More jobs might be created this year than during George W. Bush's presidency

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on May, 14 2010 @ 07:36 PM
link   

More jobs might be created this year than during George W. Bush's presidency


www.nationaljournal.com


If the economy produces jobs over the next eight months at the same pace as it did over the past four months, the nation will have created more jobs in 2010 alone than it did over the entire eight years of George W. Bush's presidency.

That comparison comes with many footnotes and asterisks. But it shows how the economic debate between the parties could look very different over time -- perhaps by November, more likely by 2012.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.theatlantic.com
newsone.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
1,000,000 jobs created under Obama... If you are a teenager, you will work for free.




posted on May, 14 2010 @ 07:36 PM
link   
When I saw this I thought it was a good thing to be aware of. Mostly because the article head line is deceptive. Where is it true in its most strict sense, meaning over the last year, it does not account for the four million jobs that were lost during the economic collapse. So this is just a good lesson for things to watch out for in political debates that I am sure will keep coming.

www.nationaljournal.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Prediction:
Haven't read the article yet but something tells me all these "jobs" will be in the government sector.
That would be the only thing that would make sense.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


Alxandro
Thanks for posting,
and that I do not know. I did not look for a breakdown quite like that. The article I referenced gave a break down of numbers, I did not look for one of where the jobs were being created. The biggest thing I was hoping to get across was that the headline is deceptive.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Governemnt jobs or public jobs? It seems teachers are being layed off, city workers as well, at least in CA. everyone here knows they lie about everything, so i find this news questionable.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 07:56 PM
link   
Does this take into account the job lost also? Or just the number of people who get jobs. The article is very skewed and political in nature.

Here's the problem... The unemployment rate is still going up. That's not a gain.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by RedGolem
 


yep. LOTS of asteriks and footnotes. Like the jobs lost under Obama's first year.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I don't blame Obama in particular. He is another link in a string is fail. But it does show that this might just be a bit of slant.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by hinky

Here's the problem... The unemployment rate is still going up. That's not a gain.


Yes it still is going up. That brings up another point of deception. When you hear that the unemployment claims have gone down for the forth straight month, what it means is first time unemployment claims. That has nothing to do with weather or not jobs have been created or lost. Or the total number of people on unemployment. Which list I heard is still above nine percent.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   
And if Bush printed useless money by the trillions and dump it into the economy, same thing would happened under his 2 terms.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Probably jobs cleaning up the oil spill Obama caused...



americanandproud.net...



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 08:22 PM
link   
But the truth is the economy has not really gained any jobs in the last four months, most of the hundreds of thousands of people who found jobs during this time, were in fact hired as temporary workers by the Department of Commerce to work on the 2010 Census.

If you took out those temporary jobs, which are in fact temporary we would have continued to have net losses in employment each month this year, instead of slight gains.

Since it was Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and John Jay who agreed to a Census every ten years to be mandated into the Constitution as part of the Treaty of Paris that concluded the Revolutionary War, whose terms were in fact dictated by King George, I think in reality we have to credit King George for these temporary job gains.

Three cheers for King George! Hip hip hooray, hip hip hooray, hip hip hooray!

Sad but true the English Monarch we rebelled against over 200 years ago is responsible for these jobs!



[edit on 14/5/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by RedGolem
 


I see what you are saying.

It's like they are preparing to divert attention away from Obama in case these jobs don't pan out.

Seems they are going out to remind us of Bush, at any cost.
Kinda like this cartoon.




posted on May, 14 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Sorry i am not buying into this, the jobs rate is still 9.9

This is nothing more then pro obama crap nonsense, dont believe me? check the data your self.


These jobs are either in the military or government office jobs

since, they don't always tell the truth.


I still see this as an economic collapse or at least would be one.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
The true unemployment rate, including those that have lost unemployment benefits and those that are underemployed is almost 20%.

I was going to mention the census workers too, but someone beat me to it.

Sad thing is, they won't be eligible for unemployment when the census is over, so those jobs, once finished, will also go uncounted.

So you see, they call numbers on the jobs, but fake you out on the lost jobs.

Of the people that had jobs prior that did not qualify for benefits the first time, I would even push that estimate closer to a true 25% unemployment rate.


[edit on 14-5-2010 by Libertygal]





top topics
 
1

log in

join