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.

(Slate)   The Bureau of Labor Statistics finds an extra 386,000 jobs under its seat cushions   ( slate.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy, Bureau of Labor Statistics  
•       •       •

6468 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Sep 2012 at 9:20 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-09-27 09:42:29 PM  
2 votes:
25.media.tumblr.comView Full Size
2012-09-27 07:56:54 PM  
2 votes:

EnviroDude: Types nice, but that is not correct. Obama is down a million or so jobs. Not including the 359,000 that filed for unemployment this past week.


Kindly justify this statement, thanks.

Also, now Obama is officially a Job Creator, how many jobs have the GOP created? President Clinton?

washingtonpost.comView Full Size
2012-09-28 12:00:22 PM  
1 vote:

bestie1: Do you need more explanation? Ok I see: 1996 + 16 = 2012. So more people were born in 1996 than were born in 1945, 1946 or 1947. In fact all the years of the baby boom had the same number or less people born than are born now. So even though the boomers are retiring there are just as many or more people eligible to enter the workforce.

As far as charts going to 2050. All my sources are there are BLS and they included these things called "projections". Ask an adult to explain that to you. I would but I need to go to sleep.


The problem with the baby boom was there was a huge swell in the birth rate and it was followed by a huge dip in the birth rate right after. The way social security works is that the next people help pay into the system for the people before them. When the baby boomers retire, the next two generations aren't as big as they are, so it creates a problem where they have a harder time paying for the bigger population group. The populations of today were increasing more steadily, so that problem isn't going to happen again because it's all relatively even. The actual number of people born is irrelevant, it's the number of people relative to the next generations.
2012-09-28 12:04:12 AM  
1 vote:

Atomic Spunk: bestie1 simply posted a graph that showed that the employment situation is bleak,


It's coming to me now. Republican scum post "labor participation rates" decreasing, because people will misinterpret it to think it means that the economy is worsening, even though it just means an aging population is retiring.

Take note everyone.
2012-09-27 11:48:43 PM  
1 vote:

fanbladesaresharp: So when he wins, is he going to pull back on that $14 TRILLION debt his guys OK'd?


Jesus you're an ignorant moron.

First off, lying sack of shat, the debt increased 6 trillion, and that's mostly from unchanged Bush policies.

bridgeproject.comView Full Size
2012-09-27 10:40:59 PM  
1 vote:

bestie1: Mrtraveler01: bestie1: [data.bls.gov image 600x300]
Civilian workforce participation rate. Kind of hard to argue with.
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000/

It's been trending downward since 2001, ergo it's all Fartbama's fault.

It's not even worth arguing this. Any reasonable person can read that graph.


I am reading that graph, the trend started going downward in 2001 when the baby boomers started retiring, the slope increased during the fallout from the bubble bursting in 2008 and now it's evened back out again and continues the same downward trend that it started under Bush.

Wait, are you telling me that the trend should be going upward? That's just stupid and shows how little you know about statistics and demographics.
2012-09-27 10:39:20 PM  
1 vote:
Here is how you spin this:

Republican: THEY ARE COOKING THE BOOKS!
Democrat: See! the Obama recovery is working!

In other words, it depends who is in the WH, and which "side" you are on, as to how you
feel about this so called statistic. I'm about to the point of thinking BOTH political parties
could care less about what happens in flyover country. They've got theirs and that is all
they care about.
2012-09-27 10:31:56 PM  
1 vote:

Hobodeluxe: I submitted this with the same headline earlier :/

go Obama. grats on the 7.9% unemployment despite all the GOP austerity measures


What farking austerity? Trillion dollar deficits? Record spending levels? What farking austerity? Just because Krugman says that word while you are sucking his dick doesn't mean the US is even close to austerity measures.
2012-09-27 10:31:25 PM  
1 vote:

MyRandomName: meat0918: FTFA:

More Americans are employed today than were when he took office.

Once more, with feeling

More Americans are employed today than were when he took office.

One. More. Time.

More Americans are employed today than were when he took office.

Thank god the population hasn't increased at all since he took office.


3 year olds need jobs too!
2012-09-27 10:26:33 PM  
1 vote:
ARE YOU BETTER OFF?!
2012-09-27 10:16:12 PM  
1 vote:
I'm surprised. I'd figure they'd wait till next month to gin up the numbers so he'd have a talking point.
2012-09-27 10:13:12 PM  
1 vote:

FlashHarry: i wonder how he'll spin this.


He'll say something like: Obama was lying to you about the jobs numbers all year so he is lying to you now.
2012-09-27 09:44:01 PM  
1 vote:
surprise!!

I bet they find even more in October and right before the Election...

and then lose them again in December.
2012-09-27 09:34:06 PM  
1 vote:
Well someone has got to operate those fema death camps and death panels.
2012-09-27 09:22:48 PM  
1 vote:
*cough* BulLshiat *cough*
2012-09-27 07:14:51 PM  
1 vote:

meat0918: FTFA:

More Americans are employed today than were when he took office.

Once more, with feeling

More Americans are employed today than were when he took office.

One. More. Time.

More Americans are employed today than were when he took office.


Types nice, but that is not correct. Obama is down a million or so jobs. Not including the 359,000 that filed for unemployment this past week.
2012-09-27 06:19:09 PM  
1 vote:
"how can Mitt Romney be losing with the economy doing so poorly?"

Because the Romney campaign has done everything they can to get voters to believe that no matter how bad things might be now, he and Ryan would be able to find innumerable ways to make it worse.
2012-09-27 04:16:24 PM  
1 vote:
awww, poor romney. i wonder how he'll spin this.
 
Displayed 18 of 18 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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