Record 95,102,000 Americans Not in Labor Force;

Discussion in 'Labor & Employment' started by sawyer, Jan 6, 2017.

  1. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your articles are based on data several years old, when the economy was still recovering and growth was suppressed with Republican austerity.

    Since then millions of jobs have been added, but the boomers are retiring faster.

    This is of course nothing new.. We've known this was coming for decades.

    But how exactly is that baby boom Obama's fault? That is the question.
     
  2. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Prove the trend has not continued
     
  3. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh not this nonsense again. Notice how your cherry picked number leaves out the Democrat HUGE 9% and 18% spending increases 2008 and 2009 and then you list all government employment federal state county city distirct not just federal employment over which a president wouwould actually have some input.

    This garbage wwas long ago refuted.
     
  4. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Lets see you rant about austerity then credit Obama with the deficit reduction that resulted. You rant about supply side when it was trickle up that you suppoerted that failed to produce a strong recovery.
     
  5. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And what was the occasion at which he made that statement?
    To whom was he specicifally speaking to?

    And post his entire statement in full context.
     
  6. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The austerity cuts which lowered the deficit which you seem to have opposed didn't happen until what 4 years after the recession ended and you blame it for Obama's failed policies to get us into a full and strong recovery. How laughable.
     
  7. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    51,205
    Likes Received:
    37,552
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Numbers are numbers
    2008 our workforce was a tad over 146 million with a little over 79 million not in the workforce.

    2017 our workforce is currently a bit over 152 million with a little over 95 million not in the workforce.

    Now if you honestly believe that OBarry pissing away 800 billion on nothing, actually saved those jobs, your just kidding yourself! What folks like you don't understand is OBarry propped up the To big to fail corps! The U.S. and it's economy would have self corrected, all he did was ride the coattails of a country and a people that would have gone on trading, buying, producing and selling goods while they bulldozed the bodies of the mega rich that would have honestly been the only losers.

    You give it some thought, OBarry denied you corporate hating liberals your day in the sun! If the young and stupid OBarry had ignored the Old Wise Politicians and called their hand on the doomsday lie you all would have had your day in the sun and the rich cats would have done the thirty story swan dive ;) And the littles guys like you and I would have gone on like nothing ever happened!
     
  8. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    He didn't, he's blaming him for the Worst Recovery since the Great Depression which it has been.

    So which is it Obama is a great President cause look how he cut the deficit or he was a lousy President because the Republicans cut the deficit?
     
  9. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes two years after the Democrats took control of the Congress and started instituting Democrat policy and lack thereof.

    Why do you keep pretending President's singularly control the government, the budget and the economy?
     
  10. Penrod

    Penrod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2015
    Messages:
    12,507
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Where does he say he believes it. Hey did Obama believe you could keep your Dr ?

    We already had a fool for the last 8 years. One more wont hurt


    PS
    Again I didnt vote for him so dont blame me
     
  11. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You mean other than the fact that they are his own words, and he says they are "real numbers"?

    - - - Updated - - -

    See my post.

    - - - Updated - - -


    The truth is that the nearly 18 percent spike in spending in fiscal 2009 — for which the president is sometimes blamed entirely — was mostly due to appropriations and policies that were already in place when Obama took office. ... Since pictures can convey information more efficiently than words, we’ll sum up the official spending figures in this chart. It also reflects our finding that Obama increased fiscal 2009 spending by at most $203 billion, accounting for well under half the huge increase that year. ... So by our calculations, Obama can fairly be assigned responsibility for — at most — 5.8 percent of the $3.5 trillion that the federal government actually spent in fiscal 2009, which was 17.9 percent higher than fiscal 2008.

    http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/

    When Obama took the oath of office, the $789 billion bank bailout had already been approved. Federal spending on unemployment benefits, food stamps and Medicare was already surging to meet the dire unemployment crisis that was well underway. See the CBO’s January 2009 budget outlook.

    Obama is not responsible for that increase, though he is responsible (along with the Congress) for about $140 billion in extra spending in the 2009 fiscal year from the stimulus bill, from the expansion of the children’s health-care program and from other appropriations bills passed in the spring of 2009.


    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=2

    Listening to a talk radio program yesterday, the host asserted that Obama tripled the budget deficit in his first year. This assertion is understandable, since the deficit jumped from about $450 billion in 2008 to $1.4 trillion in 2009. As this chart illustrates, with the Bush years in green, it appears as if Obama’s policies have led to an explosion of debt. But there is one rather important detail that makes a big difference. The chart is based on the assumption that the current administration should be blamed for the 2009 fiscal year. While this makes sense to a casual observer, it is largely untrue. The 2009 fiscal year began October 1, 2008, nearly four months before Obama took office. The budget for the entire fiscal year was largely set in place while Bush was in the White House.

    http://www.cato.org/blog/dont-blame-obama-bushs-2009-deficit

    Having said that, it is impossible to look at the chart and not to see a large ramp up in outlays under George W. Bush — the president who reversed the direction of federal outlays, which had been falling. Indeed, it is perfectly reasonable to argue that much of the responsibility for 2009’s 25.2 percent rests with President Bush, and not with President Obama; in January 2009, before President Obama took office, the CBO released its forecast that fiscal year 2009 would see outlays of 24.9 percent of GDP based on pre-Obama policies.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/09/03/yep-obamas-a-big-spender-just-like-his-predecessors/

    On Jan. 7, 2009, two weeks before Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported that the deficit for fiscal year 2009 was projected to be $1.2 trillion.

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/29/barack-obama/obama-inherited-deficits-bush-administration/

    - - - Updated - - -

    Please cite my post you are referring to.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Do your own homework.

    - - - Updated - - -


    There are three main reasons for that: the slowly-improving economy is putting more people back to work, which means fewer safety net payments and more tax revenue; defense spending cuts; and the tax hikes from January 1 2013 have gone into effect.

    Indeed, it's not the spending side of the ledger that has shrank the budget deficit, but the tax side.


    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/kevinglass/2013/05/07/report-budget-deficit-shrinks-due-to-more-tax-revenue-n1590424

    - - - Updated - - -

    Population grew and baby boomers retired. What's your point?

    Now if you honestly believe that OBarry pissing away 800 billion on nothing, actually saved those jobs, your just kidding yourself!


    CBO estimates that ARRA’s policies had the following effects in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2010:

    o Raised real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) by between 1.1 percent and 3.5 percent,

    o Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.9 percentage points,

    o Increased the number of people employed by between 1.3 million and 3.5 million, and

    o Increased the number of full-time-equivalent jobs by 1.8 million to 5.0 million compared with what would have occurred otherwise, as shown in Table 1. (Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers.

    http://www.cbo.gov/publication/22032

    Non-partisan analysis by IHS, Macroeconomic advisers, and Moody's also show job creations by the stimulus in the 2.1-2.5 million range.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/cea_5th_arra_report.pdf page 16.

    *CBO: Between 1.3 million and 3.6 million jobs saved or created.
    *IHS/Global Insight: 2.45 million jobs saved or created.
    *Macroeconomic Advisers: 2.3 million jobs saved or created.
    *Moody’s Economy.com: 2.5 million jobs saved or created.

    http://www.politifact.com/virginia/...or-says-stimulus-failed-get-people-back-work/

    +++

    September 2009

    CBO estimates that the enactment of ARRA raised fed-eral outlays by about $100 billion and reduced tax collec-tions by about $90 billion through September 2009.

    On that basis, CBO estimates that in the third quarter of calendar year 2009, an additional 600,000 to 1.6 million people were employed in the United States, and real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) was 1.2 percent to 3.2 percent higher, than would have been the case in the absence of ARRA (see Table 1).

    https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/111th-congress-2009-2010/reports/11-30-arra.pdf
    Prove it.

    Wrong. I don't hate corporations at all.
     
  12. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All part of the plan.


    Step 1: Obstruct and use control of the House to (*)(*)(*)(*) up the economy. E.g. Create as much uncertainty as possible by threatening to cause the US to shut down the government, default on its obligations, and wreck the economy. Add 700,000+ people to the unemployment lines by eliminating government jobs. Block every single proposal by the President to create jobs. Force austerity cuts in Govt spending to prevent or limit economic growth.


    Step 2: Blaaaaame Obaaaaaamaaaaaa and count on the sheeple being ignorant and misinformed or simply blaming whoever is president.

    As this thread amply proves, it worked like a charm.



    There are three main reasons for that: the slowly-improving economy is putting more people back to work, which means fewer safety net payments and more tax revenue; defense spending cuts; and the tax hikes from January 1 2013 have gone into effect.

    Indeed, it's not the spending side of the ledger that has shrank the budget deficit, but the tax side.


    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/keving...icit-shrinks-due-to-more-tax-revenue-n1590424

    Republicans blocked Obama's proposals to raise more revenues and cut the deficit further.
     
  13. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What plan you're proven no such plan.




    What does something that happened the year before sequester and the start of the deficit cutting have to do with what I posted.

    Phony cherry picking again I see.

    So which is it Obama is a great President cause look how he cut the deficit or he was a lousy President because the Republicans cut the deficit?
     

Share This Page