Gallup: Unemployment drops down to 8.1%, lowest level yet.

The unemployment rate is 8.1%, not 8.5%. It hasn't been 8.5% for some time now.

 

What was it when Reagan was in office at this point? About 18% or so?

LOL -- that's a new one. How does inflation offset unemployment improvement?

 

Sorry I don't spend enough of my life on here to suit you. I've provided all links requested.

 

How so? Gallup has been cited several times by conservatives on this board as a reliable source for unemployment data.

Conservatives are great at making baseless, unsupported accustations. But when you ask for specifics, they disappear.

 

How does Gallup cook the books?

Several conservatives have cited gallup's unemployment rate as reliable.

But as usually, to conservatives, it seems data is only reliable when it shows a weaker economy. When the exact same source shows improvement, its "cooked"!

Putting aside the hypocrisy and illogicalness of their position, it does make it easy to make arguments when you can simply change your positions all the time.

 

UE was 4% when he came in and almost 8% when he left.

That's something to brag about, all right.

 

Funny, numerous conservative "experts" here say Obama is completely responsible.

 

Just so. And that .1% at a time has seen a Gallup unemployment rate drop from 11.3% to 8.1%

Which you know, as you have cited Gallup's unemployment rate several times in the past.

 

I think one would have to be out of touch to believe that having the government do something would be cheaper than having anything or anyone else do it. It is easier to "clarify" things after you have what you want than to do it while you are trying to get it. That's the political way.

This whole issue has been screwed up for politcal purposes. The capital gains tax rates apply to everyone, not just the rich. Those who invest, own 401K plans etc benefit just like rich people do. If the idea is to get rid of capital gains taxes, then do that. But don't criticize people who use it legally as it was intended. This is partisanship getting a leg up on common sense.

You are certainly correct there. Those with low incomes that don't pay taxes don't pay them because they are greedy. They don't pay them because the law says they don't have to.

 

Don't follow how your opinion is relevant to the post.

The special low privileged 15% investment tax rate applies to investment income. Only those wealthy enough to have significant investments that generate their income significantly benefit from the special low privileged 15% rate.

I agree they are screwed up for political purposes. We've elected politicians whose goal has been to make the rich richer at the expense of the other classes.

And they exceeded beyond anyone's imagination. The growth in wealth and income of an entire generation has been all taken by the a small percentage of the richest.

 

Don't follow how your opinion is relevant to the post.

The special low privileged 15% investment tax rate applies to investment income. Only those wealthy enough to have significant investments that generate their income significantly benefit from the special low privileged 15% rate.

I agree they are screwed up for political purposes. We've elected politicians whose goal has been to make the rich richer at the expense of the other classes.

And they exceeded beyond anyone's imagination. The growth in wealth and income of an entire generation has been all taken by the a small percentage of the richest.

 

When Obama took office, the economy was tanking at a -9% real rate, losing 700,000+ jobs a month, unemployment was skyrocketing upward, and the stock markets were crashing in the worst recession in 80 years. The housing market was destroyed and the economy was headed straight for a depression.

But now the economy has been growing steadily for more than two years, the private sector has created jobs every month for more almost two years, stock markets are up almost 100% from their recession lows, and the [BLS] unemployment rate has fallen from above 10% to 8.2%, and over 4 million private sector jobs have been added since Jan 2010.

Only those invested in failure for political purposes could claim Obama's policies have kept unemployment high and jobs low.

 

Absolute nonsense.

 

No kidding? Please tell us when it was Gallup became part of the Govt.

 

Upon what basis do you assert the Gallup's unemployment number is the U3 number?

In fact it is not. Gallup's unemployment numbers, which has been cited by conservatives here as a reliable indicator of unemployment, is usually different than the U3 number, sometimes significantly so, since they measure different things with different criteria.

 

How does one compare 10.1% unemployment with 8.1% unemployment and come out with the latter is not better?

 

When did Gallup become part of the administration?

 

As horrible a job as I believe Obama is doing - I think that every non-proven 'fact' put forth against him by known racists on this thread should be taken with a gigantic grain of salt.

As pathetic a job as Obama is doing - anyone that thinks that GWB did much better is ignorant in the extremis.


Both parties are horrific for America and until the masses get this through their INCREDIBLY thick heads...America is just going to get worse and worse.

That so many of you actually think either party gives a rodent's buttocks about your welfare is borderline incredible, in my opinion.

What did you all take in school - Trained Minion 101?

 

It's really quite simple...and sometimes I fear the realization of what you've stated can lead to burnout on politcal disscussion forums.

The majority party or current administration, will always take credit for the good, and blame the bad on previous administrations, or current minority legislators.

The minority party, will always try to take credit for the good away from the majority and the current administration, and blame the bad on the current administration, or current majority legislators.

This priciple applies in 99% of circumstances in Washington, and poltical campaigns. Of course there is the 1% of the time where staged bipartisan cooperation gets brownie points for certain rouge types.

The foolish notion that one side is worse than the other...is what keeps Fox and MSNBC in business...and the part of our electorate that buys that crap, remain much stupider than Americans need to be if we expect to compete globally.

 

Think about the misery index, and you'll realize it's a simplistic measure, and thus a crock.

A 1% increase in inflation does not produce the same amount of misery as a 1% increase in unemployment -- yet the misery index counts them the same.

According to Wikipedia, a 2001 study found that the tradeoff should be more like 1.7% inflation equal 1% unemployment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_(economics)

Further, the absolute rate of inflation is less important than the rate of inflation relative to wage growth. Workers are better off with inflation at 10% and wage growth at 15% than you are with inflation at 2% and wage growth at 1%. (That's not absolutely true, of course. If you have a lot assets relative to your income, then inflation can be a bigger factor than wages. And for someone on a fixed income, inflation is clearly the bigger enemy. But in general, if median income growth outstrips inflation, you're doing better regardless of the nominal rate of inflation).

And which unemployment measure should we use? The base U3 or some broader measure? After all, aren't underemployed and discouraged workers unhappy, by definition?

There might be some sort of valid index that could be drawn using unemployment and inflation. But the misery index isn't it.

 

'More Americans than forecast filed claims for jobless benefits and sales of previously owned homes unexpectedly dropped, indicating the almost three-year-old economic expansion may be moderating.'

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...projected-filed-jobless-claims-last-week.html

 

I teach minionhood.

On a more serious note, the center is gone. There is only left and right. Whichever side you choose you will end up in a coalition wth some unsavory characters. One makes his choice and hopes for the best. Put another way, "you pays your money and you takes your chances."

 

It's the nature of politics, period. It's not a uniquely American phenomenon by any means. Politicians must, in order to retain and increase power, blame someone else for failure and gain as much credit as possible for success.

 

Why we do not rely on Gallup for actual unemployment numbers...

 

We bottomed out in 2008 and the growth we had in 2009-present wasn't in anyway effected by the two trillion dollars of government spending and tax cuts. In reality the artificial suppression of interest rates which reduced income to tens of millions of retirees has adversely affected our economic recovery more than the TARP spending to bailout millionaires, Wall Street and that failed related to the auto industry (GM and Chrysler still went bankrupt) or the Stimulus which lined the pockets of millionaire constrution company owners that build our "infrastructure" projects. The Stimulus spending did extend some state government jobs for almost a year but then those individuals ended up joining the unemployment lines extended the high unemployment rates longer than what would have happened otherwise.

All of the federal spending and tax cuts have resulted in nothing more than an increase in the national debt to the point were we face future federal bankruptcy if interest rates return the the levels of the early 1980's. The federal government will not have the money to even pay the interest on the national debt if that happens and that will cause the federal government to declare bankruptcy or the inflate the money supply by so much that it will destroy every middle class American's personal assets to the point that they become virtually worthless.