September Jos Reports (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 28, 2024, 06:11:51 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  September Jos Reports (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: September Jos Reports  (Read 2878 times)
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


« on: October 08, 2004, 12:14:22 PM »

They are in and the great USA has 96000 additional non-farm jobs for the month of September.  Walling about 50000 short of the 148000 projected estimate.  Job creation for August was lowered from 144000 down to 128000.

And I know your going to say that it was the Hurricanes but the Labor Department says that they had a minimum effect.   So it is official Bush is the second President in the Histroy of the USA to have a net loss of jobs, 821,000 down.

I would really love to see that nifty grafic that you had on job creation vorlon.  The final adjustment and see if Bush is above or below the re-election line.

Unemployment is still very low however 5.4% which is somewhat odd because job creation isn't keeping up with population growth.  If this doesn't make it completely clear to everyone that the employment rate doesn't reflect many people that are out of work and are looking for work I don't know what will.
Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2004, 12:32:54 PM »

The Population is growing.   We aren't in europe we aren't even close to that demographic model more people are entering into the workplace (or trying to) than are leaving it.  96000 doesn't keep up with the monthly increase of people that are eligible to work. 

And I Understand that you like to keep a tidy forum Dave but you moving around topics is infuriating.  The Job reports were always in the US Presidential Campaign forum every month that Bush was doing good and you move this one.  I know I'm paranoid but sometimes it seems like you move certain discussions to take them off the table.
Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2004, 01:47:32 PM »

This supports some of your claims but shows that the crunch shouldn't happen until 2012.


http://www.microsoft.com/enable/aging/demographics.aspx



http://www.nowcc.org/issues/report.html

This is interesting too.   But however you spin it  96000 is dismal.

Year         Population           Difference     Av. Inc/Month
1930       122,775,046
1940       131,669,275      8,894,229        74,118
1950       151,330,000    19,660,725      163,839 (retiring)
1960       179,322,000    27,992,000      233,266
1970       203,302,031    23,970,031      199,750
1980       226,545,805    23,243,774      193,698 (entering)
1990       248,765,170    22,219,365      185,161    
2000       267,636,061    18,870,891      157,257

So the boom was definately a big increase but I think more women in Gen X are entering into the workplace than then and the average retirement age is being pused up to 65 which means that it is still those born between 1940 and 1950 that are retiring and that decade had a montly increase of 30000 less than the people that are currently entering into employment.  I'm not saying it won't become a problem but I really don't think that  retirement is a good excuse for the lack of job creation.
Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2004, 01:50:21 PM »

NO John Ford e-bay is not a major employer.  I think the unemployment rate does not reflect the reality of unemployment in this country because it does not include many people that are unemployed that are looking for work.  I am unemployed but I'm not collecting unemployment benefits.  Plenty of people that have been looking for work are no longer counted and many people that would have entered the market are waiting.
Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2004, 07:04:34 PM »

I specifically did mention the Hurricanes and the Department of Labor said that they did not have an effect on the low number of jobs that were created.

And I used E-bay as an example because that is the Job that Cheney used in a speech to explain why he thought the job creation numbers were inaccurate.

You guys are going to be so much happier when you no longer have to apologize and excuse everything away for the President.  Sometimes I think that Bush and the neo-cons should keep control of the house and senate just so that you see, really with out an excuse how their economic plan is hurting the country.  But lo I can not because I LOVE this country and I don't want it to suffer under this regime any longer.

The only people that I know, personally, that are voting for Bush at this points are the ultra-left wackjobs that want to see the policies of Bush get more militant and that the tree of liberty can get fertilized.
Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2004, 05:26:39 PM »



I thought some of the apologists might like this one.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.035 seconds with 12 queries.