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)   Weak U.S. job growth report suggests the country is still constipated but still not in the sh*tter   (cnbc.com) divider line 34
    More: Interesting, U.S., sovereign debt crisis, Diane Swonk  
•       •       •

294 clicks; posted to Business » on 01 Jun 2012 at 8:59 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2012-06-01 09:05:59 AM
Unemployment went up from 8.1% to 8.2%

It's time to get the failure in the White House out!
 
2012-06-01 09:13:09 AM
nasdaq futures are down 45 this morning. expect a bloodbath on wall st. today.

as for the jobs report. well, when you slash govt. spending, you're going to slow a recovery. it happened in 1937. it's happening now. this is to be expected. at least we're not sliding back into recession like they are in spain and the UK, where austerity has killed their recoveries.
 
2012-06-01 09:20:52 AM
Sounds like we need to listen to some Screamin' Jay Hawkins: Constipation Blues
 
2012-06-01 09:27:39 AM
April jobs numbers revised downward from +115K to +77K.

May jobs numbers initially pegged at +69K (versus +155K expected).
 
2012-06-01 09:28:32 AM
... and Congress debates another anti-abortion bill.

Didn't Republicans promise a laser focus on the economy when they took control of the House of Representatives in 2010?

Boner is a complete disaster.
 
2012-06-01 09:35:43 AM
With all this liquidity, you wouldn't think things could get so backed up. Capital should just be spraying everywhere.
 
2012-06-01 09:35:45 AM

Muta: Didn't Republicans promise a laser focus on the economy when they took control of the House of Representatives in 2010?


republicans are liars.

besides, if they had actually tried to improve the economy (instead of the opposite, which is what they've succeeded in doing), obama's approval would be higher. and since they put party way before country, this was an impossibility.
 
2012-06-01 09:37:36 AM

TIKIMAN87: Unemployment went up from 8.1% to 8.2%

It's time to get the failure in the White House out!


Don't worry, unemployment will drop to "praise Obama" levels when extended benefits run out for a bunch of people and all will be well again.
 
2012-06-01 09:38:52 AM

Nabb1: Sounds like we need to listen to some Screamin' Jay Hawkins: Constipation Blues


Or some:

Constipated Duck

by Jeff Beck!
 
2012-06-01 09:46:32 AM

Giltric: when extended benefits run out


So on the one hand, unemployment benefits are a waste of money and the Republicans drag their heels every time the idea of extending them comes up. Extended benefits are just a hammock for lazy and shiftless people, so we should get rid of them to get people to work. On the other, now that things have improved enough that the final phases of unemployment are starting to disappear in some states, it should be a reason to celebrate. Nope. More biatching and moaning about how some people are "dropping off the rolls".
 
2012-06-01 10:00:31 AM
Stability is all you can ask for in the long run. Continued growth is unsustainable.
 
2012-06-01 10:01:55 AM

FlashHarry: nasdaq futures are down 45 this morning. expect a bloodbath on wall st. today.

as for the jobs report. well, when you slash govt. spending, you're going to slow a recovery. it happened in 1937. it's happening now. this is to be expected. at least we're not sliding back into recession like they are in spain and the UK, where austerity has killed their recoveries.


Yeah. Look at it this way. All of the private sector jobs lost since obama took office have been filled. The jobs lost that haven't been filled are government jobs, mostly state and local positions. In their quest to either look good or to justify tax cuts, mostly gop governors and legislatures have cut jobs.

Without those jobs, one the states are pay unemployment benefits or gave payouts. Two, that is reduced income and money that is not being spent locally. That dropoff prevents private sector businesses from hiring more people, which then snowballs into other local businesses not hiring people, which snowballs into lower tax receipts for towns, states, and the federal government.
 
2012-06-01 10:02:34 AM
Macro Econ 101:
Even if private business is driving a good bit of a post-recession recovery (which they are), some consistent level of government spending is required to push the recovery to that next level where it can be truly self sustaining over the long term.

Slashing all spending on all levels to near 0 will only stall out the recovery, leading to further reductions in employment and spending power, which then restarts a cycle of doom.
 
2012-06-01 10:24:33 AM

Giltric: Don't worry, unemployment will drop to "praise Obama" levels when extended benefits run out for a bunch of people and all will be well again.


notthisshiatagain.jpg

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which publishes the damn report:

Where do the statistics come from?

Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment, the Government uses the number of persons filing claims for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under State or Federal Government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed...

Because unemployment insurance records relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration project...

Because these interviews are the basic source of data for total unemployment, information must be factual and correct. Respondents are never asked specifically if they are unemployed, nor are they given an opportunity to decide their own labor force status. Unless they already know how the Government defines unemployment, many of them may not be sure of their actual classification when the interview is completed.

Similarly, interviewers do not decide the respondents' labor force classification. They simply ask the questions in the prescribed way and record the answers. Based on information collected in the survey and definitions programmed into the computer, individuals are then classified as employed, unemployed, or not in the labor force...

Who is counted as unemployed?

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. Actively looking for work may consist of any of the following activities:

Contacting:
An employer directly or having a job interview
A public or private employment agency
Friends or relatives
A school or university employment center
Sending out resumes or filling out applications
Placing or answering advertisements
Checking union or professional registers
Some other means of active job search

Passive methods of job search do not have the potential to result in a job offer and therefore do not qualify as active job search methods. Examples of passive methods include attending a job training program or course, or merely reading about job openings that are posted in newspapers or on the Internet.

Workers expecting to be recalled from temporary layoff are counted as unemployed, whether or not they have engaged in a specific jobseeking activity. In all other cases, the individual must have been engaged in at least one active job search activity in the 4 weeks preceding the interview and be available for work (except for temporary illness).
 
2012-06-01 10:53:18 AM

Arkanaut: notthisshiatagain.jpg

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which publishes the damn report:


What an accurate accounting of the number of unemployed.

On a side note....you used to have to list at least 3 or 4 places you applied to in order to collect unemployment benefits.....now all you have to do is press 1 for yes, and 2 for no.

Probably as accurate as tallying the unemployed.
 
2012-06-01 11:51:48 AM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Macro Econ 101:
Even if private business is driving a good bit of a post-recession recovery (which they are), some consistent level of government spending is required to push the recovery to that next level where it can be truly self sustaining over the long term.

Slashing all spending on all levels to near 0 will only stall out the recovery, leading to further reductions in employment and spending power, which then restarts a cycle of doom.


You know what's rich? Eric Cantor went on TV and called this job growth "pathetic."
 
2012-06-01 11:53:19 AM

Giltric: Arkanaut: notthisshiatagain.jpg

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which publishes the damn report:

What an accurate accounting of the number of unemployed.

On a side note....you used to have to list at least 3 or 4 places you applied to in order to collect unemployment benefits.....now all you have to do is press 1 for yes, and 2 for no.

Probably as accurate as tallying the unemployed.
I don't know what the fark I'm talking about


Why is it that modern conservatives INSIST on being stupid, or lying when stupid won't suffice
 
2012-06-01 12:01:54 PM
If we elect Romney, we can go back to "deficits don't matter" and get some government stimulus.
 
2012-06-01 12:04:06 PM

ghare: Why is it that modern conservatives INSIST on being stupid, or lying when stupid won't suffice


Don't fall into that trap of thinking they are as stupid as they sound. They are actually smart enough to know how to appeal to their base.

Well, some of them anyway.
 
2012-06-01 12:21:21 PM

rumpelstiltskin: If we elect Romney, we can go back to "deficits don't matter" and get some government stimulus.


Only for the DoD and their contractors.
 
2012-06-01 12:34:20 PM

Muta: Didn't Republicans promise a laser focus on the economy when they took control of the House of Representatives in 2010?

Boner is a complete disaster.


The birds from the 2010 disaster election have came to roost.
Don't forget, Boehner and the boys have threatened another debt limit fight.
If this country rewards then with more power in this coming fall, we have to be honest and realize we deserve all the economic suffering we're going to receive from the Republicans.
The rich will be ok though, don't worry about them.
 
2012-06-01 12:38:48 PM

rumpelstiltskin: If we elect Romney, we can go back to "deficits don't matter" and get some government stimulus.


they'll rename it "Freedom Capital," though.
 
2012-06-01 01:03:06 PM

FishyFred: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Macro Econ 101:
Even if private business is driving a good bit of a post-recession recovery (which they are), some consistent level of government spending is required to push the recovery to that next level where it can be truly self sustaining over the long term.

Slashing all spending on all levels to near 0 will only stall out the recovery, leading to further reductions in employment and spending power, which then restarts a cycle of doom.

You know what's rich? Eric Cantor went on TV and called this job growth "pathetic."


Um, not keeping up with population growth is pathetic. Having fewer total jobs today than in January 2009 is pathetic.

Stalling out this "recovery" might not be such a bad thing, if we can replace it with something that looks more like, you know, actual recovery. With jobs and money and such.
 
2012-06-01 01:26:33 PM
img.photobucket.com

If only there was some way to create jobs without an act of Congress...hmmmmmm....
 
2012-06-01 01:30:13 PM

Kurmudgeon: If this country rewards then with more power in this coming fall, we have to be honest and realize we deserve all the economic suffering we're going to receive from the Republicans.


That's the main reason why I don't feel too sympathetic about this report. America keeps bringing its own hardship upon itself. I feel terrible for certain individuals who are trying their best, but the culture itself doesn't have any sort of mindset that warrants sympathy.
 
2012-06-01 01:36:29 PM

Lost Thought 00: Stability is all you can ask for in the long run. Continued growth is unsustainable.


I am learning to agree. But how do we adjust to this?

Deftoons: [img.photobucket.com image 605x412]

If only there was some way to create jobs without an act of Congress...hmmmmmm....


Go on
 
2012-06-01 02:12:46 PM

Garet Garrett: FishyFred: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Macro Econ 101:
Even if private business is driving a good bit of a post-recession recovery (which they are), some consistent level of government spending is required to push the recovery to that next level where it can be truly self sustaining over the long term.

Slashing all spending on all levels to near 0 will only stall out the recovery, leading to further reductions in employment and spending power, which then restarts a cycle of doom.

You know what's rich? Eric Cantor went on TV and called this job growth "pathetic."

Um, not keeping up with population growth is pathetic. Having fewer total jobs today than in January 2009 is pathetic.

Stalling out this "recovery" might not be such a bad thing, if we can replace it with something that looks more like, you know, actual recovery. With jobs and money and such.


I didn't say it wasn't pathetic. I said it's rich that Cantor said that, since it's mainly the fault of Republicans in Congress that there hasn't been more spending on the sorts of projects that would create jobs.
 
2012-06-01 02:26:52 PM

Deftoons: [img.photobucket.com image 605x412]

If only there was some way to create jobs without an act of Congress...hmmmmmm....


it worked from 1933 to about 1970.
 
2012-06-01 02:49:43 PM

ghare: Giltric: Arkanaut: notthisshiatagain.jpg

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which publishes the damn report:

What an accurate accounting of the number of unemployed.

On a side note....you used to have to list at least 3 or 4 places you applied to in order to collect unemployment benefits.....now all you have to do is press 1 for yes, and 2 for no.

Probably as accurate as tallying the unemployed. I don't know what the fark I'm talking about

Why is it that modern conservatives INSIST on being stupid, or lying when stupid won't suffice


Obama is a conservative........maybe you are trying to villify some political party...do tell.

But i'll bite....which part is the lie?
 
2012-06-01 03:42:16 PM
Romney is quoted as saying "This is devistating news. " Actually I'm sure he is jumping for joy over this report.
 
2012-06-01 04:04:37 PM

Giltric: TIKIMAN87: Unemployment went up from 8.1% to 8.2%

It's time to get the failure in the White House out!

Don't worry, unemployment will drop to "praise Obama" levels when extended benefits run out for a bunch of people and all will be well again.


Like I've been saying for years; we can reduce the number of people with cancer if we just let them die or killed them. See, the problem isn't the cancer. It's the people with cancer and if we get rid of them, the problem is solved.

Unemployment can be dealt with the same, and removing the unemployed from the rolls is a start. Focus on the symptoms.
 
2012-06-01 04:23:29 PM

FishyFred: I said it's rich that Cantor said that, since it's mainly the fault of Republicans in Congress that there hasn't been more spending on the sorts of projects that would create jobs


THis is where I disagree. I'd place more blame on the Republicans in the state governments.
 
2012-06-01 10:39:35 PM

Garet Garrett: FishyFred: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Macro Econ 101:
Even if private business is driving a good bit of a post-recession recovery (which they are), some consistent level of government spending is required to push the recovery to that next level where it can be truly self sustaining over the long term.

Slashing all spending on all levels to near 0 will only stall out the recovery, leading to further reductions in employment and spending power, which then restarts a cycle of doom.

You know what's rich? Eric Cantor went on TV and called this job growth "pathetic."

Um, not keeping up with population growth is pathetic. Having fewer total jobs today than in January 2009 is pathetic.

Stalling out this "recovery" might not be such a bad thing, if we can replace it with something that looks more like, you know, actual recovery. With jobs and money and such.


My fear of Romney getting elected is that his only idea for improving the economy is to give billionaires and corporations more tax cuts and pray they use it to create jobs. Corporations are already sitting on huge piles of cash and waiting for the economy to improve. If they take that tax cut, toss it on the pile and continue to wait, all we've accomplished is to make the deficit worse.
 
2012-06-03 11:43:14 PM

Altitude5280: Romney is quoted as saying "This is devistating news. " Actually I'm sure he is jumping for joy over this report.


Oh he is, unless the job loss figures include staples and the sports authority.
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report