to be important; lets try another. Since the year 2000, over 40,000 factories in America have shuttered their doors. The value of a countries currency is directly related to the value it produces. We, America, produce less value now; and, our currency is worth less. And yes I blame Bush too not just the Butcher of Libya.

Hey, your last lie didn't work, so let's just try a second, even bigger lie! That's sure to fix your credibility.

LIE?

Link

Link

no it is true. and sad that partisan politics stops real growth. both sides want you poor and slave-like.


Yes, yes, both sides are bad and everyone leaving the workforce is unemployed, not retired.

Blah blah blah.

Continue to lie and believe the economy is not improving. We will merely leave you in the dustbin of history.
 
Displayed 50 of 240 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report