Unemployment Rate Drops to 3.6%

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Justoneman

You can cross reference the Bill's and acts established in the timeline.

Bush was the GOP puppet. Congress during Clinton was Republican when the laws started loosening up it wasn't only his HUD sec. It was also Bush's. It was popular and the Democrats had Republican bipartisan signatures. amd.freddie and the banking committees were Republican under Clinton when the laws began changing to let everyone qualify.

Believe me when I say, that BS right there is the UNIPARTY and EVERYTHING is OWNED by the D's.


Gangrene I called Newt, was that last one to hold the line on Balancing the Budget and he was a prick about it. Bush had D' leadership in Congress.
When Obama had it too they did NOTHING they claimed to be about including protecting the border claim they were discussing as SOOOO important ad naseum.

If you are not willing to admit it was D controlled, fine. Have a good day living in that BS.

What was dem controlled? The president has veto power and the Congress banking committees were Republican when this started under clinton.

During Bush Dodd and Frank escalated a program that had broad support until it went south with the Republican president literally making his own loan programs as well.

You have to remember Bush was literally the establishment puppet. Not a rhino. He was literally their guy. His whole cabinet eq
Was filled with prior Reagan era Republicans.

Yeah like I said it was both parties. If you dont understand how legislation works and how it passed as well as who actually signed and passed the legislation you have your head in the sand.

Let me guess you also support Donald trump loosening the loan laws like barnie frank did (which he has started doing with home loans) and calling for Quantitative Easing (printing money and I injecting it into the economy)?

Dude get s clue the government numbers are not real. They weren't during Obama they aren't now.

If it takes Americans over extending credit to create jobs that isn't a good long term economy. It's literally a bubble waiting for a credit crunch.

Buy gold now before the signs are more obvious.

a reply to: luthier



You sir are being silly. I totally understand how it works my specialty may be Chemistry but my lifelong pursuit is History and I can teach the class. I am starting to suspect you can't handle the truth without spin.

The spin was on you. The D's had both houses and the Presidency under Obama. Wake the hell up!

ETA

Yes Bush was Establishment and we have concluded that is the Cabal. I agree with you on Bush.

a reply to: Justoneman

Obama had nothing to do with the housing crisis.

Again do you think deficit budgets, loosening loan regulations and printing money are good economic philosophies? That is the trump administration's plans.

They sound an awful lot like Obama. Print money to boost the economy.


Do you realize we have one of the largest economic expansions in history yet are producing nearly a trillion in national debt per under trump?

Again totally fake economy. Everyone is spending money they dont have to boost job growth.

Literally a bubble economy.

Do you understand that peoples bad investments get paid off by your taxes? When the government has to stimulate the credit crunch points those bad investors are paid off by your taxes?

So no debt is not just personal responsibility. It can quickly become a problem for society including people who have invested wisely.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Wardaddy454

For 2 years we have had growth in wage? while having the highest national debt in 10 years and the highest personal debt and debt to income ratios.


That doesnt make you think about the metrics a little?

The metrics are starting to trend in the right directions.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Xtrozero

Depending on what state I live in $200k starting, guaranteed, no overtime, working 3 days a week. I plan to live in a lower wage state in the South, so starting pay right now is $160-170k there.

What is your major to get 200k out of college?

www.investopedia.com...

To see how well these stocks have been doing, look no further than the NASDAQ US Buyback Achievers Index (^DRB). The DRB is an index that tracks U.S.-based stocks that have reduced their shares outstanding – primarily through corporate buyback programs – by at least 5% during the past 12 months. Some of the index's top holdings include Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO), Apple Inc. (AAPL), Oracle Corporation (ORCL) and Starbucks Corporation (SBUX). Looking at the chart of the DRB below, you can see that – unlike the S&P 500 – the Buyback Achievers Index climbed to a new 52-week intra-day high of 14,281.53 today. This is higher than the high of 14,268.43 it hit on Sept. 21, 2018, when the S&P 500 topped out at its all-time high.

www.investopedia.com...

A stock buyback, or repurchase, occurs when a company buys its own shares off the market and therefore reduces the amount of stock outstanding.It can do this in one of two ways: The company can either buy shares at current market prices or tender a fixed-price offer to current shareholders. The primary benefit of a buyback is the price appreciation investors usually see after the transaction. When the supply of stock available to the general market suddenly becomes smaller, each share is worth more.

^^^bull market

a reply to: butcherguy

" Remember when Obama asked what Trump was going to do about the economy?...."


Yeah , is he Still Shoveling that Sheit Today ? Should be in a Federal Prison .What a Freakin' Pathetic LOSER .........

originally posted by: butcherguy
Source; NPR

U.S. employers added a better-than-expected 263,000 jobs in April, as the nearly decade-old economic expansion shows no signs of slowing. And the unemployment rate dropped to 3.6 % — the lowest in nearly 50 years.

The US unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in 49 years.

Remember when Obama asked what Trump was going to do about the economy?.... Wave a magic wand?

I'm liking it.

So there's only 5 times as many unemployed as there are homeless people in USA?

Isn't the statistics based on those who actually still TRY to get a job? How about those who have already given up?

The U-6 rate is said to be 9.7%, so I'm guessing the real number is at least that.

Back in 2014, it's been said that 20% of all families did not have a single person that was working. Not sure what that number is today.

a reply to: LordAhriman

Sorry this is a load of bollocks

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Excellent post. Sums up the entire Obama 8-year reign of destruction, in a single photo!

Before you get all excited about unemployment figures maybe you should be asking the more important issue regarding that figure being for those in the US...

1. How many hours a week are those jobs...
2. Is it a worthy living wage...
3. Healthcare...
4. Permanent or Temporary...

It's easy to cook the books when your previous job was buying assets to make them bankrupt. NEVER TRUST A CONSERVATIVE the Irish have a name for them Tòraidh or in modern times, Tory, meaning Outlaw, Brigand or Thief.

And sadly wealth, safety, and jobs are not what a lot of people look for when voting.

Even if Americans need to take a hit it's time for a women president, gay president, foreign president.

Those are important prerequisites for many voters.

There is the official published unemployment rate. Then there's the true rate. Which one do you think is higher? By a long shot. Oh, you don't think the official rate is gamed? Did you know a person is counted as employed if they work 1 hour per week. Really? How many people do you know that can make ends meet working one hour per week? And this is just one example of how the official rate is gamed.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Wardaddy454

For 2 years we have had growth in wage? while having the highest national debt in 10 years and the highest personal debt and debt to income ratios.


That doesnt make you think about the metrics a little?

The metrics are starting to trend in the right directions.

No they are not. They are headed toward more debt. Literally. Much more debt.

a reply to: LordAhriman

No that has nothing to do with it as retirees were not considered unemployed in the first place.

a reply to: butcherguy

Then you didn't dig any deeper than the headline. Go read the jobs report. In the last decade the "not in labor force" number has doubled to 102 Million. The US only has a population of 325 mil. For 50 million people to be "not in labor force" means they were taken out of the unemployment number. If you add them back in, plus all the workers working multiple part time jobs because they can't find employment fulltime, you end up with about a 23% unemployment rate. That is approaching Great Depression levels.

a reply to: richapau

Its the same way they have always done the unemployment rate.

a reply to: richapau

The labor force participation rate is actually trending upwards slightly after being in decline:
www.bls.gov...

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: butcherguy

Then you didn't dig any deeper than the headline. Go read the jobs report. In the last decade the "not in labor force" number has doubled to 102 Million. The US only has a population of 325 mil. For 50 million people to be "not in labor force" means they were taken out of the unemployment number. If you add them back in, plus all the workers working multiple part time jobs because they can't find employment fulltime, you end up with about a 23% unemployment rate. That is approaching Great Depression levels.

Yes, in the last decade.
You realize who was the President for the majority of those years?
Things actually to be turning around for the economy.
Unemployment is down.

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: butcherguy

Then you didn't dig any deeper than the headline. Go read the jobs report. In the last decade the "not in labor force" number has doubled to 102 Million. The US only has a population of 325 mil. For 50 million people to be "not in labor force" means they were taken out of the unemployment number. If you add them back in, plus all the workers working multiple part time jobs because they can't find employment fulltime, you end up with about a 23% unemployment rate. That is approaching Great Depression levels.

Also, that's not an apples to apples comparison. The LFPR doesn't go back that far, so there's no way to say what the "real" rate was during the Depression.