patrick.net

Well at least there's ONLY 5.6% unemployment.

Say hello to president mitt...

whats up with the thread and post timestamps?
Patrick move to UTC time?

It's all Obama's fault!!!

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Age: 16 years and over

funny how everyone leaves that part out

Your headline is bad and you should feel bad.

is a better picture of the job situation.

Overall employment (blue line) is roughly back to Bush Boom levels, but far below Clinton Boom levels.

F/T employment is ~7M jobs short of either boom time trend.

Here's another report on BLS crap.

http://www.theburningplatform.com/2015/01/09/another-bullshit-bls-report/?utm_content=bufferd8f9f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Jazz was right on time.

I wonder how the forsaken unemployed will vote 8 years after?

I mean after 4 years in, they just didn't show up. They've had another 4 years to be useless and forgotten, living couch to couch. Think they'll go all Kumbya on ya at the next Liberal Lie Fest rallies?

I wonder if they'll do something crazy like throw their vote away and vote Independent, OR will they Vote what ever Republican the GOP throws at them... (gulp) even if that means another Bush.

This is being held in the armory until 2016....
It'll seem like fresh meat when it's reintroduced...

jazz music says

Let's talk about Benghazi!!!!!!!

"There are now 101,585,000 working age Americans not working. That’s a lot of free shit for us 147 million working Americans to pay for."

Good thing the top 5% is taking almost 2/5 of the national income then. They've got the money, and they sure as hell aren't "working" for it, at least once you get up into the 1%ers who taking over 20% and paying a 22.8% tax rate.

Again, BLS considers "working age" to include retirement age. The baby boom was just getting rolling in 1950, with 4M births that year.

Mish dismantled shadow stats a couple days ago regarding GDP growth.

I'm not sure he is an unempeacable source.

I do see that they cook the books regarding UE.

This take on it takes into account the retirement thing:

http://patrick.net/?p=1275298

Bellingham Bill says

Again, BLS considers "working age" to include retirement age. The baby boom was just getting rolling in 1950, with 4M births that year.

Troll-like bullshit that has already been disproven. Why the lies?

Blurtman says

Troll-like bullshit that has already been disproven. Why the lies?

it's actually . . . not a lie. If you read my first message in this thread you'll see I linked to the actual BLS report; here's a screenshot of my above so you can read it again:

Note that it doesn't say Age: 16 - 64, or some such -- that is the labor participation rate of age 16 and over.

Since ages 65+ is included in that, the 62.7% number that everyone is referencing includes retirement age in the "workforce participation".

HTH.

If you are disagreeing with the fact that 1950 saw 4M births, well, I can't help you there, you're too far gone.

"By far the biggest contributors to the drop in participation were:

- that the population of those aged 25-54 increased by 1.12 million, and yet its labor force actually shrank by 1.53 million—a net loss of 2.65 million;

and

- 2.53 million people aged 16-24 failed to enter the labor force compared to the rate in 2003..

In fact, if older Americans were not working longer — in the process adding 2.79 million to the civilian labor force — participation would be even lower than it already is at about 61.7 percent, instead of the 62.8 percent rate reported.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/01/15/u-s-unemployment-retirees-are-not-the-labor-exodus-problem/2/

Blurtman says

that the population of those aged 25-54 increased by 1.12 million, and yet its labor force actually shrank by 1.53 million—a net loss of 2.65 million

that makes it sound like things are getting worse.

but they're not:

shows the situation is stable now.

Comparing today's numbers to the 1977 is deceptive since half the baby boom was still teenagers in that year.

Now they're age 50-68 and beginning to leave the workforce.

http://qz.com/286213/the-chart-obama-haters-love-most-and-the-truth-behind-it/

Blurtman says

that the population of those aged 25-54 increased by 1.12 million

I assume this "Americans for Limited Government" study has 2008 as the base year.

shows the age 25-54 workforce has actually declined a million or so since 2008.

The right-wing nut job writing that is writing fiction.

It's Fortune's Op Ed section, which competes with the WSJ's for how many lies they can pack in 1000 words.