100,000 Thousand Jobs Created!!

I answered your question, Ekim. The fact that you don't like or understand my answer is irrelevant. I answered your question. This will be explained to you in Basic Comprehension 101. Take it, you'll like it.

Wow CJ is all I can say. At no time did this (young woman) say anything about 40,000,000 jobs. She did say something about 4, 400,000 jobs before Obama took office and 4,300,000 jobs after Obama took office for a total of 8,700,000 jobs lost during this recession. You were off by a factor of 10 when you tried to tag this to Bush. Of course we do have mostly her word and her conclusions to go by. Not the greatest source. I do wonder when the trough of the recession occurred that she kept talking about. Normally that would be the deepest part of a wave but we don't know from her words. There is evidence that the recession is coming back around and giving Obama even more chances to look clownish.

I think you lost Ekim. Your numbers don't even match her numbers and she is your only source.

Wow CJ is all I can say. At no time did this (young woman) say anything about 40,000,000 jobs. She did say something about 4, 400,000 jobs before Obama took office and 4,300,000 jobs after Obama took office for a total of 8,700,000 jobs lost during this recession. You were off by a factor of 10 when you tried to tag this to Bush. Of course we do have mostly her word and her conclusions to go by. Not the greatest source. I do wonder when the trough of the recession occurred that she kept talking about. Normally that would be the deepest part of a wave but we don't know from her words. There is evidence that the recession is coming back around and giving Obama even more chances to look clownish.

I think you lost Ekim. Your numbers don't even match her numbers and she is your only source. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

wow is all I can say too, you cant read canya teach..

give it another try, if youre real lucky you might accidently stumble over that part

hint

that quote is in a light blue color in the middle of the post

another hint .. need any more help el teach-o


We still need many more jobs to overcome the loss of jobs that started in 2008 and to make up for the increase in population since 2008. Please remember that over 49,000,000 people were laid off between Spring of 2008 and the end of 2009.

The entire quote:

Can you summarize the above?

• <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Obama was inaugurated in January 2009 when the economy was in free fall and we were losing about 700,000 jobs a month. Over 4,400,000 jobs were lost before Obama took office. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">The employment situation did not bottom out until late 2009 or early 2010. An additional 4,300,000 jobs were lost between the time that Obama took office and the bottom ("trough") of the recession. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">That's a total job loss of at least 8,700,000 jobs over approximately 2 years. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Since the economy started to add jobs under Obama, 3,165,000 jobs have been added using seasonally-adjusted numbers (See below).<LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Since the economy started to add jobs under Obama, 2,954,000 jobs have been added using "real" unadjusted numbers.
• We still need many more jobs to overcome the loss of jobs that started in 2008 and to make up for the increase in population since 2008. Please remember that over 49,000,000 people were laid off between Spring of 2008 and the end of 2009.

Now if I may point out that this was a summary meaning her own words and I think she did a typo because known of her numbers (the supposedly hard statistics) do not support this last statement. So I give her a break and didn't accuse her of being stupid and unable to do simple math. Why don't you cut her the same break? The fact is that nothing in what she posted supports Ekims claim. See he may have taken the typo seriously and did so repeatedly. Once, yes, twice, maybe, but when others points out the problem he doubled down and persisted.

Give a hard piece of data that supports the claim that 49,000,000 people were laid off over two years. I mean just look at the numbers (which Ekim didn't): the US population is 330,000,000 and 49,000,000 is 14.9%. So Ekim is saying that unemployment was 14.9% at the end of 2009 if you count every swinging dick in the country. If you look at the people actually working 107,000,000 in 2008 and find that 49,000,000 is 45.8%. So you see that Ekim has said that unemployment in 2009 was approximately 45%...see how crazy that is?

I'm seeing a lot of

bu..bu..bu.. but here as they look for something, anything to deflect it off on COG Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

Do you even have any idea what the fick you're talking about?

The answer has been discussed in here no fewer than 5 times before. While others may care to waste their breath, i have no desire to restate the obvious. For the 6th time.

I answered your question, Ekim. The fact that you don't like or understand my answer is irrelevant. I answered your question. This will be explained to you in Basic Comprehension 101. Take it, you'll like it. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I can see by your answer you never read the question.If you said he only created 100,000jobs,when it has been reported the private sector had created 150,000 jobs month until May.then you are full of shit.However I don't think a president creates any jobs.

Finally a truth!!! A president doesn't create jobs. Though I suppose a president could have a first lady who goes out and hires grounds keepers for the White House garden but that would never add up to a 100,000 jobs. No a president (and a congress) create an environment in terms of taxes and regulations that allow private business to create jobs. This centralized concept of government creating jobs is fatally flawed. I didn't know you had it in you Ekim.

The entire quote:

Can you summarize the above?

• <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Obama was inaugurated in January 2009 when the economy was in free fall and we were losing about 700,000 jobs a month. Over 4,400,000 jobs were lost before Obama took office. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">The employment situation did not bottom out until late 2009 or early 2010. An additional 4,300,000 jobs were lost between the time that Obama took office and the bottom ("trough") of the recession. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">That's a total job loss of at least 8,700,000 jobs over approximately 2 years. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Since the economy started to add jobs under Obama, 3,165,000 jobs have been added using seasonally-adjusted numbers (See below).<LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Since the economy started to add jobs under Obama, 2,954,000 jobs have been added using "real" unadjusted numbers.
• We still need many more jobs to overcome the loss of jobs that started in 2008 and to make up for the increase in population since 2008. Please remember that over 49,000,000 people were laid off between Spring of 2008 and the end of 2009.

Now if I may point out that this was a summary meaning her own words and I think she did a typo because known of her numbers (the supposedly hard statistics) do not support this last statement. So I give her a break and didn't accuse her of being stupid and unable to do simple math. Why don't you cut her the same break? The fact is that nothing in what she posted supports Ekims claim. See he may have taken the typo seriously and did so repeatedly. Once, yes, twice, maybe, but when others points out the problem he doubled down and persisted.

Give a hard piece of data that supports the claim that 49,000,000 people were laid off over two years. I mean just look at the numbers (which Ekim didn't): the US population is 330,000,000 and 49,000,000 is 14.9%. So Ekim is saying that unemployment was 14.9% at the end of 2009 if you count every swinging dick in the country. If you look at the people actually working 107,000,000 in 2008 and find that 49,000,000 is 45.8%. So you see that Ekim has said that unemployment in 2009 was approximately 45%...see how crazy that is? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Why do you waste your time arguing with idiots? To me, it seems kind of pointless. When someone makes a mistake on unemployment numbers that's off by 1,000%, it show's how clueless they are.

The entire quote:

Can you summarize the above?

• <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Obama was inaugurated in January 2009 when the economy was in free fall and we were losing about 700,000 jobs a month. Over 4,400,000 jobs were lost before Obama took office. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">The employment situation did not bottom out until late 2009 or early 2010. An additional 4,300,000 jobs were lost between the time that Obama took office and the bottom ("trough") of the recession. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">That's a total job loss of at least 8,700,000 jobs over approximately 2 years. <LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Since the economy started to add jobs under Obama, 3,165,000 jobs have been added using seasonally-adjusted numbers (See below).<LI style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0.25em; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px">Since the economy started to add jobs under Obama, 2,954,000 jobs have been added using "real" unadjusted numbers.
• We still need many more jobs to overcome the loss of jobs that started in 2008 and to make up for the increase in population since 2008. Please remember that over 49,000,000 people were laid off between Spring of 2008 and the end of 2009.

Now if I may point out that this was a summary meaning her own words and I think she did a typo because known of her numbers (the supposedly hard statistics) do not support this last statement. So I give her a break and didn't accuse her of being stupid and unable to do simple math. Why don't you cut her the same break? The fact is that nothing in what she posted supports Ekims claim. See he may have taken the typo seriously and did so repeatedly. Once, yes, twice, maybe, but when others points out the problem he doubled down and persisted.

Give a hard piece of data that supports the claim that 49,000,000 people were laid off over two years. I mean just look at the numbers (which Ekim didn't): the US population is 330,000,000 and 49,000,000 is 14.9%. So Ekim is saying that unemployment was 14.9% at the end of 2009 if you count every swinging dick in the country. If you look at the people actually working 107,000,000 in 2008 and find that 49,000,000 is 45.8%. So you see that Ekim has said that unemployment in 2009 was approximately 45%...see how crazy that is? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

you STILL didnt read the entire article ... it explains the complex differences between unemployment .


go play in the street

49,000,000 jobs is almost half the work force. Seriously, CBJ7, you need that comprehension course. Seriously.

Do you even have any idea what the fick you're talking about?

The answer has been discussed in here no fewer than 5 times before. While others may care to waste their breath, i have no desire to restate the obvious. For the 6th time. Originally Posted by Doove

Here this will keep everyone bust for a while. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION —MAY 2012

Nonfarm payroll employment changed little in May (+69,000), and the unemployment rate was
essentially unchanged at 8.2 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment
increased in health care, transportation and warehousing, and wholesale trade but declined in
construction. Employment was little changed in most other major industries.

Beyond all the political bullshit, the fact of the matter is there are A LOT of people hurting in this country. People that cannot find meaningful employment still. A full 4-5 years after the shit hit the fan. That is NOT an improvement in my book, nor is it to those people.

What exactly has Obama done since he took office to help rectify the employment situation, what policies have been put in place to help the economy and make business need and want to hire people?.....AND what have the results been, to date?

Here this will keep everyone bust for a while. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Beyond all the political bullshit, the fact of the matter is there are A LOT of people hurting in this country. People that cannot find meaningful employment still. A full 4-5 years after the shit hit the fan. That is NOT an improvement in my book, nor is it to those people.

What exactly has Obama done since he took office to help rectify the employment situation, what policies have been put in place to help the economy and make business need and want to hire people?.....AND what have the results been, to date? Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

the recession wasnt over until 2010 loomed on the horizon ... jobs decline not increase during recessions, hence the name "recession"

for ANY president Republican or Democrat to turn red numbers into black numbers in half of his term is an improvement regardless how anyone tends to view it

49,000,000 jobs is almost half the work force. Seriously, CBJ7, you need that comprehension course. Seriously. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

seriously, click the link and read the differences between raw numbers and seasonally adjusted numbers ... aka educate yourself before you make stupid remarks

from the report


Counting jobs or workers is very tricky. In seasonal numbers, we have still lost more jobs and workers in the first year of Obama's administration, when the economy was struggling to pull out of recession, than we have gained during the second and third years of Obama's administration when we have experienced job growth. We are still running a jobs/workers deficit of up to 1,500,000 in seasonally-adjusted numbers since Obama took office.


Job growth was brisk in the first months of 2011, slowed down towards the middle of the year, then picked up during the last months of the year. However, job growth, particularly private sector job growth, continued throughout 2011. We now have 23 months of private sector job growth.


There's usually no one number that explains everything, and most monthly numbers need to be seen as "trends", not absolutes. People use the unemployment rate, but even that can vary for so many reasons that don't really reflect the true state of the labor market.

CBJ4.75 you do not create a job everytime you SUCK a dick...fucker

Actually jobs have nothing to do with the definition of a recession. It is all about GDP. It is technically possible to increase GDP and loose jobs at the same time.