Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Shows how the housing bubble fueled the economy for a period of time.
Also shows a slow and steady improvement since 2010. At this rate it might return to pre bubble by the time of the next election.
-Labor Participation Rate for 25 to 54 year olds have gotten worse since Obama declared 'mission accomplished' err the recovery began.
-No college students, military soldiers, and the elderly are not counted as not participating in labor as per some of the eternal excuse making for the 'sacred one' hallowed be thine name.
-Labor Participation Rate for 25 to 54 year olds at lows going back to 1984.
-Highest Rate of poverty in over 50 years and it has worsened since Obama declared the recovery.
-Lowest ratio of full time jobs in work force and falling since Obama declared recovery.
-Highest amount of people ever on food stamps and climbing since Obama declared recovery.
-Growing amount of recent college grads not holding a job where a college degree is required. 45%. Has gotten worse since Obama declared a recovery.
-Household income has dipped since Obama declared a recovery.
-Amount of young adults living in mom's basement increased since Obama declared the recovery.
Presidents do not decide when a recession ends. It ends when things stop getting worse. Recovery can go on and on and on.
It took 12+ years for the Great Depression to end and it did so only because the U.S. entered the war via unprecedented deficit spending. Others claim it ended in 1946, when the war ended.
Obama recouped all the job losses from the Great Recession (which totaled 7 million from Sept 2008-Oct 2009) and now has a net growth in job creation more than DOUBLE his miserable failure of a predecessor.
Republicans cause a disaster, do next to nothing to help clean it up, then blame the guy who is trying to put the pieces back together. Vote them out in 2014.
All that came before and during contributed to the mess.
You are deliberately being partisan and ignoring reality.
For instance, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act is as much the Democrats as it is the Republicans.
#1 Democrat Clinton's administration said they would support such a bill years before it became reality.
#2 Democrat Clinton was "proud to sign it into law" and urged Democrats to vote for it.
#3 Democrats overwhelmingly voted for it. 38 to 7 in the Senate and 155 to 51 in the House.
The Democrats could have stopped it in congress or stopped it with a presidential veto.
My point is that BOTH parties got us into this mess. The point that I was responding to is that it was 1 party - which is a lie.
Do you want me to go into the other points you listed and tie it back to Bubba?
Gramm-Leach-Bliley were the sponsors and all are Republican.
The Republicans held the majority in both chambers and the majority of them voted yea.
The Act received bipartisan support.
Both parties are responsible for all that came before. On this we can agree.
They "don't want you to see" it so much they report it EVERY SINGLE MONTH right alongside the traditional U-3 unemployment rate.
I hear that same stupid argument all the time from people who clearly are too lazy to simply look it up for themselves. There is NOTHING "hidden" about the U-6 UE rate - NOTHING. It's reported every single month right alongside the U-3 UE rate.
Ken
But why is U3 slammed into the masses heads? Clearly there is an agenda. To fool the public.
But why is U3 slammed into the masses heads? Clearly there is an agenda. To fool the public.
More tinfoil hat nonsense - there is no "agenda".
The U3 number is more widely quoted because it is the TRADITIONAL UE number that's been around for decades and decades AND more widely used by economists. The U6 number only began being calculated during the Clinton years - prior to that, during the Bush 41 years, during the Reagan years, during the Carter years, the Ford years, the Nixon years etc, etc, etc the U6 value didn't even exist as a statistic.
During the Clinton years the U6 calculation was developed as a way to determine a more comprehensive UE rate that included (for example) those people who still want a job but have given up looking. It's a useful statistic that's more complete than the U3 but a bit less reliable because it's a "soft" statistic vs the "hard" U3 number that's easier to determine with more accuracy. That's WHY the U3 is still more widely used by economists than the more complete - but less accurate - U6 number.
Ken
Last edited by LordBalfor; 08-04-2013 at 10:05 PM..
But why is U3 slammed into the masses heads? Clearly there is an agenda. To fool the public.
Most of the American public can hardly understand the U3. The more complex U6 is beyond their American Idol level brainpower.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
