Hopey Changie!

[Damocles]

Here's a graph showing how not better things are getting:


Nope, not getting better at all.

Again, please go to earlier in the thread and actually read the example, then increase it by many many more companies.

And again. This isn't a sign of good, look elsewhere.

Here, I'll find it for ya:

I've already explained how this isn't much of a "good" indicator at all.

Let's say I had a company that laid off 20% (100 employees total, I lay off 20, 80 left) of its workers at the beginning of the downturn. As it continued I laid off another 10% (now only 8, 72 employees left now) and started cutting into the meat... I was able to squeak out a bit more productivity from my employees and now was able to lay off 5% more and get a hope for a bit of a profit just last month... (that's 3 more if you're doing the math I now have 69 employees), it isn't because the economy is getting better that I am laying off less people.

Less people losing their jobs is not an indicator of a powerfully good change in the economy.

The company in my example (and in reality many companies today) started off laying off many more than they are now, but continued layoffs, although smaller in number, are not a sign of good things for the company. The company went from laying off 20 to 3... Yeah, the number is smaller, but the outlook isn't good.

 

[Bonestorm]

Again, please go to earlier in the thread and actually read the example, then increase it by many many more companies.

And again. This isn't a sign of good, look elsewhere.

I don't know that anyone is claiming this is a "sign of good." Rather, it is a sign of things getting better. You claim things are not getting better. Your claim is stupid.

 

[Jarod]

Here's a graph showing how not better things are getting:

Nope, not getting better at all.

Awsome... but less job loss is not better, but more job loss would be worse... I am still confused!

 

[Bonestorm]

Here's another chart showing things not getting better:

 

[Canceled1]

It is clear that people do not want this bill. The overwhelming numbers show they want them to start over and do it right.

I think the Obama apologists are so desperate to hold on to a gain, any gain, they are willing to chew off a limb before they give up.

Can you imagine how much it sucks to know the guy you put in office is tanking at a speed so fast they are catching wind 1000's of miles away?

For chrissakes! The paralyzing silence coming out of Berkeley alone is deafening!

 

[Damocles]

I don't know that anyone is claiming this is a "sign of good." Rather, it is a sign of things getting better. You claim things are not getting better. Your claim is stupid.

No, I claim that this specifically is not a sign of it getting better. You are disingenuous. Things are looking as if we've hit bottom and can expect things to get better, but the layoffs are not a sign of this. I have explained why that is.

 

[Canceled1]

Again, please go to earlier in the thread and actually read the example, then increase it by many many more companies.

And again. This isn't a sign of good, look elsewhere.

Here, I'll find it for ya:



The company in my example (and in reality many companies today) started off laying off many more than they are now, but continued layoffs, although smaller in number, are not a sign of good things for the company. The company went from laying off 20 to 3... Yeah, the number is smaller, but the outlook isn't good.

And the layoffs will continue as the full scope of the economic meltdown and abysmal failure of the "stimulant package" is realized.

 

[Jarod]

I agree the Conservatives are winning the propaganda war... But reality will win out and when the effects of the strong recovery are felt, the majority will see how strong Obama has been.

 

[Damocles]

Here's another chart showing things not getting better:

Now this is a sign that things should start to improve. The jobs numbers are not a sign of that. I have explained why... And will here again:

I've already explained how this isn't much of a "good" indicator at all.

Let's say I had a company that laid off 20% (100 employees total, I lay off 20, 80 left) of its workers at the beginning of the downturn. As it continued I laid off another 10% (now only 8, 72 employees left now) and started cutting into the meat... I was able to squeak out a bit more productivity from my employees and now was able to lay off 5% more and get a hope for a bit of a profit just last month... (that's 3 more if you're doing the math I now have 69 employees), it isn't because the economy is getting better that I am laying off less people.

Less people losing their jobs is not an indicator of a powerfully good change in the economy.

Smaller numbers of layoffs is not a sign of improvement in this area, and this quote makes it clear why that is. While at the beginning the company laid off 20 and now it is laying off 3 it doesn't mean it is doing any better than before, it is other areas you should look for those signs.

 

[Jarod]

But we have much much less layoffs, right?


Thats not better than more layoffs how again... cuz I still dont get it!

 

[Damocles]

And the layoffs will continue as the full scope of the economic meltdown and abysmal failure of the "stimulant package" is realized.

I hope not. Unemployment is a lagging indicator. However, the coming foreclosures that they have been unable to stave off with patches can roadblock any recovery, and there are several more obstacles (including consumer credit) that will create challenges.

Seriously, regardless of who is in the WH we need to hope that things will get better soon.

 

[Damocles]

But we have much much less layoffs, right?


Thats not better than more layoffs how again... cuz I still dont get it!

Again. It isn't a sign of "getting better" nor that things are "good", and I explained why in simple terms that even you can understand. Larger numbers at this time would mean companies were closing and I am glad that isn't happening because that would mean we were worse off than we started. Improvement will show in other areas, lower numbers of layoffs isn't one of the areas you should be looking to.

 

[Jarod]

Again. It isn't a sign of "getting better", and I explained why in simple terms.

If less layoffs are better and we had less layoffs almost every month of the Obama Administration than the month prior... How is that not "getting better"?

 

[Damocles]

If less layoffs are better and we had less layoffs almost every month of the Obama Administration than the month prior... How is that not "getting better"?

I've already explained how this isn't much of a "good" indicator at all.

Let's say I had a company that laid off 20% (100 employees total, I lay off 20, 80 left) of its workers at the beginning of the downturn. As it continued I laid off another 10% (now only 8, 72 employees left now) and started cutting into the meat... I was able to squeak out a bit more productivity from my employees and now was able to lay off 5% more and get a hope for a bit of a profit just last month... (that's 3 more if you're doing the math I now have 69 employees), it isn't because the economy is getting better that I am laying off less people.

Less people losing their jobs is not an indicator of a powerfully good change in the economy.

The company isn't doing better, Jarod, it is desperately trying to hold on long enough to survive. That they are laying off less people than before isn't a sign things got any better. That they are still laying off is a sign that things are still bad.

 

[Jarod]

But less people are loosing their jobs...

To me, no matter how you slice it, that is a good thing.

 

[Jarod]

Ive done my part, Ive hired a person.

 

[Damocles]

But less people are loosing their jobs...

To me, no matter how you slice it, that is a good thing.

Now you are just being deliberately obtuse, if things do not actually start getting better for the company then the company will close its doors and then we'll see those numbers you seem to want. It isn't a "good" thing that more people are losing their jobs and more people are moved off unemployment roles before they get jobs.

 

[Bonestorm]

Now this is a sign that things should start to improve. The jobs numbers are not a sign of that. I have explained why... And will here again:



Smaller numbers of layoffs is not a sign of improvement in this area, and this quote makes it clear why that is. While at the beginning the company laid off 20 and now it is laying off 3 it doesn't mean it is doing any better than before, it is other areas you should look for those signs.

Well, the economy isn't a single business. Your metaphor is set up to produce the result that you want.

I guess just don't understand why you won't just simply agree with the obvious: the economy is improving although it has a long way to go. I would suggest that it's more partisan claptrap from a typical Republican, but that could never be true of you.

 

[Jarod]

Well, the economy isn't a single business. Your metaphor is set up to produce the result that you want.

I guess just don't understand why you won't just simply agree with the obvious: the economy is improving although it has a long way to go. I would suggest that it's more partisan claptrap from a typical Republican, but that could never be true of you.

Ill say it did not used to be true of him.

Ask a direct question and he will usually answer.

Damo, do you belive the economy is improving?

 

[Bonestorm]

More not improving: