Lowest unemployment rate since Sept 2008

You would like Texans Kareem Jackson despite being a first round draft pick, and after 4 years of being burned, he's turning into a fine subpar cornerback! Maybe even mediocre. Originally Posted by gnadfly

If you wanna use sports metaphors....

One guy took a 12-4 team and turned them into a 2-14 team. The other guy took over the 2-14 team and is turning them back into a 10-6 team.

A President's policies probably have their greatest impact in years 8-12, not 2-6.

You would like Texans Kareem Jackson despite being a first round draft pick, and after 4 years of being burned, he's turning into a fine subpar cornerback! Maybe even mediocre. Originally Posted by gnadfly

If you wanna use sports metaphors....

One guy took a 12-4 team and turned them into a 2-14 team. The other guy took over the 2-14 team and is turning them back into a 10-6 team.

A President's policies probably have their greatest impact in years 8-12, not 2-6. Originally Posted by Doove

Turdfly always pretends to have an answer even though he has yet to have a clue.

Turdy is a very, very, very dim bulb.

Once again, if the unemployment rate is down the corresponding numbers of people receiving public assistance such as food stamps should also be down. Why is there so much difference in the rates?
Still puzzling, isn't it.

Once again, if the unemployment rate is down the corresponding numbers of people receiving public assistance such as food stamps should also be down. Why is there so much difference in the rates?
Still puzzling, isn't it. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

One reason is many of the jobs that are out there barely pay enough for a Familly to live in what has become known as the middle class standard.

Here is an example. I have a niece who teaches school in a rural district. She is divorced, (husband is in prison out of state), and makes a tad over $45,000 a year.

This is barely enough to keep her three teen age kids in cell phones, clothes, money for school activities, televisions, computers, food, etc.

She has a college degree. She is considered a "professional". She is almost to the point to where she wants to file for government assistance..

So these should not be counted as jobs?

You fuckers are amazing.

Each will judge this news depending on their point of view. Remember there are socialist countries that have zero unemployment. That is because they count government programs as employment. I think we should take in to account the size of the workforce. The percentage of our workforce actually working is the lowest in years. However, the unemployment rate is down. That tells me that many people have given up looking and a percentage have simply fallen to the rest of us to take care of them. The number of people now on food stamps has grown. Is this what we want? If the Senate remains democratic after the next election, the country is not moving in the correct direction. We will become a socialist state without freedom. Is that what we want?

Once again, if the unemployment rate is down the corresponding numbers of people receiving public assistance such as food stamps should also be down. Why is there so much difference in the rates? Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Because of idiots like you who refuse to raise the minimum wage.

Still puzzling, isn't it.

What's puzzling is how someone can preach something from the hilltops, turn around and bitch about the ultimate consequences, and not see the irony.

Here is an example. I have a niece who teaches school in a rural district. She is divorced, (husband is in prison out of state), and makes a tad over $45,000 a year.

This is barely enough to keep her three teen age kids in cell phones, clothes, money for school activities, televisions, computers, food, etc.
Originally Posted by Jackie S

She works about 180 days out of the year. There are 365 in a year.

What's puzzling is how someone can preach something from the hilltops, turn around and bitch about the ultimate consequences, and not see the irony. Originally Posted by Doove

Show me the credible economists who believe raising the minimum wage is going to decrease the UE rate. Sure it may bring in more (legal) people into the workforce, but it will eliminate as many as if more jobs.

Show me the credible economists who believe raising the minimum wage is going to decrease the UE rate. Originally Posted by gnadfly

That wasn't the question. Learn to keep up.

That wasn't the question. Learn to keep up. Originally Posted by Doove

That would be a fair question to just about everyone else. But keeping up has never been a part of Turdfly's vocabulary!

He's the ultimate dim bulb!

Because of idiots like you who refuse to raise the minimum wage. Originally Posted by Doove

Do you want a raise, or what?

She works about 180 days out of the year. There are 365 in a year. Originally Posted by LexusLover

you heard about investing FUCK, btw YOU CAUSING CJOHNNY54(CJOHN)FU_CC lots of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ was 7 billion + the beginning of 2013.

WT$ RIDER->IB->LEXUSLOVER

BUSINESS TIMING

you would not know 365 days a year person

Because of idiots like you who refuse to raise the minimum wage.

What's puzzling is how someone can preach something from the hilltops, turn around and bitch about the ultimate consequences, and not see the irony. Originally Posted by Doove

Doofus, if a government mandated minimum wage is THE *solution*, why wasn't THIS problem *solved* when FDR first implemented a minimum wage in 1933?

Doofus, if a government mandated minimum wage is THE *solution*, why wasn't THIS problem *solved* when FDR first implemented a minimum wage in 1933?

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Seems you don't understand the question either. Not surprising.