Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ...
From: Mark Neglay (negloid_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 06/07/04
- Next message: Mark Neglay: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Previous message: jpathogan: "Re: Money Supply, Credit Supply"
- In reply to: john grove: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Next in thread: retrogrouch_at_comcast.net: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Reply:(deleted message) retrogrouch_at_comcast.net: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Reply: Synthetic Telepath: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Reply: john grove: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 7 Jun 2004 03:24:13 -0700
jgrove24@hotmail.com (john grove) wrote in message news:<ab67fbc2.0406061017.5d778a3e@posting.google.com>...
> "John Fraude Kerry" <BigLoser@dnc.org> wrote in message news:<Mz5wc.41347$pt3.1735@attbi_s03>...
> > The Unemployment Rate is LOWER than what it averaged during the 90's, so the
> > Democrats are looking REALLY stupid with their bull*** rhetoric about
> > "worst since the Great Depression".
> >
> > Americans are laughing at the increasingly-hysterical Democrats.
>
> Its a different story when 29 million working age adults are "not in
> the labor pool", thus not
> counted.
A greater percentage of these same people were out of the labor pool
during past times. The labor force has grown every year for the past
three years and is now up over 2 million people since the beginning of
the recession.
> Also, an average of 700,000 layoffs during CHRISTMAS week in 2001,
> 2002 , 2003, re.
> doleta.gov
Ok now you're just making *** up. Layoffs? Did you mean new
unemployment insurance claims, al la www.dol.gov? If so, protraying
them as layoffs is highly deceptive. Additionally, the only way the
figures approach the line of BS you are dropping here, is if you
consider non-seasonally adjusted numbers. New claims always go up in
the last week of the year, as temporary holiday employees lose their
temporary holiday jobs wrapping gifts, running registers, etc..
Finally, even if we assume that all people who filed for new
unemployment insurance in the last week of 2001, 2002, and 2003 were
laid off; and if we disregard the seasonal function and foolishly
examine unadjusted numbers during the one week in the year when new
claims are almost always exceptionally high; if we make all of these
*stupid* assumptions, new claims were higher in the last week of 2000
(568,973 NSA) than they were in the last week of 2003 (516,493 NSA).
They also were not that much lower than they were in the last week of
2002, (620,929 NSA).
> Piles of Shruble from coast to coast.
Can you make a point without deceiving or is that your only tool?
- Next message: Mark Neglay: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Previous message: jpathogan: "Re: Money Supply, Credit Supply"
- In reply to: john grove: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Next in thread: retrogrouch_at_comcast.net: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Reply:(deleted message) retrogrouch_at_comcast.net: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Reply: Synthetic Telepath: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Reply: john grove: "Re: UNEMPLOYMENT rate in US tops Great Depression in new report ..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]