Unemployment Rate falls to 7.8%

Originally posted by Eladar
Which kinds of jobs? Government jobs and temp jobs mostly from what I've seen. It was just stuff on the front page of drudge.

"The latest official data showed that the construction sector added 5,000 jobs last month, while the number of people working in government jobs rose by 10,000.

However, the biggest gain was record in the healthcare sector, which added 44,000 jobs in September.

As well as more people finding jobs, the report showed more people were looking for employment. This contrasts with recent surveys, which showed jobless Americans giving up on the search for work."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19845234

Originally posted by CLL53
Doesn't matter if the numbers were fudged or not, 7.8% is still way too high, and nothing to go dance in the streets over. One data point does not infer a change in trend either.

Ronald Reagan was reelected in 1984 with 7.2% unemployment.

Originally posted by Eladar
Which kinds of jobs? Government jobs and temp jobs mostly from what I've seen. It was just stuff on the front page of drudge.

Is there ever anything positive you would give the President credit, at least partial credit? Anything? Any positive item at all? Name one. Any positive instance his leadership or proposals contributed? You can't name one instance? I guess not if you are brainwashed by Faux News and right-wing AM radio hacks.

Originally posted by Eladar
When they report actual unemployment and stop dropping people who have been unemployed too long, then I'll start believing this stat. Until then, it is all smoke and mirrors. Smoke and mirrors. Democrats and Republicans. Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb.

I can see you don't like facts.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
And so begins the chorus of "they fudged the numbers!"

Nearly every initial report on unemployment in the last four years has been adjusted upward by the end of the month.

Originally posted by moon1969
Ronald Reagan was reelected in 1984 with 7.2% unemployment.

But that was way down from what it was. It was under 5% under Bush.

Originally posted by CLL53
I think most of us would be pleased if the economy straightened out, regardless of the political consequences. Let's just hope this does indicate an easing is in the making, I am just not ready to pronounce a reversal until we see obvious indications. How we ratchet up employment without committing an inflationary faux pas may be a bit interesting to see, but that will be the follow-on story.

The conclusion that this is bad news for Mitt doesn't hold water. How Obama takes credit for this is a mystery. It happened while he was concentrating on campaigning, which may indicate that doing nothing is better than doing what he has been doing.

Originally posted by kmax87
How long have they reported unemployment in the way they currently do?

With small differences, for as long as I can remember. Clinton called the Bush41 economy the worst since the Great Depression with significantly lower unemployment than 7.8 and lower than at the end of the Carter administration. Bush43 caught the Clinton recession and didn't exaggerate as much as Clinton had done, but every challenging candidate says unemployment will get better under their administration.

It is extremely difficult to make the case that after the first 3 years and nine months, that now you finally have it right, and all is well. Almost everyone agrees that the economy and unemployment was Obama's greatest challenge, and should have been his highest priority on inauguration. Instead he made and insane decision to force feed America national healthcare, one way or the other. To get it, he finally gave up on single payer, and adopted Romney care only by some political chicanery.

Romney care isn't popular with small business or independent contractor self employed types in Massachusetts, so it is no surprise that Obama's clone caused uncertainty, and slowdown of business creation and hiring.

One way or the other we will get over all of this, but Obama has to accept that his policies at least aggravated and prolonged high unemployment, and nobody can cite any Obama policy which was designed to alleviate the problem. If things are better, why would anyone give Obama credit?

Originally posted by Eladar
Is there anything that you'd ever admit was damning to Obama and good for the Republicans?

The answer of course is no, you are an Obama sunshine pumper.

D next to a name means good and R means bad as far as you are concerned. 😀

So you really think Obama's cooking the numbers?

Originally posted by normbenign
The conclusion that this is bad news for Mitt doesn't hold water. How Obama takes credit for this is a mystery. It happened while he was concentrating on campaigning, which may indicate that doing nothing is better than doing what he has been doing.

Actually, according to the revised numbers, it's been happening all summer.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/revised-numbers-suggest-surprisingly-robust-summer-jobs-figure-chart.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

This is actually very good news. Fort the country. I know you're probably disappointed.

From Ed Dionne:

"Good jobs reports helped the GOP in 1984 and '88 and no Democrats accused the government of conspiracy. Please speak up, sane conservatives."

Originally posted by Kunsoo
Actually, according to the revised numbers, it's been happening all summer.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/revised-numbers-suggest-surprisingly-robust-summer-jobs-figure-chart.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

This is actually very good news. Fort the country. I know you're probably disappointed.

From Ed Dionne:

"Good jobs reports helped the GOP in ...[text shortened]... nd no Democrats accused the government of conspiracy. Please speak up, sane conservatives."

The point doesn't change. I celebrate people getting work and being self reliant. Unemployment is still too high, and the President has no idea of how to fix it.

Originally posted by normbenign
The point doesn't change. I celebrate people getting work and being self reliant. Unemployment is still too high, and the President has no idea of how to fix it.

He's fixing it. The only problem is that his initiatives have been stymied, and deficit hawks' obsessiveness is keeping everything in low throttle.

Originally posted by normbenign
But that was way down from what it was. It was under 5% under Bush.

7.8% is also way down from what it was...?

The conclusion that this is bad news for Mitt doesn't hold water. How Obama takes credit for this is a mystery. It happened while he was concentrating on campaigning, which may indicate that doing nothing is better than doing what he has been doing.

Heh. Measures taken by the executive branch only affect the country in the month they are implemented? This is possibly the most bizarre leap of logic I have seen from you.

Originally posted by normbenign
The point doesn't change. I celebrate people getting work and being self reliant. Unemployment is still too high, and the President has no idea of how to fix it.

Well, that's true. Unfortunately the people who do have an idea are not on the election ballot.

Originally posted by Kunsoo
So you really think Obama's cooking the numbers?

The numbers really don't matter much, if at all. The unemployed, under-employed, and uncounted, KNOW who they are and what predicament they are in, and will vote for the candidate they think may change their situation. OK, that is one group, the top leaders in industry don't make decisions based one a single number from a single source related to a single aspect of the economy either (they consider many variables, not just unemployment rates, whether the published rate is valid or otherwise) and likely will vote for the candidate that is most closely aligned with their plans to grow business. This is group two. This analysis could be extrapolated further, but you get the point. The bottom line is that the number published, good or bad, valid or invalid, will only sway the votes of the stupid that are smack dab sitting on the fence, politically. I can't imagine anyone but the most base stupid humans in the country that would see the number and think to themselves "man, that number was great, this must be the work of Obama and his actions, Obama is the man, I am changing my vote to him."