Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows

3 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

boards of FL

boards of FL

http://mam.econoday.com/byshoweventfull.asp?fid=466624&cust=mam&year=2015&lid=0&prev=/byweek.asp#top

In the latest good news out of the labor market, jobless claims are steady at historic lows with initial claims showing a small 3,000 gain to 271,000 for the June 20 week. The 4-week average is down 3,250 to a 273,750 level that, in an especially good sign, is trending slightly lower than the month-ago comparison.

Continuing claims are also near historic lows but did tick higher in the latest data which are for June 13 week. Continuing claims rose 22,000 in the week to 2.247 million with the 4-week average up 5,000 at 2.237 million. This 4-week average is trending slightly higher than a month ago. The unemployment rate for insured workers remains near a record low at 1.7 percent.

Claims levels are so low they appear to have no more room to go, at least lower. There are no special factors in today's report, one that confirms very favorable conditions on the unemployment side of the labor market.

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Showimage


_________________
I approve this message.

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

Hey I got a chart..huh? mine says yours sucks....

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-emp

Guest


Guest

TEOTWAWKI wrote:Hey I got a chart..huh? mine says yours sucks....

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-emp

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT5-e5epBxOhvQENlf6ZTWTIqE2rdRhy73wvaov-V8pmB__IsoH

*****HeeHeeHee*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2Tqzo-Kz8s

Very Happy

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

The BLS estimates a 90% confidence interval for a change in the unemployment rate of ±0.22%, and a 90% confidence interval for the monthly change in payrolls of ±108,000. The BLS, however, admits the payroll survey's confidence interval is not solid, given built in biases and the lack of randomness in the monthly sample.

The payroll survey used to include a regular monthly bias factor of about +150,000 jobs. Those jobs were added each month for good measure, as an estimate of jobs created by new companies. Companies that went out of business generally were assumed to be employing the same number of people as before they went out of business.

In the last couple of years, the BLS has modeled and seasonally adjusted its bias factor; there is no more guesstimation. Accordingly, new monthly bias factors have ranged from -321,000 to +270,000 during the last year. This, combined with continuous seasonal adjustment revisions, has added to the volatility of recent monthly reporting.

boards of FL

boards of FL

TEOTWAWKI wrote:Hey I got a chart..huh? mine says yours sucks....

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-emp



Yes. When the data doesn't support your worldview, make up your own data.


When the unemployment rate is doing this...

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows QDpZv6c

...just make up your own chart and pretend that it isn't!!! And when people who are rightly skeptical ask to see your data...make them pay for it!!

It makes so much since...if you're an idiot!


_________________
I approve this message.

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

Come on peek out from under the covers Boards. You got to know that we have an extraordinarily high unemployment rate and those figures you posted were pulled out of some bureaucrats lying ass. Well I guess if one person has 3 20 hr a week jobs we can count him as 3 persons huh ?

boards of FL

boards of FL

This is hilarious.  The ShadowStats calculation of GDP % change:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-gdp


Well that's interesting.  Apparently the economy has been in recession since late 2000 with the only exception being a brief period of expansion in 2004.   One more time, according to ShadowStats, GDP has receded continuously for the last 15 years save for a brief period of months in 2004.  

Look at inflation adjusted GDP figures...

2001 GDP: 12.682.2
2014 GDP: 16,085.6
% change in GDP: 27%

The size of our economy has increased by almost a third between 2001 and 2014 and yet at the same time we have somehow been in recession virtually the entire time.

I suppose you can peddle that to economically illiterate morons...


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

TEOTWAWKI wrote:Come on peek out from under the covers Boards. You got to know that we have an extraordinarily high unemployment rate and those figures you posted were pulled out of some bureaucrats lying ass. Well I guess if one person has 3 20 hr a week jobs we can count him as 3 persons huh ?


From the BLS:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows WGlZlU8


Uh huh!!! Guffaw!!!  The onlee reesin that unimploimint come down is becuz evereeone is werking part tim jobz!@!!11 Guffaw!!!111  In realtee, peeple werking part time four ekonomik reasins has decreeeesed by 25% since 2009, but I a smartt gufy!!111 Guffaw!!! Uh huh!!!  I mak up my own numb3rz!!!11


_________________
I approve this message.

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

boards of FL wrote:
TEOTWAWKI wrote:Come on peek out from under the covers Boards. You got to know that we have an extraordinarily high unemployment rate and those figures you posted were pulled out of some bureaucrats lying ass. Well I guess if one person has 3 20 hr a week jobs we can count him as 3 persons huh ?


From the BLS:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows WGlZlU8


Uh huh!!! Guffaw!!!  The onlee reesin that unimploimint come down is becuz evereeone is werking part tim jobz!@!!11 Guffaw!!!111  In realtee, peeple werking part time four ekonomik reasins has decreeeesed by 25% since 2009, but I a smartt gufy!!111 Guffaw!!! Uh huh!!!  I mak up my own numb3rz!!!11

So seeing the truth finally gave you a stroke...I am sorry....maybe a case of beer will fix it.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:This is hilarious.  The ShadowStats calculation of GDP % change:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-gdp


Well that's interesting.  Apparently the economy has been in recession since late 2000 with the only exception being a brief period of expansion in 2004.   One more time, according to ShadowStats, GDP has receded continuously for the last 15 years save for a brief period of months in 2004.  

Look at inflation adjusted GDP figures...

2001 GDP: 12.682.2
2014 GDP: 16,085.6
% change in GDP: 27%

The size of our economy has increased by almost a third between 2001 and 2014 and yet at the same time we have somehow been in recession virtually the entire time.

I suppose you can peddle that to economically illiterate morons...

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQlKYrrkc8goRiVrpmHpjFBnQLdJNFD-1nffV_lPASmBJXBbLrm

This is a thread about unemployment. Not the economy. Please do try to focus. After all they are two very different things.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSYH0_YQE54

Smile

boards of FL

boards of FL

TEOTWAWKI wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
TEOTWAWKI wrote:Come on peek out from under the covers Boards. You got to know that we have an extraordinarily high unemployment rate and those figures you posted were pulled out of some bureaucrats lying ass. Well I guess if one person has 3 20 hr a week jobs we can count him as 3 persons huh ?


From the BLS:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows WGlZlU8


Uh huh!!! Guffaw!!!  The onlee reesin that unimploimint come down is becuz evereeone is werking part tim jobz!@!!11 Guffaw!!!111  In realtee, peeple werking part time four ekonomik reasins has decreeeesed by 25% since 2009, but I a smartt gufy!!111 Guffaw!!! Uh huh!!!  I mak up my own numb3rz!!!11

So seeing the truth finally gave you a stroke...I am sorry....maybe a case of beer will fix it.


You just said that unemployment rate numbers are low because - and I have no idea how you came up with this - there are many people out there working three part time jobs.  That means that they're counted...in something...three times.   OK.  I then gave you the numbers that show us that the number of people working part time for economic reason has actually decreased considerably since the end of the recession (gosh, that seems like common sense!).

Have you no response there?  Would you like to stand corrected, or would you perhaps like to counter with some sort of, I don't know, factual information that lead you to your belief about part time workers?


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Damaged Eagle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:This is hilarious.  The ShadowStats calculation of GDP % change:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-gdp


Well that's interesting.  Apparently the economy has been in recession since late 2000 with the only exception being a brief period of expansion in 2004.   One more time, according to ShadowStats, GDP has receded continuously for the last 15 years save for a brief period of months in 2004.  

Look at inflation adjusted GDP figures...

2001 GDP: 12.682.2
2014 GDP: 16,085.6
% change in GDP: 27%

The size of our economy has increased by almost a third between 2001 and 2014 and yet at the same time we have somehow been in recession virtually the entire time.

I suppose you can peddle that to economically illiterate morons...

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQlKYrrkc8goRiVrpmHpjFBnQLdJNFD-1nffV_lPASmBJXBbLrm

This is a thread about unemployment. Not the economy. Please do try to focus. After all they are two very different things.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSYH0_YQE54

Smile



Actually, this thread is about new and continuing jobless claims.  For whatever reason, the thread title "Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows " and the original post which not only discusses jobless claims but also gives you a pretty picture to look at didn't tip you off.

May I suggest learning to read before participating in forum discussions that require some level of reading comprehension?

http://www.learningrx.com/reading-help-for-adults-faq.htm


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:
Damaged Eagle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:This is hilarious.  The ShadowStats calculation of GDP % change:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-gdp


Well that's interesting.  Apparently the economy has been in recession since late 2000 with the only exception being a brief period of expansion in 2004.   One more time, according to ShadowStats, GDP has receded continuously for the last 15 years save for a brief period of months in 2004.  

Look at inflation adjusted GDP figures...

2001 GDP: 12.682.2
2014 GDP: 16,085.6
% change in GDP: 27%

The size of our economy has increased by almost a third between 2001 and 2014 and yet at the same time we have somehow been in recession virtually the entire time.

I suppose you can peddle that to economically illiterate morons...


This is a thread about unemployment. Not the economy. Please do try to focus. After all they are two very different things.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSYH0_YQE54

Smile



Actually, this thread is about new and continuing jobless claims.  For whatever reason, the thread title "Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows " and the original post which not only discusses jobless claims but also gives you a pretty picture to look at didn't tip you off.

May I suggest learning to read before participating in forum discussions that require some level of reading comprehension?

http://www.learningrx.com/reading-help-for-adults-faq.htm

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTMty4slnxqjSHq9Qv6otd_qUTXgONevSmj5x4JtBv7Gdl6RFwt

How the economy does and what the unemployment rate is have very little to do with each other. For someone who says he's studied such you don't appear to have the vaguest clue.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzlgJ-SfKYE

Smile

2seaoat



I see you and Mr. Markle are fighting for the chair of the University of Chicago's school of economics.....Noble prize is on the horizon, but with T and PK as your brightest students.......it is simply a game changer.

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

Can't be picking on Seaoats BFF

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:I see you and Mr. Markle are fighting for the chair of the University of Chicago's school of economics.....Noble prize is on the horizon, but with T and PK as your brightest students.......it is simply a game changer.

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQYs2Ort4TlyNq6gJH6JBj2622Gz18yJGdARQcUgaZ1Dd-oUN7G

I know enough to know that a what appears to be a good economy by the standards currently used is not driven by the number of workers on the work force.

What's your excuse?

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNayAdfuWU0

Smile

boards of FL

boards of FL

boards of FL wrote:
TEOTWAWKI wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
TEOTWAWKI wrote:Come on peek out from under the covers Boards. You got to know that we have an extraordinarily high unemployment rate and those figures you posted were pulled out of some bureaucrats lying ass. Well I guess if one person has 3 20 hr a week jobs we can count him as 3 persons huh ?


From the BLS:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows WGlZlU8


Uh huh!!! Guffaw!!!  The onlee reesin that unimploimint come down is becuz evereeone is werking part tim jobz!@!!11 Guffaw!!!111  In realtee, peeple werking part time four ekonomik reasins has decreeeesed by 25% since 2009, but I a smartt gufy!!111 Guffaw!!! Uh huh!!!  I mak up my own numb3rz!!!11

So seeing the truth finally gave you a stroke...I am sorry....maybe a case of beer will fix it.


You just said that unemployment rate numbers are low because - and I have no idea how you came up with this - there are many people out there working three part time jobs.  That means that they're counted...in something...three times.   OK.  I then gave you the numbers that show us that the number of people working part time for economic reason has actually decreased considerably since the end of the recession (gosh, that seems like common sense!).

Have you no response there?  Would you like to stand corrected, or would you perhaps like to counter with some sort of, I don't know, factual information that lead you to your belief about part time workers?



Well I guess my work here is done! Until next time, Forrest!

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Giphy


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Damaged Eagle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Damaged Eagle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:This is hilarious.  The ShadowStats calculation of GDP % change:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-gdp


Well that's interesting.  Apparently the economy has been in recession since late 2000 with the only exception being a brief period of expansion in 2004.   One more time, according to ShadowStats, GDP has receded continuously for the last 15 years save for a brief period of months in 2004.  

Look at inflation adjusted GDP figures...

2001 GDP: 12.682.2
2014 GDP: 16,085.6
% change in GDP: 27%

The size of our economy has increased by almost a third between 2001 and 2014 and yet at the same time we have somehow been in recession virtually the entire time.

I suppose you can peddle that to economically illiterate morons...


This is a thread about unemployment. Not the economy. Please do try to focus. After all they are two very different things.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSYH0_YQE54

Smile



Actually, this thread is about new and continuing jobless claims.  For whatever reason, the thread title "Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows " and the original post which not only discusses jobless claims but also gives you a pretty picture to look at didn't tip you off.

May I suggest learning to read before participating in forum discussions that require some level of reading comprehension?

http://www.learningrx.com/reading-help-for-adults-faq.htm

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTMty4slnxqjSHq9Qv6otd_qUTXgONevSmj5x4JtBv7Gdl6RFwt

How the economy does and what the unemployment rate is have very little to do with each other. For someone who says he's studied such you don't appear to have the vaguest clue.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzlgJ-SfKYE

Smile



You just tried to tell me that the subject of this thread is the unemployment rate.

I just corrected you and told you that it is actually new and continuing jobless claims.

Your response to that is to completely disregard the fact that you were wrong and instead is to say something as idiotic as "How the economy does and what the unemployment rate is have very little to do with each other."?

I'm not even sure how to reply to something as asinine as that.

Damaged Eagle, just to clarify, are you honestly saying that the health of the labor market and the health of the overall economy "have very little to do with each other."?  Would you like to correct yourself there, or was it truly your intent to say that? You realize that that is a completely idiotic comment, right?

It's almost as if you have never had any - and I do mean any - instruction at all in economics or, hell, even common sense logic.


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:
Damaged Eagle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Damaged Eagle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:This is hilarious.  The ShadowStats calculation of GDP % change:


Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Sgs-gdp


Well that's interesting.  Apparently the economy has been in recession since late 2000 with the only exception being a brief period of expansion in 2004.   One more time, according to ShadowStats, GDP has receded continuously for the last 15 years save for a brief period of months in 2004.  

Look at inflation adjusted GDP figures...

2001 GDP: 12.682.2
2014 GDP: 16,085.6
% change in GDP: 27%

The size of our economy has increased by almost a third between 2001 and 2014 and yet at the same time we have somehow been in recession virtually the entire time.

I suppose you can peddle that to economically illiterate morons...


This is a thread about unemployment. Not the economy. Please do try to focus. After all they are two very different things.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSYH0_YQE54

Smile



Actually, this thread is about new and continuing jobless claims.  For whatever reason, the thread title "Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows " and the original post which not only discusses jobless claims but also gives you a pretty picture to look at didn't tip you off.

May I suggest learning to read before participating in forum discussions that require some level of reading comprehension?

http://www.learningrx.com/reading-help-for-adults-faq.htm

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTMty4slnxqjSHq9Qv6otd_qUTXgONevSmj5x4JtBv7Gdl6RFwt

How the economy does and what the unemployment rate is have very little to do with each other. For someone who says he's studied such you don't appear to have the vaguest clue.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzlgJ-SfKYE

Smile



You just tried to tell me that the subject of this thread is the unemployment rate.

I just corrected you and told you that it is actually new and continuing jobless claims.

Your response to that is to completely disregard the fact that you were wrong and instead is to say something as idiotic as "How the economy does and what the unemployment rate is have very little to do with each other."?

I'm not even sure how to reply to something as asinine as that.

Damaged Eagle, just to clarify, are you honestly saying that the health of the labor market and the health of the overall economy "have very little to do with each other."?  Would you like to correct yourself there, or was it truly your intent to say that?  You realize that that is a completely idiotic comment, right?

It's almost as if you have never had any - and I do mean any - instruction at all in economics or, hell, even common sense logic.

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTw5_SNONqeO2M3Mp71FA13UlvZpCN67SWYVpKldX4kAqByl9WZ3Q

That's not what happened moron please take you meds and remain focused.

As for my statement about the economy. In a population of one million people I can have just as good of an economic figure selling Lamborghini's to a few people as an economic figure based on selling thousands of used Fiat's to a lot of people. In the Lamborghini economy I require very few workers and in the Fiat economy I require a lot of workers. So no the state of an economy does not rely on the labor market.

*****FART*****
IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAD6Obi7Cag

Smile

boards of FL

boards of FL

Damaged Eagle wrote:That's not what happened moron please take you meds and remain focused.



You said...


Damaged Eagle wrote:This is a thread about unemployment. Not the economy. Please do try to focus.


This thread is titled "Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows". Here is the original post. Notice that this thread is not about the unemployment rate, so you were wrong when you said that it was.

boards of FL wrote:http://mam.econoday.com/byshoweventfull.asp?fid=466624&cust=mam&year=2015&lid=0&prev=/byweek.asp#top

In the latest good news out of the labor market, jobless claims are steady at historic lows with initial claims showing a small 3,000 gain to 271,000 for the June 20 week. The 4-week average is down 3,250 to a 273,750 level that, in an especially good sign, is trending slightly lower than the month-ago comparison.

Continuing claims are also near historic lows but did tick higher in the latest data which are for June 13 week. Continuing claims rose 22,000 in the week to 2.247 million with the 4-week average up 5,000 at 2.237 million. This 4-week average is trending slightly higher than a month ago. The unemployment rate for insured workers remains near a record low at 1.7 percent.

Claims levels are so low they appear to have no more room to go, at least lower. There are no special factors in today's report, one that confirms very favorable conditions on the unemployment side of the labor market.

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Showimage



So to conclude, that is in fact what happened. You tried to steer me back to a thread topic that isn't actually the thread topic. Pretending as if that didn't happen - when everyone on this forum can clearly read that it did - only paints you as being even dumber than you were when you first tried to steer me back to the wrong thread topic.

But that isn't nearly as bad as this...



Damaged Eagle wrote:As for my statement about the economy. In a population of one million people I can have just as good of an economic figure selling Lamborghini's to a few people as an economic figure based on selling thousands of used Fiat's to a lot of people. In the Lamborghini economy I require very few workers and in the Fiat economy I require a lot of workers. So no the state of an economy does not rely on the labor market.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. I'm sorry. This is nearly as bad, actually, this is probably worse, than 2seaoat talking about the NBA.

You just said that the overall economy and the health of the labor market have very little to do with each other. I gave you a chance to walk that back. Rather than walk that back, you double down! And you even try to come up with a theoretical framework in which your idea may make sense.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. From now on when you participate in any thread that involves economics, I'm going to refer to this post of yours. This is right up there with Markle's "increased interest rates cause inflation".

In fact, I think this may be deserving of its own thread: Republicans try to discuss economics


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQyLb35fvsxI1VpihEQyhqX2rS5moNgwXlTge7rqzYqEPYYDc3-

Go ahead. What I wrote will ring true to some who think about it.

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA7iGxV6rt4

Smile

boards of FL

boards of FL

Damaged Eagle wrote:How the economy does and what the unemployment rate is have very little to do with each other.


Let's see here...


Economic study and thought has been around for centuries, and when it comes to studying the economy, growth and jobs are two primary factors that economists must consider. There is clearly a relationship between the two, and many economists have framed the discussion by trying to study the relationship between economic growth and unemployment levels. Economist Arthur Okun first started tackling the discussion in the 1960s, and his research on the subject has since become known as Okun's law. Below is a more detailed overview of Okun's Law, why it is important and how it stood the test of time since first being published.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/12/okuns-law.asp


The relationship between Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and unemployment rates can be seen by the application of Okun’s Law. According to the principles established by this law, there is a corresponding two percent increase in employment for every established one percent increase in GDP. The reasoning behind this law is quite simple. It states that GDP levels are driven by the principles of demand and supply, and as such, an increase in demand leads to an increase in GDP. Such an increase in demand must be accompanied by a corresponding increase in productivity and employment to keep up with the demand.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-relationship-between-gdp-and-unemployment-rates.htm


Potential output measures the productive capacity of the economy when unemployment is at its natural rate. Because people move from job to job as a regular event, the natural rate of unemployment is generally believed to be greater than zero: There will almost always be some unemployment in the economy. Thus, potential output is not the maximum an economy could theoretically produce, but a lower, sustainable number.

In most economic models, the level of output that is produced is proportional to the level of the inputs—typically, capital and labor. Thus, one might imagine that increasing unemployment above its natural rate might be associated with output falling below its potential, and vice versa.


https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/october-2013/output-and-unemployment-how-do-they-relate-today


We’ve all heard how the U.S. economy has been slow to recover. In the final analysis, there is one issue which resides at the epicenter of economic growth. That is our unemployment dilemma. How important is the unemployment rate to our economic recovery? Let me put it in these terms. Employment is to economic growth what oxygen is to the human existence. You can’t have one without the other. In this article, I will present evidence to bolster the point that until the unemployment rate is brought down to a more reasonable level, our economic recovery will falter.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/08/27/the-key-to-economic-growth-reduce-the-unemployment-rate/[/quote]



I'm curious, Damaged Eagle, can you point to any source anywhere that makes the claim that "How the economy does and what the unemployment rate is have very little to do with each other"?

Or would you perhaps like to walk that back and concede that you were simply talking out of your ass? Did you read or learn that idea from some other source? If so, what source? Or did you simply make it up out of ignorance?


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

Both new and continuing jobless claims remain at near historic lows Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQHsfBzp2Zf8aiKxbGOhcMFqSoH9do4vQaRRncwBXmNrkuaBxct

If you want to hear the rest of the story...

The rest of the two economies are composed of Chinamen selling rocks to each other with a Hindu buying from them then reselling at wholesale prices. However you could never buy a Lamborghini with the overall cash flow of the rest of that economy... much less a used Fiat.

*****FART*****
IN BOARD's GENERAL DIRECTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAD6Obi7Cag

Smile

I wonder where I stole that from.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum