The unemployment rate fell from 6.1 percent in August and is now close to 5.5 percent, which many economists consider a healthy level. The lower rate, combined with the surge in hiring, could ratchet up pressure on the Federal Reserve to raise its benchmark interest rate earlier than expected. Most economists have predicted that the Fed would start raising rates in mid-2015.












































 

FBHO

What a complete load of bullshit.

"Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low; Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force."  

The .GOV and the liberal news media is trying to pump up the Dems chances for election.  Talk about cooking the books.

There are lies...there are Damn lies...and then there are statistics!
-Mark Twain

The news whores just state the numbers and rarely discuss the reality of these numbers.

Obama! Obama! Obama! Obama!

BWHAHWHHAHAHWHAHHAHAHHWWWHAHAHWHAHAHAHHWHWHWHHHHHAHHHAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!

Except there are at least 92 million people who know better. Reality has a way of cutting through the hype.

Why work when you can suck off the .gov tit?

the figures spewed out by the .gov are a prime example of " figures don't lie " " but liars figure ".



Always some scheme to try to fool the masses.



gd

lol

Do we have the late Friday afternoon revision numbers yet?

That 5.9% is the U3 "rose-colored-glasses" rate the politicians and their MSM leg-humpers love to tout. The more realistic U6 rate is 11.8%.

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.

ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It's 7.8%.

COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?

ABBOTT: No, that's 14.7%.

COSTELLO: You just said 7.8%.

ABBOTT: 7.8% Unemployed.

COSTELLO: Right 7.8% out of work.

ABBOTT: No, that's 14.7%.

COSTELLO: Okay, so it's 14.7% unemployed.

ABBOTT: No, that's 7.8%.

COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 7.8% or 14.7%?

ABBOTT: 7.8% are unemployed. 14.7% are out of work.

COSTELLO: If you are out of work you are unemployed.

ABBOTT: No, Congress said you can't count the "Out of Work" as the unemployed.
You have to look for work to be unemployed.

COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!!

ABBOTT: No, you miss his point.

COSTELLO: What point?

ABBOTT: Someone who doesn't look for work can't be counted with those who look
for work. It wouldn't be fair.

COSTELLO: To whom?

ABBOTT: The unemployed.

COSTELLO: But ALL of them are out of work.

ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out
of work gave up looking and if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of
the unemployed.

COSTELLO: So if you're off the unemployment rolls that would count as less
unemployment?

ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don't look for work?

ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how they get it to 7.8%. Otherwise it
would be 14.7%. Our govt. doesn't want you to read about 14.7% unemployment.

COSTELLO: That would be tough on those running for reelection.

ABBOTT: Absolutely!

COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to
bring down the unemployment number?

ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.

COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?

ABBOTT: Correct.

COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?

ABBOTT: Bingo.

COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of
the two is to have people stop looking for work.

ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like an Economist.

COSTELLO: I don't even know what the hell I just said!

ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like Congress.

 Out of that 92 million,how many are looking for employment rather than complaining that Republicans aren't giving them enough?

If more Americans WANTED to work there wouldn't be a need for cheap immigrant labor.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

What did you expect when baby boomers began to retire?

Well in all honesty the job openings in my town and the entire state over the last few months have increased greatly.

Firing on all cylinders....

About to throw a rod and be totaled is closer to the truth....

Good Lord, nearly everything we hear and see coming form the MSM and Gov anymore is pure BS. They can't even tell the truth about the simplest things; it's sickening...

 

FBHO

If you make 42k a year in welfare benefits (includes insurance/housing/food/clothes/gas/phone/etc.)  WHY would you want to work for $10.00 hr. with no benefits? (21k yr.)  

Sometimes employers can't compete with the Gov.

Throw out as many as you think don't belong in the count, and there will still be tens of millions of righteous decent people who vote. That's a lot of pissed of people.

this!



 

Sad but true.


Fbho

They always doctor up the numbers right before an election and then revise the numbers after it is over.

Does this 62.8% rate consist of a certain age group of eligible workers?  Or is it a percentage of our total population.

Probably a really stupid question but I would think that with 92 million of the working age population out of work that 63% participation rate would be significantly lower.

In short, I'm saying that I find it hard to believe that we have 250 million people of working age in our country of 315 million.

The real question is whether the decrease in labor force participation is driven by retiring baby boomers or by people getting depressed and dropping out of the labor force due to an inability to find jobs.

And there are a lot of stupid people that will believe the headlines of 5.9% unemployment and think everything is all hunky doory and pull the lever for D.

The labor force is everyone who is employed or unemployed.

 

I have a question. Does that 92 million include ONLY people of working age? Or does it also include children and elderly?

edit: Nm. It's 16 years and older.

Still about 10% here according to GA DOL.

Dept. of labor lying as usual, prior to ellections.

 

Yes, I understand this. What I was saying is how can 93 million out of work people only add up to 36% of eligible workers in our country.

The number of people between 16-65 is seriously 250 million out of the total of 315 million?

Arent there like 20+ more million people on wellfare as well?

Even among the employed, there are a lot of people that are working part time. Also, Obama, and his ilk, are happy with the low labor participation rate; that means more people become dependent on government handouts. Therefore more Democrat voters!

Displacement on demand. LOL!

Convenient they just spit those numbers out right before O made a speech on the economy...BULLSHIT...Rush pointed out a while back how many times they make these great announcements about how good the economy is doing and how many people got jobs this month or how this last quarters production or GDP was up...and then 100% of the time they down grade their assessment...its all BULLSHIT..

FBHOATHHRIO.

Ummm.... we have a population of 315 million people. That's around 30% of Americans not in the workforce. How many of those are kids or adolescents? I would expect that number to grow as the population of the United States increases overtime.

The percentage is the key.  

Not when half of them are getting a check. Why would they vote to cut off their own sugar?



2013 article

I know plenty of real otherwise-hard-working people who are hurting. Work is hard to find especially in the over-50 age group, where people should be pulling down the maximum money as they prepare for retirement. Many others are under-employed, even in the blue collar group.

What percent of those "awakened"people do you think awoke to the bullshit reality, and what percent of people awoke to feebee addiction?

 

If it was the baby boomer explanation, then employers would have to raise wages to compete for remaining workers. Even though boomers retire, they still eat, breathe, and consume. Goods and services still need to be produced for them, too.

Even I got unemployment for three months this year. $340 a week is no incentive for me to stay home when I have a family of four and one kid going to college next year. While there are a percentage who would vote to keep their bennies, there are a lot more who would rather work for a competitive wage. They would vote to right the ship. Guaranteed.

Y'all have to stop believing that the slightest amount of "sugar" is satisfying.

Logan's run.

That is highly dependent on your lifestyle/upbringing/values/etc.  For someone who is lazy, ignorant and doesn't give a shit about themselves or their children, it doesn't take much "sugar" to entice them out of the normal adult obligations that most of us pursue.

Several hundred dollars a week, food stamps, a cell phone, section 8 housing, and medical care is a pretty sweet offer vs. working 50 hours a week at a minimum wage job with reduced handouts.  I don't see the typical multi-generational welfare individual waking up one day and suddenly saying "this is bullshit, I should support my family on my own!"