WOW: Economy gained 151k jobs in October (with 159k private sector jobs)

[BzaDem]

September private sector jobs revised from +64k to +107k.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=12064570

[Atman]

1. Good thing we put the GOP back in charge! They'll reverse the trend and blame it on Obama!

Jesus. America is soooooooooo stupid.

[dennis4868]

2. The media will credit...

the repubs for the job gains!

[Le Taz Hot]

3. And unemployement remained at 9.6%

for the third straight month in a row. I'm glad you're happy but as one from the MILLIONS currently unemployed, pardon me if I don't celebrate quite yet.

On edit: Speeling

[BzaDem]

4. The unemployment rate isn't a relevant calculation, since it mainly reflects people re-entering the

labor force. This is because of the dumb way it is calculated.

We could lose 6 figures or gain 6 figures and the unemployment rate would be the same.

[inna]

10. "The unemployment rate mainly reflects people re-entering the labor force"??

OMFG.

Do you even hear yourself?

All resemblances of credibilty gone, seriously.

[BzaDem]

11. Um, yes, I hear myself, and what I said is 100% accurate.

The unemployment rate would have gone down, but it didn't, because the number of jobs gained was offset with an equivalent number of people who weren't in the labor force (defined as having looked for work recently) re-entering the labor force (by looking for work).

The words "unemployment rate" and "labor force" are defined concepts. It would behoove you to educate yourself and learn what they mean.

[Le Taz Hot]

15. Well, let's see, what else does it not reflect?

People who have run out of benefits, despite the extensions.
People who are under-employed.
People who are employed part-time.
People who have given up.

So, you're right in that respect, the unemployment figures are NOT an accurate reflection of actual unemployment. Thanks for proving my point, albeit inadvertently.

[BzaDem]

17. When did I ever say that unemployment figures are an accurate reflection of actual unemployment?

My entire point is that they are NOT an accurate reflection of actual unemployment.

That is, the 9.6% staying 9.6% is irrelevant, because of the way the measure is calculated.

The payroll survey (showing +151k jobs) is much more informative.

[Le Taz Hot]

22. And I agreed with you.

But not in the way you anticipated.

[kick-ass-bob]

23. So you want all 3,000,000 people to get their jobs back at once?

I guess you thought 21 months was enough time to recover, too.

[BzaDem]

25. This jobs recovery is actually one of the fastest in history (measured from the time GDP

growth went positive).

[Le Taz Hot]

28. Why yes, because that is exactly what I said.

:eyes: :crazy:

[kick-ass-bob]

30. You haven't said anything except

that you aren't happy about 150k jobs in a month.

So TELL US: what the hell do you mean? Or are you being vague and obtuse on purpose?

[kick-ass-bob]

20. You are correct. But you are doing the doublespeak.

So it doesn't count everyone - so why did you bring up the unemployment rate?

The economy added jobs, so someone - whether it was current job seekers getting jobs and the given ups coming back in the "looking category" or someone else getting those jobs - it still means more people have jobs.

Come back when you can speak straight.

[BzaDem]

21. +1. Glad some people see past the doublespeak.

[Le Taz Hot]

27. OK, I'll

be happy to walk you through it again. The OP was a rah rah that we had gained so many jobs. I countered that the unemployment rate was still at 9.6% which obviously (OK, obviously to most) indicated the unemployment rate was stagnated at an incredibly high number. I went with the official rate because to go further would be off topic. In post #4 the original poster posited that the official number was not representative of the REAL unemployment rate. I replied that I agreed with her (him? I never know) but not for the same reasons as it did not reflect large numbers of the unemployed and I went on to name just a few categories.

I hope this clears it up for you.

Peace,
LTH

[dennis4868]

6. why can't you celebrate...

for others who got jobs. I don't have one either but when the country starts doing better, that makes me happy!

[Le Taz Hot]

14. Get back to me when you're ready to address the issue.

(Hint: I'm not easily distracted.)

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JackintheGreen]

5. But FOX just said

that only 60K were expected. That 100K+ were needed just to meet workforce increases. You CAN'T ask them to back-pedal!

Oh, wait...how many of those new jobs are people staffing/crewing the 3400 ships going on Obama's Asia tour. That's gotta be a lot, right? Whew, I feel better now.

[fasttense]

7. And what kind of jobs are they?

Let's see, what kind of jobs would be opening up the month before Christmas? Hmmm, I can't imagine what good paying jobs are being offered. Oh, wait, I know, temporary sales clerk jobs. Happy days are here again!

[BzaDem]

8. The jobs figures are already seasonally adjusted by the Labor department.

This figure is over and above the boost one would normally expect for Christmas.

[fasttense]

9. Thanks Bza, I did not know they were adjusted for Christmas hirings.

Thanks, so maybe the economy is improving, maybe. At least we are providing enough jobs for the new incoming workers and a few for the unemployed.

[ipaint]

32. From the op's link.

The job gains were concentrated in relatively few sectors: retailers added 27,900 positions, likely in preparation for the holiday season. Temporary agencies added 34,900. Restaurants and bars hired 24,400 people.

[Toots]

12. Republicans have only been elected for four days and look at how many jobs they created..

:shrug: That is how it is going to be, you can count on it..

[scheming daemons]

13. These are OCTOBER numbers.... prior to election

[Toots]

19. You sound like facts matter..

What did you not get about this last election?

[deacon]

16. Politically speaking, there is a trend-the GOP will have to make sure it doesn't shift into reverse

n/t

[BootinUp]

29. The way they are going to slash state spending

I don't see how it won't have a negative effect.

[bullwinkle428]

24. Thank you so much, Speaker Boner!!!

Just watch this burnt siena clown start beating his chest with pride over this news!

[piratefish08]

26. Yay GOP!! Getting the job done even BEFORE the election!

this'll be headline news on Faux tonight.