Unemployment Numbers

1. 60

   tammybarnetteposted 12 years ago

   http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/lauhsthl.htm 
   
   Current Unemployment numbers by state, includes historic highs and lows...Interestingly most historic highs came during the Reagan Administration.

   replyreport
   1. 74

      Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      How interesting that only 9 of 50 states actually had their highest unemployment under Obama.
      WHY IS THIS INFORMATION NOT BEING USED TO FIGHT BACK?
      So many states have unemployment rates that are really LOW.
      I heard on the news that the Rust Belt is BOOMING, too.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         MM, I know, I was speaking to Ken Burgess the other day about VA...I live right next door in East Tn....the adds of Obama killing Coal are every 5min....VA is huge coal country...I think I had said the unemployment there was 5.6%, but It is 5.9%...I'm glad many of the MA mayors came to VA, I hope it helped...they wanted to tell the TRUTH about Romney:)

         replyreport
      2. 58

         logic,commonsenseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         and whose labor department is in control of the statistics at this time?
         If things are booming, why are 46 million people still on food stamps and over 20 million unemployed?

         replyreport
         1. 60

            tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Things aren't booming, the economy however is not in the deep hole as Republicans are trying to paint it, we are making a recovery, and they are trying their very best to convince people we are not, but....they are lying

            replyreport
      3. 61

         American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         MM
         
         percentages are a masterful way of making numbers look good that are not so good. As the base number goes up, it's harder to achieve the same percentage.
         
         For example, there are 100 people in the work force, ten are not working so there is a 10% unemployment rate. Now today here are 1,000 people in the work force and 10 are not working, is that 10% No. 100 people is what is needed for ten percent. So this President can have a 5% unemployment rate which means 50 people are out of work, but he has historical the lowest unemployment rate despite the fact he has more people on unemployment in history.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Does this then also take into account , that the numbers of available jobs are lower and, by industry for instance, with our huge loss of manufacturing that some persons are enrolled in college or job training programs to prepare for the jobs now available?

            replyreport
            1. 61

               American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Forbes is very good at explaining the difference between Obama and Regan as well as other recovery's
               
               http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrar … -straight/

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Ok first, I detect slant in the writing, but second, what stands out to me most is the loss of manufacturing jobs which is not the fault of POTUS...Reagan made maufacturing boom..but I will finish with both articles and do some fact checking and number running and be back in touch soon...I hope,lol...may take a minute(as the teens say today )

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     LOL Tammy, no problem.. You are right, there is a slight slant in the writing but the numbers are accurate. The part that hits me is manufacturing and as I have wrote and mentioned on my show, the manufacturing sector in not doing what Obama claims. Why does no one say something?

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        AV, still studying...but wanted to show you this stat about manufacturing, it started trending downward heavily in 2002-2004--leveled off a bit from 2004-2008--then drops off a cliff till 2010 and is trending upward...
                        http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES30000 … ol=XGtable   
                        It is very clear the heavy purge of manufacturing jobs has crippled our recovery...more later 

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU04032 … ol=XGtable 
                           Unemployment spikes from 2009-2010 then by 2012 has dropped to levels of 2003...

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/BDS00000 … ol=XGtable   job gains

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/BDS00000 … ol=XGtable   job losses

                                 replyreport
   2. 0

      Sooner28posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I am bookmarking this!

      replyreport
2. 59

   Repairguy47posted 12 years ago

   Its a good thing Reagan ran the country not states.

   replyreport
   1. 74

      Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah.
      Good thing Obama runs the country and not the states, too.

      replyreport
   2. 60

      tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Repairguy, I guess it's only the POTUS fault if its Obama, right?

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

         No, national unemployment rates is what he should be concerned with! You don't know that?

         replyreport
         1. 60

            tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Was that what Reagan was concerned with?

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Don't know, I'm not Ronald Reagan. Why am I breaking my own rules and talking to you. My bad, buhbye.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  I did not realize you had ruled not to speak to me, but suits me fine

                  replyreport
               2. 74

                  Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Rules? What rules?

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     MM, he has chosen not to debate with me, we have some history,lol

                     replyreport
                     1. 74

                        Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        You win by default then!
                        

                        replyreport
               3. 80

                  Credence2posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Repair, you really have a problem with coherent conversation. a logical argument was presented supported with data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and you find everyexcuse to discredit the data. With reasoning like this like you demonstrate, that a rightwinger could not be trusted in any responsible position.. Geez, how small minded can you get? Don't any of you people have the integrity to admit it when you are wrong?

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     I'm not wrong unemployment was low during the Reagan administration. States that had high unemployment at times can't be attributed to Presidents. Our national unemployment rate is high now but some states have low unemployment and that is attributed to the states not the President. Same with states with high unemployment rates. It ain't brain surgery!

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        RG, again, I have to answer, I apologize in advance...Obama has been murdered in the media for unemployment, that is the point of the thread....If you add all states unemployment then divide by the number of states you will get an average...what we are saying here is that by state, the worst umemployment numbers are reflected in the Reagan Administration, so the average would also be higher...I do understand  what you are saying about state responsibility, and it is a valid point, but not the way the media paints it for the Obama Administration.

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           The reason Obama is getting pounded is because he said he was going to fix it and hasn't done anything! Now he says he has a plan, thats what he said four years ago and here we are!

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              RG, He is fixing it, that was my point, his policies are working, it just has taken more time to dig out of the hole than he anticipated...for one, he anticipated bipartisanship, not a Congress whose main goal was to run him out of office...he could not have planned for that...the slow pace of recovery is the fault of Congress, he has done everything within his power without their help, last night on CNN, they said that they believed if Obama wins, this time Congress will respond differently because their entire goal was to make him a one term POTUS, and they have the lowest approval rating in history by the American people.

                              replyreport
                              1. 59

                                 Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 He had two full years of democrat controlled house and senate!!! Do you even believe what you post or is it just something to do???

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 60

                                    tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                    RG, So your arguement is that he should have "taken that for granted," that would have been a very partisan thing for him to do, he would have risked being labeled as such, and he truly believed that that would all work together, I am certain if he could go back in time, knowing they would hate him anyway, I am sure he would have taken advantage of his first two years....I know his policy will work, the math works, I know Romneys will not, been there done that with W...that is my philosophy and ideology

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 59

                                       Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                       Lets see, the guy that said republicans lost so they have to ride in the back of the bus was afraid to appear partisan? He couldn't use the democrat controlled house and senate to find a way out of our economic mess but could use it to shove health care down our throats? Please for everything that is holy, DONT VOTE!!!!!!!!!!!!

                                       report
                                    2. 60

                                       tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                       I never heard that remark from him, show me proof of that, I relly did not hear that....I am so confused about this healthcare debacle...half of Americans and the UN disagreed with W about his illegal war in Iraq, he raised the debt ceiling 8 times and drove our country into the biggest economic didsaster since the Great Depression, and he was made out to be some kind of hero, but now of course they hide him...and Romneys foriegn policy advisors are none other than W's....But for some crazy reason, Obama wanting healthcare for all Americans is demonized? I will never understand that concept, other than to say the GOP's gazillions have taken extra care to brain wash society with propaganda and lies to vote against their own best interest....

                                       report
                                       1. 59

                                          Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                          http://www.mediaite.com/tv/obama-to-gop … t-in-back/
                                          
                                          Dont vote....please

                                          report
            2. 74

               Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               
               
               No, no, and no!
               
               Let's review this one more time.
               If it's a point against Obama, it counts.
               If the same point can be made against them, it doesn't count.
               Got it?
               If this explanation is too complicated (I know it's hard to follow along, tammy, being a "retard" as I am sure you are, just like me and our President and all libTARDS), here's some language that might be easier to grasp:
               
               "I know you are but what am I? Neener. Neener. Neener."
               

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     movingoutposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     @tammy and MM...in a libTARDS voice! WILL YOU BE MY FRIEND? lol

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        U BETCHA

                        replyreport
               2. 59

                  Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  No and no, sorry to disappoint but Obama is not responsible for good and bad unemployment rates in each and every state. Those numbers can be due to good or bad governors,state officials.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     RG, That was the FOX spin...He said that drove us in the ditch, this time mid class families will ride shotgun and they can sit in the back...now I will give you this, it does sound like a little Rosa Parks; tit for tat, but hardly news worthy, FOX is owned by the right wing, please watch better sources, actually do not watch any and just research the economy and foriegn policy using government web sites like the CBO and US treasury...factcheck.org is an un biiased site, calls them all out on BS...but please DO vote, it is your right, and I would never say that to someone...of course I am voting, as I explained on the other forum, it's my rights R/R is screwing with...

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        His words were not fox spin. You don't seem to know much about the guy you support! You seem rather ignorant that he had two full years of democrat controlled house and senate and did nothing to create jobs. You are going to support Obama no matter what, if he had kidnapped the Lindbergh baby you would call it fox spin! You only know what is dumped into your head by other liberals! For the love of god DO NOT VOTE!

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           RG, No reason to be rude...I already gave you the whole run down on those two years, Rupert Murdock owns FOX, do you know who that is...He has been doing such a fabulous job spreading propaganda in Australia, creating basic genocide against the aborigines , the other owner of 5.5% is Prince al-Walid Bin Talal, who has bragged of his pull to dictate their stories...I wrote an entire hub about the owner's of our media...this is why I say, please research and make the best decision for you and your family

                           replyreport
                     2. 61

                        American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        I know you may not read this since it is from a right wing source but you can google it, there are many other sites carrying it.
                        
                        "The Obama campaign has finally released the transcript of his endorsement interview with the Des Moines Register--and it is clear why they were reluctant to do so: the President says he has "absolutely" no regrets about ignoring the economy during the first two years of his term, when Democrats controlled Congress."
                        
                        http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government … -Two-Years

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           I will read when have a moment, I tried to skim and did not see it in the Q and A part, but will check it out

                           replyreport
                        2. 60

                           tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           Well, first I can hear bias in the author, next the "facts" are according to the Washington Post and third the graph is from The Heritage Foundation...So all a little to righty tighty...So, If i even concede that the "no regrets," part is true, although some context is obviously left out, I believe what I read between the lines is that Obama said he has no regrets for working out the healthcare issue as his top priority...and it is a campaign promise he has kept, and Ted Kennedy would be so proud More to study

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              AV, check this out http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/ENUUS000 … ol=XGtable Federal Government
                              http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/ENUUS000 … ol=XGtable private sector

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES10000 … ol=XGtable  logging and mining

                                 replyreport
                              2. 60

                                 tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES60000 … ol=XGtable proffessional and business services...I see the jobs...

                                 replyreport
                              3. 60

                                 tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 AV, every graph shows that we are climbing out of the ditch...Statistics without slant do not lie...

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 60

                                    tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                    AV, Let me know what you think of these numbers, I was up half the night looking through the BLS, amazing tools there, calculators, maps, graphs, historic data...most useful site

                                    replyreport
3. 90

   habeeposted 12 years ago

   You guys are too funny!

   replyreport
4. 59

   chaoticpsycheposted 12 years ago

   I hate numbers, especially when coming to unemployment for percentage of people in poverty. These numbers show those who are unemployed based for factors that someone has reported to. For example filing for unemployment. I am thinking unemployment rates are much higher. You figure some people just lose their job and don't file for unemployment. Or they have been working under the table and no are jobless. So there are a lot of factors for any numbers and statistics.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      tammybarnetteposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I understand what you mean, but these are the real numbers from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, and most people do draw their unemployment, they still have bills to pay....but yes poverty is at 15%, which is why food stamps are at 15%...after the worst recession since the Great Depression...Thank God these systems were in place

      replyreport
5. 59

   secularist10posted 12 years ago

   The series begins in 1976. Not the most useful, but interesting.
   
   On a related note, history shows that Democratic presidents are better for the economy than Republicans:
   
   http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung … -democrat/
   
   GDP does better, the stock market does better, and corporate profits do better. There's many factors in economic prosperity, of course, not just the party of the President. But the policies do make a difference.

   replyreport
6. 0

   khmohsinposted 12 years ago

   I think policies count, the war to terrorism lead US towards unemployment

   replyreport
7. 74

   Mighty Momposted 12 years ago

   A sobering reality check for us all, here:
   
   http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/10/ … eally-need

   replyreport