Jobs up 290,000
- Thread starter Topspin
- Start date
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
actually, the counter point is that unemployment rate went to 9.9%.
It is funny how the roles have reversed though. When Bush was in office, even when jobs rose 300k, all we heard about was how that was not enough to keep up with new workers entering the market. Now, 290k is 'great news'.
As for the counter point above, the rise in the unemployment rate is actually a positive sign. It means more people who had given up looking are coming back into the job search. Translated... that means people's expectations on the economy are improving slightly.
The jobs numbers were certainly stronger than expected, that is indeed good news... even without the census jobs, the number was strong (for this economy). It will be interesting to see next months numbers. Will the fears in Europe cause employers to pull back on hiring?
actually, the counter point is that unemployment rate went to 9.9%.
It is funny how the roles have reversed though. When Bush was in office, even when jobs rose 300k, all we heard about was how that was not enough to keep up with new workers entering the market. Now, 290k is 'great news'.
As for the counter point above, the rise in the unemployment rate is actually a positive sign. It means more people who had given up looking are coming back into the job search. Translated... that means people's expectations on the economy are improving slightly.
The jobs numbers were certainly stronger than expected, that is indeed good news... even without the census jobs, the number was strong (for this economy). It will be interesting to see next months numbers. Will the fears in Europe cause employers to pull back on hiring?
Just look at the trend, its been occuring since Obama took office.... the numbers have been constantly been improving along a steady trajectory for over a year. A couple months of outlyers, but the trend is strong.
actually, the counter point is that unemployment rate went to 9.9%.
It is funny how the roles have reversed though. When Bush was in office, even when jobs rose 300k, all we heard about was how that was not enough to keep up with new workers entering the market. Now, 290k is 'great news'.
As for the counter point above, the rise in the unemployment rate is actually a positive sign. It means more people who had given up looking are coming back into the job search. Translated... that means people's expectations on the economy are improving slightly.
The jobs numbers were certainly stronger than expected, that is indeed good news... even without the census jobs, the number was strong (for this economy). It will be interesting to see next months numbers. Will the fears in Europe cause employers to pull back on hiring?
Honestly, I don't recall ever criticizing a 300K employment report in Bush's tenure. My main criticism of Bush during his time was that he had no economic policy whatsoever, wasted a lot of money on stupid decisions, and didn't give a hoot about deficit spending.
Also, it's probably important to point out that comparing this kind of employment report in 2010 to, say, 2005, is just a bit different.
I belive he is a Budhist, and not just because it sounds cool. He does seem to have a bias against liberalism and Democrats such that it affects his rational when discussing politics.
Weird. I was lectured by at least ten billion conservatives that the obama stimulus was a disaster that was going to drive us into a depression.
In other news, Fox News - suddenly and for some strange reason - asks the question: Does credit for economic recovery go to George W. Bush?
True, but even Budists are not perfect.
Christians are not supposed to hate, but look at the fundies...
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Actually, I was comparing it to 2002/03 when we were coming out of the Clinton recession.
I wasn't referring to you specifically. Just Dems in general. That said, I agree with you that Bush did not have a real economic policy and he did indeed spend like a drunken liberal.
I wonder what would have happened if we had taken the advice of message board conservatives, and implemented the Sarah Palin/John McCain plan of slashing public spending, government outlays, and not doing TARP - but letting the banks fail?
I ain't no banking expert, but it seemed like TARP was a neccessary evil given that we were on the brink of another great Republican depression. So even though all message board conservatives were against tarp and against stimulus spending, I will give Bush credit for dimly being aware that the nation was teetering on the brink of an economic meltdown. Like bush said back in the fall of 2008 (to paraphrase): "I had to become a socialist to save the nation".
As for Fox News, you nailed it bro. That sh*t is almost as good as the Comedy Channel.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
That's a lot of temporary census workers. Are they creating much wealth?
Topspin
Verified User
r Fox News, you nailed it bro. That sh*t is almost as good as the Comedy Channel.[/QUOTE]
I'm not as high on Obama as the average dem, he's too centrist and not liberal enough for me. Nor was I down on Bush as much.
I hope they do wait about 6 months to get into the market when their greed can't let them poo poo the market anymore.
I'm not as high on Obama as the average dem, he's too centrist and not liberal enough for me. Nor was I down on Bush as much.
I hope they do wait about 6 months to get into the market when their greed can't let them poo poo the market anymore.
Obfuscate
Powered By: Capitalism
Obviously you are not a banking expert.
We could have eaisily kept the money supply stable without TARP and therefore avoid the doom and gloom that happened in the Depression when we let the money supply fall by 1/3. TARP was a sliver compared to what the Federal Reserve had done with M2- Discount Window access ect. Suprised to hear Liberals agree that we need a Corpratist banking system and that the worst of greedy bankers need a bailout to help the middle class.