Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

June Job Creation at 80,000; Rate Holds Steady at 8.2%

"The U.S. economy created just 80,000 jobs in June and the unemployment rate held steady at 8.2 percent, reflecting continued slow growth in the economy with the presidential election just four months away.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics said private payrolls increased 84,000, while the government lost 4,000 jobs. Economists expected job growth of about 100,000 and the unemployment rate to be unchanged, though many had increased their forecasts based on some recent indicators.

With yet another month of weak employment growth, the second quarter marks the worst three-month period in two years. The period averaged just 75,000 per month, against 226,000 in the first quarter, which benefited from an unusually mild winter."

Bush is an asshole!

One-third (100-69.3) of the new jobs are temp jobs.

Thank you, President Obama.

Who the hell voted for this clown????

CAA Flagship wrote:Who the hell voted for this clown????

Women and negroes, neither of whom should be allowed to vote.

Where's jellybelly? Spin this, motherfucker.

CitadelGrad wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote:Who the hell voted for this clown????

Women and negroes, neither of whom should be allowed to vote.

Oh, I forgot hipsters. They shouldn't be allowed to vote either.

CitadelGrad wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:
Women and negroes, neither of whom should be allowed to vote.

Oh, I forgot hipsters. They shouldn't be allowed to vote either.

Don't forget "FAGS" voted for him too...
(But I understand you need to be careful bringing that up, because of the citadel gay thing)
and I would guess unemployment is closer to 12% than 8%perhaps even 15% if you really wanted the true number

Chizzang wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:
Oh, I forgot hipsters. They shouldn't be allowed to vote either.

Don't forget "FAGS" voted for him too...
(But I understand you need to be careful bringing that up, because of the citadel gay thing)
and I would guess unemployment is closer to 12% than 8%perhaps even 15% if you really wanted the true number

I didn't mention FAGS because some of them vote GOP, like the Log Cabin Republicans. They're generally OK, even though I wouldn't touch the bedsheets in that cabin.

Most independent models indicate the true unemployment figure to be around 14%. Those models put the true unemployment figure at ~16.5% when THE ONE took office.

Chizzang wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:
Oh, I forgot hipsters. They shouldn't be allowed to vote either.

Don't forget "FAGS" voted for him too...
(But I understand you need to be careful bringing that up, because of the citadel gay thing)
and I would guess unemployment is closer to 12% than 8%perhaps even 15% if you really wanted the true number

IIR the true number is about 14.6%. I guess it's good that the rate is holding steady.


Ha. Good one.

-

The guy hit 31 fundraisers in June. Maybe a little work on this next recovery summer would be helpful

Proposed new Obama campaign slogan: “Don’t read too much into my first term.”

June 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/07/ ... ation-june" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

May 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/06/ ... uation-may" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

April 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/05/ ... tion-april" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

March 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/04/ ... tion-march" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

February 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/03/ ... n-february" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

January 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/02/ ... on-january" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

December 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/ ... n-december" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

November 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/12/ ... n-november" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

October 2011: “The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and employment estimates are subject to substantial revision. There is no better example than August’s jobs figure, which was initially reported at zero and in the latest revision increased to 104,000. This illustrates why the Administration always stresses it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK:http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/11/ ... on-october)

September 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/10/ ... -september" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

So private sector continues to grow and government employment continues to shrink.

Obushma's a conk genius!

kalm wrote:So private sector continues to grow and government employment continues to shrink.

Obushma's a conk genius!

The private sector is growing?

-
There could be lots of threads of Obama then and now

Flashback 2004: Obama Dismisses Job Creation Of 310,000 New Jobs Under Bush…

BO's message has been Romney will bring us back to the Bush days.

Maybe not so bad

[quoteVia RCP:
After the economy added 310,000 jobs in May 2004 and the unemployment rate was 5.6%, then-candidate Barack Obama used the Democrat weekly radio address to attack the Bush administration for citing good economic numbers.

“For the past few weeks, President Bush and members of his administration have traveled the nation to celebrate recent improved economic statistics. Well, I’ve been traveling too, all over this large and diverse state. In cities and suburbs, downstate and upstate, I’ve heard from people who say it’s way too early to claim victory when it comes to our economy,” Obama says in the Democrats’ radio address from June 26, 2004.

“After three dismal years of job-loss, we all welcome encouraging statistics,” Obama acknowledges in the 2004 address. “But for most Americans, the health of our economy is measured in a different and more personal way: If I lose my job, where will I find one that pays as well and offers real benefits? Can I afford health-care coverage on my own, or the cost of sending my children to college? Will I ever be able to save and retire with dignity and security? These are the questions I hear hardworking people asking. For them, the basic rewards of a middle-class life, rewards that we once took for granted, have become an elusive dream.”
][/quote]

Baldy wrote:

kalm wrote:So private sector continues to grow and government employment continues to shrink.

Obushma's a conk genius!

The private sector is growing?

Oh, I'm sorry. I was just reading the posted article that said 84,000 private sector jobs were created and government jobs were reduced by 4,000 for a net gain of 80,000. Go kill the messenger...or something.

kalm wrote:

Baldy wrote:
The private sector is growing?

Oh, I'm sorry. I was just reading the posted article that said 84,000 private sector jobs were created and government jobs were reduced by 4,000 for a net gain of 80,000. Go kill the messenger...or something.

The country needs to create 120,000 jobs per month just to keep up with population growth. I don't have a PhD in mathematics or anything, but when you crunch the numbers, the private sector retracted by at least 40,000 jobs....again.

Baldy wrote:

kalm wrote:
Oh, I'm sorry. I was just reading the posted article that said 84,000 private sector jobs were created and government jobs were reduced by 4,000 for a net gain of 80,000. Go kill the messenger...or something.

The country needs to create 120,000 jobs per month just to keep up with population growth. I don't have a PhD in mathematics or anything, but when you crunch the numbers, the private sector retracted by at least 40,000 jobs....again.

Put differently, adding one Clempson Stadium worth of jobs per month ain't enough. You need to add at least a Michigan Stadium worth, just to break even. Then multiply it by the square root of 6.93 and add 32, to arrive at the perfect non-inflationary number of new private sector jobs.

Ivytalk wrote:

Baldy wrote:
The country needs to create 120,000 jobs per month just to keep up with population growth. I don't have a PhD in mathematics or anything, but when you crunch the numbers, the private sector retracted by at least 40,000 jobs....again.

Put differently, adding one Clempson Stadium worth of jobs per month ain't enough. You need to add at least a Michigan Stadium worth, just to break even. Then multiply it by the square root of 6.93 and add 32, to arrive at the perfect non-inflationary number of new private sector jobs.

All true and IIRC, whatever we uptick we were experiencing started to go away or 4/29.

kalm wrote:

Ivytalk wrote: Put differently, adding one Clempson Stadium worth of jobs per month ain't enough. You need to add at least a Michigan Stadium worth, just to break even. Then multiply it by the square root of 6.93 and add 32, to arrive at the perfect non-inflationary number of new private sector jobs.

All true and IIRC, whatever we uptick we were experiencing started to go away or 4/29.

Nobels in Econ for all! Who needs Joe Stiglitz?

Looks like most of the board Donks got the memo already. We must not have Kalm's proper address.

CID1990 wrote:Looks like most of the board Donks got the memo already. We must not have Kalm's proper address.

Oooh, oooh, accuse me of being an Obama supporter again! I love that.

Why is anyone surprised about this?

Neither side is going to do ANYTHING between now & the election to change anything.

Our political system is broken by card-carrying Democrats & card-carrying Republicans.

The day people stopped thinking with their own minds versus following ideology like it was religion is when America failed.

bluehenbillk wrote:Why is anyone surprised about this?

Neither side is going to do ANYTHING between now & the election to change anything.

Our political system is broken by card-carrying Democrats & card-carrying Republicans.

The day people stopped thinking with their own minds versus following ideology like it was religion is when America failed.

Donks better do something to change SOMETHING or they'll be in a world of hurt come November...

Maybe it is just me but I find it particularly disturbing that more people were rewarded permanent disability income from the Feds in June than new jobs were created in the private sector... and that figure is 2.6mm new jobs vs. 3.1mm awarded disability since 1/2009.

http://news.investors.com/article/61723 ... -obama.htm

November 2012... the Makers vs. the Takers, God help us all if the Takers win again.

blueballs wrote:Maybe it is just me but I find it particularly disturbing that more people were rewarded permanent disability income from the Feds in June than new jobs were created in the private sector... and that figure is 2.6mm new jobs vs. 3.1mm awarded disability since 1/2009.

http://news.investors.com/article/61723 ... -obama.htm

November 2012... the Makers vs. the Takers, God help us all if the Takers win again.

The takers are shitty at emulating the makers. The makers have pretty much had their way for the past 30 years. The makers are a shitty tide.