September unemployment is 9.8 percent

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

As first down pointed out, it's been getting higher all summer, but your logic is not spot on either. When kids go back to school, they vacate positions that employers usually try to fill, also, no kid files at the unemployment office. To add to this, A LOT of companies are already gearing up for black friday and the holidays and starting to train employees to know how to service customers for the holidays...sure more will occur at the end of this month, but I am already prepared for my holidays as are several other companies and replaced our student employees.

About landscaping work and contract work, that is a valid argument if all summer wasn't declining in unemployment rate. So what is the current administration doing to fix this issue? Worst rate since 83 and predicted to hit 10% by end of the year! Instead, he's off in Denmark pitching for Chicago to get the olypics, which was an epic fail since we were predicted to rival Rio, and we were first one dismissed.
I think your best argument would have been backing it up with historical data at this time of year, not blindly supporting who you voted for. We ALL know if this was Bush, this would be a public uproar and cry for impeachment...but it's Obama, therefore he's untouchable.

Whoa calm down cowboy, I'm not making this a Bush/Obama deal at all. Just talking about the unemployment rate and I tossed out a thought off the top of my head.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Whoa calm down cowboy, I'm not making this a Bush/Obama deal at all. Just talking about the unemployment rate and I tossed out a thought off the top of my head.

Is it an insult for a redskin fan to call another redskin fan a cowboy?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Whoa calm down cowboy, I'm not making this a Bush/Obama deal at all. Just talking about the unemployment rate and I tossed out a thought off the top of my head.

COWBOY? LOL...think that's the first time I have ever been called that.

I understand you weren't making a direct connection to Bush / Obama, but if Bush was miraculously in office (obviously couldn't happen) then how would you respond to this?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by jsarno

COWBOY? LOL...think that's the first time I have ever been called that.

I understand you weren't making a direct connection to Bush / Obama, but if Bush was miraculously in office (obviously couldn't happen) then how would you respond to this?

This isn't a political thread, it's an economic one. As was Matty's response.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This isn't a political thread, it's an economic one. As was Matty's response.

I agree but the damn liberals keep screwing it up

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This isn't a political thread, it's an economic one. As was Matty's response.

How is it not? It's an unemployment rate, and it's directly related to Obama. That's like saying a Jason Campbell issue is not a football thread.

Again, I see what Matty was trying to say, but we all don't all of sudden forget the plethera of attacks on Bush by Matty. Do you guys think you get a pass on any attacks on Obama and what you said about the previous administration just goes away? I am still astounded at the fact that even you attacked Bush about his national debt, yet Obama over quadruples it and you are miraculously silent??? You don't find that odd?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

How is it not? It's an unemployment rate, and it's directly related to Obama. That's like saying a Jason Campbell issue is not a football thread.

Again, I see what Matty was trying to say, but we all don't all of sudden forget the plethera of attacks on Bush by Matty. Do you guys think you get a pass on any attacks on Obama and what you said about the previous administration just goes away? I am still astounded at the fact that even you attacked Bush about his national debt, yet Obama over quadruples it and you are miraculously silent??? You don't find that odd?

You don't even want to talk about the issue, you just want to point fingers.

Just never mind, seriously.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

You don't even want to talk about the issue, you just want to point fingers.

Just never mind, seriously.

Check and mate.

Thank you sir...of course you can't defend the issue, there is no defense. So you will continue to blindly support who you voted for, and the ones that see Obama for who he is will continue to notice.

I guess the unemployment rate will just continue to spike, and you will continue to care less as to why.

Maybe you should continue to stay in the football sections, at least there you have valid arguments behind your comments. Been enjoying most of your comments there even though some oppose my views, but I like that you at least defend what you believe. But again, how do you defend the undefendable?

I will cease to comment on here, cause I'd rather the warpath know about his horrible unemployment rate, then the thread be closed because it is calling Obama out.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This isn't a political thread, it's an economic one. As was Matty's response.

There's no difference to some people.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

There's no difference to some people.

HAHAHA...then what would you catagorize it as?

Unemployment rate IS POLITICAL people. WOW...to even suggest otherwise is well, blind.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

HAHAHA...then what would you catagorize it as?

Unemployment rate IS POLITICAL people. WOW...to even suggest otherwise is well, blind.

Economics and politics are not one in the same. Ever take an economics course?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Economics and politics are not one in the same. Ever take an economics course?

Agreed. Someone tell our elected officials.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by jsarno

HAHAHA...then what would you catagorize it as?

Unemployment rate IS POLITICAL people. WOW...to even suggest otherwise is well, blind.

For someone who supposedly has an MBA, you have a really poor understanding of economics. The President of the US and the public policy he sets has very little impact on the unemployment rate.

Since you're a fan of analogies, Obama trying to stem the surge in unemployment is akin to building a dyke out of bricks to keep out a 90-foot tsunami.

The stimulus at most could swing unemployment by half a %, and that's IF it's fully successful. But to blame the 9.8% on Obama or the stimulus is ludicrous and reeks of failure to understand economics.

[steveo395]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

For someone who supposedly has an MBA, you have a really poor understanding of economics. The President of the US and the public policy he sets has very little impact on the unemployment rate.

Since you're a fan of analogies, Obama trying to stem the surge in unemployment is akin to building a dyke out of bricks to keep out a 90-foot tsunami.

The stimulus at most could swing unemployment by half a %, and that's IF it's fully successful. But to blame the 9.8% on Obama or the stimulus is ludicrous and reeks of failure to understand economics.

So $800 billion for at most a half % unemployment rate drop? That was a good way to spend that money.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

For someone who supposedly has an MBA, you have a really poor understanding of economics. The President of the US and the public policy he sets has very little impact on the unemployment rate.

Since you're a fan of analogies, Obama trying to stem the surge in unemployment is akin to building a dyke out of bricks to keep out a 90-foot tsunami.

The stimulus at most could swing unemployment by half a %, and that's IF it's fully successful. But to blame the 9.8% on Obama or the stimulus is ludicrous and reeks of failure to understand economics.

I'm not disagreeing with you here. I'm just curious though- Obama said the #1 goal of the stimulus is to create 3 million new jobs in two years. I don't have any figures in front of me as to how many adult Americans are unemployed currently, but I would think that if fully successful, 3 million new jobs would swing the rate by more than .5%.

Although I guess it doesn't really matter considering we're around 8 months into those 2 years and unemployment is still rising.