More trump fuck up Repaired

[Walt]

Too bad the Employment rate is flat meaning that jobless claims have fallen only because people have stopped trying to get a job. Given the Democrat's increasing unemployment and welfare benefits I can see why people would quit their jobs and just stay home and be given money instead.

While Biden has been President, the employment rate has gone from 57.5% to 58.8%. That is far from flat. When you see those amazing job creation numbers, you should remember that is not just positions created, but jobs filled.... AND MORE AMAZINGLY IT IS NET JOBS CREATED!!!

So if 5 million people quit their jobs, and a million net jobs were created, there must have been 6 million jobs absolute created. That is just math.

[Walt]

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...mployment-rate
The employment rate has remained at 58 to 59% in the last several months.

Your own citation shows that the employment rate has risen from 57.5% to 58.8%, so I do not know what you are talking about it being flat.

If employment remains flat and unemployment goes down then that means fewer people are seeking jobs while the number of employed remains the same. That in turn means the decline in unemployment is due to people who stopped looking for work and went on welfare or found a way to subsist without working like looting stores for example...

First off, employment rate is the percent of the population employed, so if that was remaining the same, and population is increasing, that would mean more people are employed. As for claiming that the only reason people do not work is welfare or looting stores, that is an insult to all the retired people in America. The baby boomers are retiring, so we can expect a lower rate of employment.

[T. A. Gardner]

Your own citation shows that the employment rate has risen from 57.5% to 58.8%, so I do not know what you are talking about it being flat.



First off, employment rate is the percent of the population employed, so if that was remaining the same, and population is increasing, that would mean more people are employed. As for claiming that the only reason people do not work is welfare or looting stores, that is an insult to all the retired people in America. The baby boomers are retiring, so we can expect a lower rate of employment.

It hovers between about 58 and 59%. I stated that. It's been relatively flat in that range for years now.

As for your second statement, yes the number of people employed would rise with the increase in population, but the percentage remains the same. The number of unemployed would rise commensurately too as this measure floats between two relative constants as well. The ups and downs of short-term unemployment (the U30) is really a poor measure of what people are doing in regards to employment or unemployment.

[Walt]

It hovers between about 58 and 59%. I stated that. It's been relatively flat in that range for years now.

In the last few months it has risen from 57.5% to 58.8%, which would be called strong growth. In the last two years, it has rapidly swung between 51% and 61% which is very much the opposite of flat. You cannot get flat out of these numbers.

[T. A. Gardner]

In the last few months it has risen from 57.5% to 58.8%, which would be called strong growth. In the last two years, it has rapidly swung between 51% and 61% which is very much the opposite of flat. You cannot get flat out of these numbers.

A +/- 1% change in employment is not "strong growth." It is well within the deviation of the statistics being used.

[Walt]

A +/- 1% change in employment is not "strong growth." It is well within the deviation of the statistics being used.

A 1.3% rise in 10 months is considered strong growth in the employment rate. The employment rate does not [usually] fluctuate quickly, with 2020 being the bizarre exception, not the rule. We have been seeing strong employment growth throughout 2021, not by any reasonable measure "flat".

[Nordberg]

Trump didn't cause this fuck up. Democrats did.

Trump didn't shut down the economy. Democrats did.

Trump didn't force mandates like the Democrats did, which is resulting in an ever widening general strike, leaving positions like this unfilled.

That was a fallacy.

[T. A. Gardner]

A 1.3% rise in 10 months is considered strong growth in the employment rate. The employment rate does not [usually] fluctuate quickly, with 2020 being the bizarre exception, not the rule. We have been seeing strong employment growth throughout 2021, not by any reasonable measure "flat".

None of it due to Biden or the Democrats but rather red states opening up their economies unlike blue ones.

https://www.bbc.com/news/57070054
https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2021...m-hard-n437702
Hell, even Biden friendly Factcheck.org admits it
https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/bo...g-jobs-report/
Politifact, another open apologist for all things Democrat all but says Biden's a liar when it comes to the economy and jobs.
https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...re-leaves-out/

[Nordberg]

None of it due to Biden or the Democrats but rather red states opening up their economies unlike blue ones.

https://www.bbc.com/news/57070054
https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2021...m-hard-n437702
Hell, even Biden friendly Factcheck.org admits it
https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/bo...g-jobs-report/
Politifact, another open apologist for all things Democrat all but says Biden's a liar when it comes to the economy and jobs.
https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...re-leaves-out/

Isn't Biden president of the whole country?

[T. A. Gardner]

Isn't Biden president of the whole country?

Yes, but he isn't the person running anywhere close to the whole economy. He can make bad policy on economic sectors as he has on energy, but he doesn't control whether states open their economy like say Arizona, Texas, or Florida has versus keeping lockdowns in place like California or New York.

[Walt]

None of it due to Biden or the Democrats

We start with the claim that it is not happening... Then we come to the claim that it is happening, but not due to Biden. It would be all more believable if you had not spent so long saying it was not happening.

The shift towards better jobs is going to have a long term benefit to the economy, as is the massive reduction in child poverty. I will not say the shift is due to Biden, but he certainly is not trying to stop it like many Republicans are. The massive reduction in child poverty was accomplished by Biden.

[T. A. Gardner]

We start with the claim that it is not happening... Then we come to the claim that it is happening, but not due to Biden. It would be all more believable if you had not spent so long saying it was not happening.

The shift towards better jobs is going to have a long term benefit to the economy, as is the massive reduction in child poverty. I will not say the shift is due to Biden, but he certainly is not trying to stop it like many Republicans are. The massive reduction in child poverty was accomplished by Biden.

There is no shift to "better jobs" going on. Millions of good paying tech and trade jobs go unfilled because we don't have enough smart energetic people to fill them. Instead, we're creating an ever-larger number of lazy stupid people that are no use except as cannon fodder in a war.



More handouts won't fix that problem, it'll only make things worse. More illegal immigration makes it worse too. The most impoverished parts of the US have high numbers of illegals, tribal land occupied by native Americans, and areas with high concentrations of Blacks. Handouts won't fix any of that.

[Into the Night]

While Biden has been President, the employment rate has gone from 57.5% to 58.8%. That is far from flat. When you see those amazing job creation numbers, you should remember that is not just positions created, but jobs filled.... AND MORE AMAZINGLY IT IS NET JOBS CREATED!!!

So if 5 million people quit their jobs, and a million net jobs were created, there must have been 6 million jobs absolute created. That is just math.

Math errors: Use of random number as data. Failure to select by randN. Failure to declare variance. Failure to calculate margin of error value. Denial of statistical mathematics.

[Into the Night]

Your own citation shows that the employment rate has risen from 57.5% to 58.8%, so I do not know what you are talking about it being flat.



First off, employment rate is the percent of the population employed, so if that was remaining the same, and population is increasing, that would mean more people are employed. As for claiming that the only reason people do not work is welfare or looting stores, that is an insult to all the retired people in America. The baby boomers are retiring, so we can expect a lower rate of employment.

Random numbers are not data. Argument from randU fallacy.

[Into the Night]

A +/- 1% change in employment is not "strong growth." It is well within the deviation of the statistics being used.

He's not using statistical math. He denies it completely.