What Was That About American JOB Losses
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
transporter
Well-Known Member
Figured I would let one of you morons (either you or Gilligan) post first.
Two questions before comments on employment report:
1. Really...how stupid are you? The employment report is a net number. Terminated employees are subtracted from new hires. A positive employment number does not negate the fact that employees at companies impacted by our incompetent President's tariffs are not still losing their jobs. (Don't they teach you this stuff in Russian elementary schools? I know they didn't teach it in Gilligan's graduate level stat class.)
2. Have you ever read an actual Us economic report, comrade? Why is it that you have to have some propaganda or politically motivated website tell you what is in a report? I posted the site for the monthly employment report on here more times than you can count. Here it is again. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
As for the report, this was a strong report....like we've had many strong employment reports since the Great Recession ended in the summer of 2009. Do you need to see the charts again to prove that we are on the continuation of a very long term trend?
It might be worth noting that you, usually horrid, cns site actually said the downturn in the labor force participation rate is part of a trend that began in 2000. Amazing, how all you perverse political types change your views of the same statistic based on who is in the WH. Under the last Admin, you, CNS and Gilligan all screamed about the LFPR...same stat, same general trend...but a completely different opinion from the ignorati types.
What is really stupid about your cns source is that they dismiss the LFPR as being stagnant but complain that those out of the workforce is "stubbornly high". I guess the author was in the same grad level stat class as Gilligan. The LFPR is a ratio that that is determined by dividing the number of folks in the workforce by the size of the workforce. So any move in the LFPR is a direct result of any movement in the "out of workforce" total.
Having said all that the rise in the unemployment rate and the rise in the LFPR are good signs...if the rise is the start of a trend.
The not so good part (depending on your perspective) of the June Employment report was continued lackluster wage growth despite low unemployment and a tight labor market.
Here's a thought (it will go nowhere as it always does): instead of spending your time looking for propaganda to post...why don't you go take a class...learn something useful. Be a productive member of whatever country you post from. Stow away in a cargo hold somewhere...hope a freighter bound for the good ole USA. You might find you like our system of govt a lot better.
Two questions before comments on employment report:
1. Really...how stupid are you? The employment report is a net number. Terminated employees are subtracted from new hires. A positive employment number does not negate the fact that employees at companies impacted by our incompetent President's tariffs are not still losing their jobs. (Don't they teach you this stuff in Russian elementary schools? I know they didn't teach it in Gilligan's graduate level stat class.)
2. Have you ever read an actual Us economic report, comrade? Why is it that you have to have some propaganda or politically motivated website tell you what is in a report? I posted the site for the monthly employment report on here more times than you can count. Here it is again. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
As for the report, this was a strong report....like we've had many strong employment reports since the Great Recession ended in the summer of 2009. Do you need to see the charts again to prove that we are on the continuation of a very long term trend?
It might be worth noting that you, usually horrid, cns site actually said the downturn in the labor force participation rate is part of a trend that began in 2000. Amazing, how all you perverse political types change your views of the same statistic based on who is in the WH. Under the last Admin, you, CNS and Gilligan all screamed about the LFPR...same stat, same general trend...but a completely different opinion from the ignorati types.
What is really stupid about your cns source is that they dismiss the LFPR as being stagnant but complain that those out of the workforce is "stubbornly high". I guess the author was in the same grad level stat class as Gilligan. The LFPR is a ratio that that is determined by dividing the number of folks in the workforce by the size of the workforce. So any move in the LFPR is a direct result of any movement in the "out of workforce" total.
Having said all that the rise in the unemployment rate and the rise in the LFPR are good signs...if the rise is the start of a trend.
The not so good part (depending on your perspective) of the June Employment report was continued lackluster wage growth despite low unemployment and a tight labor market.
Here's a thought (it will go nowhere as it always does): instead of spending your time looking for propaganda to post...why don't you go take a class...learn something useful. Be a productive member of whatever country you post from. Stow away in a cargo hold somewhere...hope a freighter bound for the good ole USA. You might find you like our system of govt a lot better.
You obviously need to change your approach then. ;-)
CPUSA
Well-Known Member
So what you're saying is...Trump's Economy is working like he told us it would?...because that Keynesian crap Obama surely was a failure, like usual...
itsbob
I bowl overhand
Angela Merkel just announced she'll END tariffs on American Cars.. if Trump is willing to negotiate..
Sounds like WINNING to me..
#walkaway
BOP
Well-Known Member
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
We know.
Did it somehow *change*?
So it stands to reason that a good solid increase has *always* been a good thing.