If it keeps up like this for the next year and a half, the Repubs will really get trounced in 2016.
2
It will be interesting to see what happens with energy sector jobs and the extraction industries over the next few months if crude prices remain around $50/barrel.
Here in Ohio, massive layoffs among drilling and fracking jobbers and the local steel plants that supply their equipment are just hitting home, and I'm sure the trickle down of those lost paychecks with hit Ohio hard in the second-quarter of 2015.
All bad news for the GOP Presidential aspirations of Ohio Gov. Kaisch.
Here in Ohio, massive layoffs among drilling and fracking jobbers and the local steel plants that supply their equipment are just hitting home, and I'm sure the trickle down of those lost paychecks with hit Ohio hard in the second-quarter of 2015.
All bad news for the GOP Presidential aspirations of Ohio Gov. Kaisch.
2
Molly in the middle 51 ... is very upbeat.
Now she has to convince the rest of us.
Now she has to convince the rest of us.
I've been watching jobs and unemployment numbers carefully for 6-7 years, since late 2008, which was certainly a very glum time. I certainly don't think everything is peachy, but people are working, homes that were in foreclosure are no longer in foreclosure; either the people were able to somehow get out of foreclosure or the home was sold, restaurants are full, grocery stores are full, you can't even find a parking space in some malls. And I'm not the only one who is "upbeat". The University of Michigan measure of consumer confidence that came out a few days ago is the highest it has been in 10 years.
Do we still have a distance to go? Yep.. but 11 million more jobs than we had 5 years ago is not hay.
Do we still have a distance to go? Yep.. but 11 million more jobs than we had 5 years ago is not hay.
4
Now imagine how good things would be if the GOP saw fit to fix some 110 year old infrastructure. Nah. Some union guy might get a misbegotten dollar. Can't have that....
17
What does this mean? It means the "recovery" is nothing different than the last debt fueled money printing "recovery" that eventually crashed and burned under the weight of its own fictitious creation. When debt exceeds the rate of GDP "growth" you get a sugar high then a painful withdrawal.
3
One thing it does not mean: Obamacare is not a "jobs killer".
PS - Ronald Reagan tripled the debt in his 8 years, the worst debt increase of any President, outside of the Civil and World War Presidents. Reagan left the economy in pretty good shape, too bad it took Bush only 3 years to ruin it.
PS - Ronald Reagan tripled the debt in his 8 years, the worst debt increase of any President, outside of the Civil and World War Presidents. Reagan left the economy in pretty good shape, too bad it took Bush only 3 years to ruin it.
3
Dear Mr Irwin,
As a follow up, I would appreciate seeing a breakdown of what types of jobs were added to the work force...were they mostly construction jobs, as the photo suggests?
I think it also would be interesting for readers to know in which part of the country were these jobs added.
As a follow up, I would appreciate seeing a breakdown of what types of jobs were added to the work force...were they mostly construction jobs, as the photo suggests?
I think it also would be interesting for readers to know in which part of the country were these jobs added.
5
Honestly, I am not seeing evidence in this argument to support this: " to match the reality that this is an economy with momentum and that it is finally translating into a stronger job market for ordinary workers." How do we know that the market is better for ordinary workers?
Ten million more jobs in the past five years? Three million in the past year? Inflation-adjusted wages of "ordinary workers"... production and non-supervisory workers.. finally going up.. to what they were in 1979? I personally don't know anyone who is looking for work after being laid off. All of hte people I did know who were laid off during the Recession have either found jobs or they have aged into retirement. All of the recent college graduates that I know are now working. I couldn't say that 3-4 years ago. The various measures of consumer confidence are higher than they were at any time since 2008, and one of those measures is at a ten year high. Are things still difficult for some people? You betcha. But that doesn't mean that most people who really need a job are working and feeling better about their lives.
4
Better check what the CEO of Gallup said about the job numbers before you write any more articles on the booming economy.
1
The CEO of Gallup caused a stir a couple of days ago when he said that the 5.6% is "misleading". The headline to the article said it was a "lie".. and that sent the naysayers into a frenzy of glee. If you read the actual article by the CEO of Gallup, a Mr. Clifton, you will see that he doesn't like the way the unemployment rate has been calculated.. and the way it HAS been calculated for decades. His article is, unfortunately, full of holes and statistical anomalies. For example, he complains about the percentage of people over the age of 18 who are working full-time. That percentage seems to be stagnant over the last 3-4 years. But he does not discuss the demographic trends that make that percentage look stagnant. When you look at the percentage of people in their prime working years working full-time, you would see, as would the CEO of Gallup, that that percentage has gone up as the economy has improved. It is now only 1% less than it was in 1986, during the much-admired "Reagan recovery". If you know anything about jobs numbers, it's easy to see Mr. Clifton's fallacies, but much harder to understand why the CEO of Gallup would make such mistakes.
5
Boehner is not happy. Would this make him smile?
The GOP ending all taxes on the rich and corporations and raise sales taxes so that the middle class , poor and unfortunate bear the burden.It's call "Drip Up to the rich" economics. And, of course, forget doing anything for our infrastructure, fire all the teachers and people in public service and get rid of the minimum wage.
The GOP ending all taxes on the rich and corporations and raise sales taxes so that the middle class , poor and unfortunate bear the burden.It's call "Drip Up to the rich" economics. And, of course, forget doing anything for our infrastructure, fire all the teachers and people in public service and get rid of the minimum wage.
11
Perfect!
3
Funny, you can't tell it was good by the performance of the market today.
1
It was a middling market performance; a loss but not a huge loss. The "market" is worried that due to the growing job market, interest rates will be raised sooner than later and his may damp down future growth.
5
Okay but there's always a dark cloud in front of that silver lining: the same malicious dimwits in the GOP who've done everything possible to slow economic recovery and to blame the President for that delay still have THEIR jobs in the capital they all claim to hate.
25
This is good news. If the trend continues, workers will finally be empowered by supply and demand to seek better wages and benefits from employers. That would begin to address the problem of income inequality, but we have a long way to go in that area.
13
Inflation-adjusted hourly and weekly wages for production and non-supervisory workers have been going up little by little. They are now where they were in 1979-- The HIGHEST they have been since 1979.
5
Mitch McConnell is quite right, of course, to take credit for all this good news. Even though he has accomplished nothing positive for six years, the mere perception of this great statesman now in charge of the US Senate has proven sufficient to attach rockets under the wings of the nationl economy.
But wait, House Speaker John Boehner, ever the gracious host of foreign dignitaries, describes the US economy as a catastrophe. Surely this is all President Obama 's fault, but who has the correct read on the matter?
But let's give Mr. McConnell all of his due respect. Congratulations, Mitch, on such a dramatic turn-around in one short month! And they said it couldn't be done!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
But wait, House Speaker John Boehner, ever the gracious host of foreign dignitaries, describes the US economy as a catastrophe. Surely this is all President Obama 's fault, but who has the correct read on the matter?
But let's give Mr. McConnell all of his due respect. Congratulations, Mitch, on such a dramatic turn-around in one short month! And they said it couldn't be done!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
22
I suppose that McConnell will take credit for the significant upward revisions in November and December, before he took over the Senate..as well as the January numbers? Actually, though the Repubs will not admit this, the economy started to roll when tax rates were raised (some of the Bush tax cuts were rolled back) back in early 2013. Who woulda thunk it? Tax INCREASES wind up creating economic growth and more jobs? Absolutely the opposite of what conservatives and Republicans have been telling us for decades.
8
Molly, your other posts suggest that you are well read enough about such issues that you already know that tax increases are not reliably related to economic growth. If not, a roughly 10 minute Google search should do the trick.
No way that I can determine what was the chicken and what was the egg. But certainly, when taxes were raised for the $400,000+ people in early 2013, the economy did start to take off.. and the increase in jobs started to snowball.
3
I hope so, because, really, it’s time; it has been long enough. I mean, this is America after all.
1
It's not good at all if you are a teen or young adult seeking work - 18.8% unemployment for 16-19 year olds and 9.8% unemployment for 20-14 year olds. Unacceptable. http://opportunitynation.org/latest-news/youth-unemployment-figures-janu...
2
I would hope that 16-17 youths would be focused on high school and those 18-21 would be in college or seriously thinking about it.
5
No. Completely acceptable.
These levels are below the 40 year average and lower than they were during Reagan's presidency.
Citing figures without historical context and hoping that nobody is paying attention makes for a bad argument.
Source:
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet
Series ID: LNS14000012
These levels are below the 40 year average and lower than they were during Reagan's presidency.
Citing figures without historical context and hoping that nobody is paying attention makes for a bad argument.
Source:
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet
Series ID: LNS14000012
10
I agree that history and context are important. Youth unemployment in the U.S. is a critical problem. Lots of teens and young adults need and want to be working full or part-time and cannot find jobs, including nearly 30 percent of black teens.
This is a great report entitled The Plummeting Labor Market Fortunes of Teens and Young Adults published in 2014 by Brookings that is worth a read: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Reports/2014/03/14%20you...
Another interesting study by Young Invincibles: The Hidden Cost of Young Adult Unemployment: http://younginvincibles.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/In-This-Together-...
This is a great report entitled The Plummeting Labor Market Fortunes of Teens and Young Adults published in 2014 by Brookings that is worth a read: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Reports/2014/03/14%20you...
Another interesting study by Young Invincibles: The Hidden Cost of Young Adult Unemployment: http://younginvincibles.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/In-This-Together-...
Been doing some research on U6 figures and found this great chart which you might want to take a look at:
http://www.macrotrends.net/1377/u6-unemployment-rate
If you'll notice on that chart U6 unemployment (and all the unemployment rates went up sharply in 2008 while President Bush was still in office. Remember Obama was elected in November of 2008, but didnt take office until January of 2009. U6 reached its peak in October of 2009 which was the first month of an Obama led economy since fiscal years start in October and the out going President's budget is still in effect until October of the first year of the new administration. U6 has declined by 6.3% since October of 2009. And the huge jump in U6 unemployment took place under the policies of George W. Bush.
So, U6 data also shows that Obama's policies have resulted in a remarkable economic improvement that have helped erase some of the damage done by the failed policies of President Bush.
Next.
http://www.macrotrends.net/1377/u6-unemployment-rate
If you'll notice on that chart U6 unemployment (and all the unemployment rates went up sharply in 2008 while President Bush was still in office. Remember Obama was elected in November of 2008, but didnt take office until January of 2009. U6 reached its peak in October of 2009 which was the first month of an Obama led economy since fiscal years start in October and the out going President's budget is still in effect until October of the first year of the new administration. U6 has declined by 6.3% since October of 2009. And the huge jump in U6 unemployment took place under the policies of George W. Bush.
So, U6 data also shows that Obama's policies have resulted in a remarkable economic improvement that have helped erase some of the damage done by the failed policies of President Bush.
Next.
16
The 2008 housing crash was the primary cause of the economic downturn. The beginning of the housing bubble was created by democratic policies regarding "affordable housing," mostly during the 90's. This introduced artificial forces (other than supply and demand) into the market, and resulted in many people in houses that they could not really afford. The secondary problem was banks being easily able to sell bad loans to Fannie and Freddie, because the people in these organizations are apparently not able to judge the quality of loans they make. They are also essentially betting with other people's money (allows for more foolish bets). The fraud that was packaging bad loans as investments was simply criminal. The bubble that burst did not begin during the Bush presidency. He was one of the few that actually warned of potential problems that were being created by existing government housing policies, although he did go along with them in his early years. He was busy with a terrorism issue that had also been developing for decades.
The idea that the housing crisis was actually the Democrats fault because of unmentioned and uncited "Democratic policies" is unsubstantiated outside the right wing bubble of made-up information. It was the banks, not the Democrats, no matter how much right wingers may wish otherwise. Regardless, Bush did absolutely nothing to stop it, and you of course give him a pass, because he "warned" of the problem. So if Obama warns of a problem, I am sure you will forever forgive him for it if it should happen, since he "warned" of it. Presidents are judged by results, and every clear-eyed person can see which President has produced better results.
3
I modeled the losses in housing due to the declines in minority home ownership rates following 2008 and the numbers just aren't that big - the total loss to mortgage holders was about 480 billion. Our banking system should have been able to handle that easily. The US government could have just written a check and moved on.
No, other things were happening. Secondary bets on the underlying mortgages totaled in the trillions and it was THOSE losses. by investors duped by S&P's dishonest risk ratings, that were the problem, not the piddly little foreclosures.
No, other things were happening. Secondary bets on the underlying mortgages totaled in the trillions and it was THOSE losses. by investors duped by S&P's dishonest risk ratings, that were the problem, not the piddly little foreclosures.
1
This skewed unemployment figure disguises a sad reality -- income inequality -- an issue that is of such great concern that Obama even made it a key issue of his State of the Union address this year.
Many qualified people are still out of work, or have to cobble together part-time work -- without benefits -- in order to eat. Many of these people have gotten sick from stress and are now fully UNemployed or dying or bankrupt or all of the above.
Yes, Obama and the Fed have led the nation to a better place than it would have been under a GOP helm, but this "cheery" news of how well the economy is doing is not anywhere near a true reflection of reality.
Many qualified people are still out of work, or have to cobble together part-time work -- without benefits -- in order to eat. Many of these people have gotten sick from stress and are now fully UNemployed or dying or bankrupt or all of the above.
Yes, Obama and the Fed have led the nation to a better place than it would have been under a GOP helm, but this "cheery" news of how well the economy is doing is not anywhere near a true reflection of reality.
15
There are still many problems with certain segments of the population. Many older people who lost their jobs back 6-7 years ago, people who counted on another 5-10 years of income before retirement, have never returned to full-time, permanent work.. and they probably won't. Younger people can potentially re-educate themselves and re-enter the labor force. But many older people have been forced into early retirement just to have some kind of income. And, yes, stress can be a killer.
But consumer confidence is higher (by some reports) than it has been for 10 years. So, for most of the people of this country, the economy is coming back and it IS "cheery".
But consumer confidence is higher (by some reports) than it has been for 10 years. So, for most of the people of this country, the economy is coming back and it IS "cheery".
3
The government's official unemployment rate measure of 5.7% (called U3) leaves out everyone who is jobless and quit looking for a job 30 days ago. If you include those people, the real unemployment rate (called U6) is 11.3%, double what our govt is telling us. And who is going to rejoice over a newly created job that pays much less than your old one which was necessary to pay all the bills.
4
If the Rs would have helped the administration passing some of Obama's infrastructure project the negative picture you describe would be much better. I am telling you, just in case you need someone to blame.
6
There is nothing different about how these numbers are calculated from those under Clinton or Bush. So what the heck is your point. If you don't like the wage structure in this country, go picket your local Chamber of Commerce or the Congressional Republicans.
7
We were in the deepest part of the recession when Obama was elected. Taking six years to realize that a lot of people were out of work does not instill confidence in leadership. I think we have someone to blame. We can also blame both parties in Congress.
This is good for the economy in so many ways. It means people who are unhappy in their jobs or feeling underpaid will have the confidence to apply to new jobs -- and that turnover means organizations are refreshed with new employees and new energy. Most of the people who change jobs get a raise, so that will show up in wage growth.
It will also mean companies need to spend more money recruiting, hiring and training to replace the employees who move. As soon as that cost rises, then companies will invest more to retain people they don't want to lose. And THAT is when some of the rest of us could start to see meaningful raises. Maybe not in 2015, but 2016 for sure.
It will also mean companies need to spend more money recruiting, hiring and training to replace the employees who move. As soon as that cost rises, then companies will invest more to retain people they don't want to lose. And THAT is when some of the rest of us could start to see meaningful raises. Maybe not in 2015, but 2016 for sure.
6
Yes... There is something called the JOLTS report, the Job Openings, Layoffs, and Turnover Survey, and it does tell us, among other things, how many people quit their jobs in a given month. The quits rate always goes up when the labor economy improves, and it has been going up since early 2010, though it has really accelerated lately.
NYT says: the pool of labor rose by 730,000 leading to the uptick, but the number of people of working age, not participating in the labor force is 11%.
It includes people who stopped looking for work. Here is where the efforts should be, to identify those people and get them retrained for the work force, BEFORE granting 5 million green cards, which drive wages lower for everyone.
It includes people who stopped looking for work. Here is where the efforts should be, to identify those people and get them retrained for the work force, BEFORE granting 5 million green cards, which drive wages lower for everyone.
10
Not sure where you are getting the 11%. The labor force percentage is the number of people 16 years of age and older who are either working or actively looking for work as a percentage of all people 16 years of age and older who are not institutionalized or in the active military. Most people do not want to work.. Many are in school, many are home with children, many are disabled, most are retired. Do you want to force people who are home with their children or retired to get retrained so that they can go back to work? And about 5 million green cards.. are you in favor of the government, police or military, going door to door to round people up who don't have "papers"? Do you really want to spend that much of our money to round people up and expel them from this country?
1
Unemployment falls quite consistently under Democratic presidents. Under Republican presidents, it is more up and down, but definitely unemployment has risen much more than it has fallen under Republicans. During the last 29 years that each party has held office, unemployment has risen a total of over 8% under Republicans and fallen almost 12% under Democrats- http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/unemployment-rate-by-president
You can see how the most WW2 presidencies stack up on job creation (slightly different than unemployment) here- http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/job-creation-president The story is equally compelling that Democrats are much better for jobs there as well.
You can see how the most WW2 presidencies stack up on job creation (slightly different than unemployment) here- http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/job-creation-president The story is equally compelling that Democrats are much better for jobs there as well.
8
The ceteris paribus assumption underlying extrapolations or projections of current data patterns into the future are worthy of examination. For example, recent data from the ISM monthly manufacturing report show that the prices of manufactured goods declined from a reading of 59.5 in September (2014)to 35.0 in January (2015). This is a decline of about 41% in the pricing power of US manufacturers. The current European sovereign debt problems as represented by Greece and recent negative CPI data from the Eurozone countries indicate this regional economy's recent lack of aggregate demand. To counter, the ECB has initiated a very significant QE policy of its own to act as a monetary stimulus. China's annual growth rate in GDP has slowed to +7.4% in the latest quarter, and it is reducing its central bank's reserve/deposit ratio to enact a more stimulatory monetary policy. To pump prime its recent stagnating economy, Japan too has initiated a series of monetary, fiscal, and secular economic policies to restart its own lagging aggregate demand. Russia's overall economy is being walloped by its dependence on oil prices and their current collapse. As a result of these global contractionary forces, excess supply exists in many global industrial sectors. And, market prices are signaling this excess supply with data such as that presented from the ISM above. It is unlikely US employment can continue to grow as robustly in this current weak global economic environment. 02/06 1:01 p
4
But economists have been saying the same or similar things since... 2010 or 2011 now. I remember constant projections for a "double dip" recession dating back to 2010 or 2011. So, yes, it seems as though you are right, and eventually the contrarians will have to be right... well, somewhat right.
Jim Clifton, the is Chairman and CEO at Gallup, had another take on this earlier in the week: http://www.gallup.com/opinion/chairman/181469/big-lie-unemployment.aspx . Should we celebrate or wring our hands? I suspect neither, but we have every reason to be hopeful. On the other hand, youth unemployment remains extraordinarily high in this country and that is something to be concerned about.
4
Youth unemployment is always high, because youths are in high school or college. This is a red herring. Go compare the youth unemployment rates of past Presidencies to this one, and you will see the proportions relative to overall unemployment are pretty much the same.
2
I read and debunked that article. It was poorly written and relied on statistical manipulation.. disturbing for someone who is the CEO of Gallup. Here's my line-by-line debunking of that article:
http://mollysmiddleamerica.blogspot.com/2015/02/debunking-gallups-big-li...
http://mollysmiddleamerica.blogspot.com/2015/02/debunking-gallups-big-li...
1
Now we've got a clear vindication of President Obama's economic strategy. The stimulus was a win. Quantitative easing was a win. Investment in alternative energy was a win.
Imagine how strong the growth would have been had Republicans not decimated government payrolls.
Imagine how strong the growth would have been had Republicans not decimated government payrolls.
43
Six years to come out of a recession can hardly be called a success.
1
So to paraphrase your argument:
Thanks for pulling us out of the crisis, but what took you so long?
And by the way the recession was declared over months ago.
Thanks for pulling us out of the crisis, but what took you so long?
And by the way the recession was declared over months ago.
3
Really? Look at Europe. Following austerity policies, they are still in a mess--and far behind us. Six years would look wonderful to the people living through that.
6
No need for celebration as these are fuzzy numbers that do not clearly tell the tale of the pronounced slack in the labor market. Given the slack, wage stagnation is not likely to ease anytime soon and the Fed will feel under no pressure to raise rates. Additionally, given how accommodative monetary policies have served as a tremendous boost for financial markets, what incentive is there for companies to raise wages and thereby help end these easy money policies? A vicious or virtuous cycle depending on your position in the process.
5
Umm... companies HAVE raised wages. Inflation-adjusted average wages of production and non-supervisory workers are now higher than they have been since 1979. We still have two jobseekers for every job opening, so we can't expect serious wage growth until that number decreases closer to 1, as it was during the Clinton years.
1
Since virtually every articulation from government officials nowadays is based on false assumptions or massaged statistics to favor existing or soon to be announced policies, attempting to deduce truth from fiction is a perilous task. When the deductions favor the status quo, they become instantly dubious. Dig deeper, sir, if you can.
6
He who bets against a momentous trend will be left holding the empty bag.
2
Every once in a while I see these accusations of fudged numbers. Unfortunately, because you're not the one keeping the statistics the you must either produce your own or definitively discredit the published ones. If you think the government is fudging theirs, the private company ADP has been publishing comparable payroll numbers.
13
Thank you. For those doubters, here's the source: http://www.adpemploymentreport.com/.
1
Don't discount lowered fuel prices for the spike in employment. It's simply now affordable to commute to a job for many of the long-term unemployed.
6
Statement like this, "Over the last year, average hourly earnings are now up 2.2 percent, comfortably higher than the rate at which consumer prices have risen.", are Carroll type cheerleading. You are reporting this as though everyone's wages were based on last year. As you well know an uptick is not enough to change the trajectory of downward wages since the 70's. Further for many this raise is not enough to increase demand given debt loads carried by most of the population that still have to be paid off. And there is no help from this admsinsitration if you have a mortgage or worse a mortgage and an underwater home price.
Please stop the false bravado on the state of the American worker. concentrate instead on the lack of training, mobility and income growth for them.
Please stop the false bravado on the state of the American worker. concentrate instead on the lack of training, mobility and income growth for them.
3
You're exaggerating the wage stagnation. There has been tepid growth in wages since the 70s, not a decline. Were Neil to compare wages to the 70s, we'd see more than a 2.2% increase.
http://www.tcf.org/assets/downloads/tcf-GoingNowhere.pdf
http://www.tcf.org/assets/downloads/tcf-GoingNowhere.pdf
7
I am a 56 year old with an MBA who works as a driver for an escort service. What economic reports do not tell us is that there may be millions of middle aged men with college degrees and significant work experience who are unemployed or underemployed. Many have completely given up.
I thought by getting an MBA I would always be marketable and have an impressive career. Then our economy changed. Companies rely on HR, and staffing firms, and the mode of communication changed from walking in or calling to "send an email". I didn't give up and walked into companies but was quickly asked to leave. It was cute when an aggressive kid stopped by but people think it's pathetic to see a middle aged man ask for a job. Sending emails is usually a complete exercise in futility. You're screened with buzz words by HR whose objective is finding someone with the exact experience specified who is interested in making a lateral move. Don't believe for a second that there isn't age discrimination.
Unless jobs are created for this forgotten demographic we will never be able to retire and our health care system will have no choice but to significantly expand medicaid.
I thought by getting an MBA I would always be marketable and have an impressive career. Then our economy changed. Companies rely on HR, and staffing firms, and the mode of communication changed from walking in or calling to "send an email". I didn't give up and walked into companies but was quickly asked to leave. It was cute when an aggressive kid stopped by but people think it's pathetic to see a middle aged man ask for a job. Sending emails is usually a complete exercise in futility. You're screened with buzz words by HR whose objective is finding someone with the exact experience specified who is interested in making a lateral move. Don't believe for a second that there isn't age discrimination.
Unless jobs are created for this forgotten demographic we will never be able to retire and our health care system will have no choice but to significantly expand medicaid.
45
As a person who has done a lot of hiring I find HR departments to be mostly worthless. The resumes that look the best often cover the worst sorts of workers. Person-to-person contact is the only way to go and gut instinct still holds sway over CV's in my book.
12
Far too many MBA degrees were awarded compared to the number of people needed for managerial jobs. Unless you have a degree from one of the top schools, hiring managers will not consider you - unless you have other valuable skills, like engineering or IT.
2
I know a lot of upper middle management men claim the only thing they can do is work privately, contract work. The HR office would rather try out someone new at a lower salary, and they tell you you are overqualified, and that is women as well. They won't LET you step lower because they don't want someone who has been making the rules or enforcing the rules or competitive. They also have diversity requirements the middle aged do not fit into.
2
An excellent article in the WSJ (linked below) describing how job growth has accelerated despite, not because of Obama's policies. The biggest factor in the improving employment picture was Congress' limitation of unemployment benefit extension. This resulted in eliminating a disincentive to work and hire. Nice of Obama to try to take a victory lap for the jobs success driven by Congress.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/president-costanzas-jobs-boom-1422404392?mob...
http://www.wsj.com/articles/president-costanzas-jobs-boom-1422404392?mob...
3
There are two competing economic approaches.
Over the last 90 years or so, one has consistently produced better results than the other.
For example, in the last 50 years, the S&P 500 us up 1,985 points. In the 22 of those years when Democrats held the White House, the net change is up 2,185 points. In the 28 years when the GOP held the White House, the net change is down 200.
I don't expect the Wall Street Journal to stop clinging to failure.
I would hope that its readers understand that reality dictates that one side is right, and the other is wrong.
Over the last 90 years or so, one has consistently produced better results than the other.
For example, in the last 50 years, the S&P 500 us up 1,985 points. In the 22 of those years when Democrats held the White House, the net change is up 2,185 points. In the 28 years when the GOP held the White House, the net change is down 200.
I don't expect the Wall Street Journal to stop clinging to failure.
I would hope that its readers understand that reality dictates that one side is right, and the other is wrong.
22
Odd that it took a couple years for people to realize that they were totally desperate, ain't it? Oh, and could you explain how cutting unemployment insurance incentivized businesses to hire? is this one of those "because they're jist nice people," arguments?
20
Sure. And black is white, and up is down.
For a person with no financial background, Obama and his administration have done a masterful job of avoiding Great Depression II and bringing this country back to some form of fiscal sanity. And Obamacare has and will play an increasingly larger part in that equation.
Denial won't get you anywhere.
For a person with no financial background, Obama and his administration have done a masterful job of avoiding Great Depression II and bringing this country back to some form of fiscal sanity. And Obamacare has and will play an increasingly larger part in that equation.
Denial won't get you anywhere.
25
Except there are other articles out today pointing out that the unemployment rate is really 2X this number if you appropriately count: those who are discouraged and have dropped out from the labor market, and the grossly underemployed whose $20 of paid work per week ought not reasonably be seen as "employed" in statistics used for public policy purposes.
6
The fact is that the measures you know call "real" have exceeded the base UI rate for decades. This was true under Reagan, both Bushes, Clinton and Obama. And there is no more reason to compare apples to oranges now than there was in the administration of St. Ronald.
The data on real wages, and other such data, support the idea that we are seeing real growth. Stop fighting reality.
The data on real wages, and other such data, support the idea that we are seeing real growth. Stop fighting reality.
18
Um, the article and the data say that the unemployment rate ticked up because of so many people coming back to the job market?
3
When people drop out long term this statistic doesn't work, and that is without precedent. People did not drop off permanently before that were not on welfare. It is presumed many of these numbers have a spouse working.
1
"For years, we've been waiting for evidence that wages will rise and that some of the millions of people who left the labor force in the last several years will return. And we got it on Friday, with all that implies."
This report does fly in the face of the GOP when confronted with the facts. But what are facts to them. I'm not sure.
While pay per hour may be rising it certainly isn't enough and it should be more. But at least pay per hour is rising.
This report does fly in the face of the GOP when confronted with the facts. But what are facts to them. I'm not sure.
While pay per hour may be rising it certainly isn't enough and it should be more. But at least pay per hour is rising.
10
When was there ever a one-side-of-the-coin jobs report? For six years the Right have forecast a U. S. economy headed into the abyss. It hasn't happened and it won't happen, this in spite of Republican/TP wishes that the country implode financially so it can be established that a Democratic president (and the current one, in particular) cannot oversee a robust economy. Doubtless the numbers would have been spectacular had crews been hired to work road, rail, bridge and urgent infrastructure repair? Or had state and local governments not dug in against all the desperately-needed mass transportation improvements that President Obama has requested almost time without number. Maybe some co-operation from the majority party now writing the nation's checks? Too much to ask for from the Party of Job Creators?
18
Did somebody forget to tell the economy that Obamacare was supposed to kill jobs, not to allow more of them?
41
Again a jobs report without context. How many of the jobs pay a decent wage? How many are permanent with benefits? How many of the long term unemployed found a job? What about those who are over the age of 45 with experience who cost more than an entry level wage? It's not a blockbuster month for people who can't find any job no matter what they do. It's discouraging and even more discouraging is the fact that no one helps the long or short term unemployed find a job. We're told it's our fault: we have a bad attitude, we don't know how to write a superlative lying resume, we're stupid, incompetent, don't have a work ethic, etc. The truth is that once you are unemployed and over the age of 45 in America you are considered worthless. Many of us will not find jobs no matter how much the economy improves. It's called age discrimination disguised as not wanting to pay us for our experience. The real message here is that no one should ever want to have a middle or upper middle class lifestyle because they will be unemployed and unable to find a job. We're supposed to save our money for that and fade from the scene.
50
Impressive that the commentator got 13 people to agree with these statements.
1
I can appreciate the pain you're feeling. While I don't know the specifics of your situation I know I would find it disheartening.
The good news is that the president has made proposals to ease discrimination against the long-term unemployed by extending unemployment benefits and creating infrastructure jobs. Republicans in Congress have of course stonewalled, and state lawmakers have of course returned funding for high-speed rail. Your vote does matter, and at a difficult time like this I advise you to vote for job creation in 2016.
The good news is that the president has made proposals to ease discrimination against the long-term unemployed by extending unemployment benefits and creating infrastructure jobs. Republicans in Congress have of course stonewalled, and state lawmakers have of course returned funding for high-speed rail. Your vote does matter, and at a difficult time like this I advise you to vote for job creation in 2016.
1
We're a long way from companies desperately looking for workers.
I remember back in the 90s, when unemployment was under 3% with very high work force participation, nearly anyone could get hired. The number of total incompetents I had to work with was amazing. But I don't think you'll ever see that kind of thing again.
I remember back in the 90s, when unemployment was under 3% with very high work force participation, nearly anyone could get hired. The number of total incompetents I had to work with was amazing. But I don't think you'll ever see that kind of thing again.
4
While these numbers are good and perhaps even hopeful, it's too soon to call a trend. And too much ground needs to be made up for the less skilled workers. The most pertinent sentence as it relates to those with only minimal and uneven financial stability or reserves is- "Indeed, a strong argument can be made by economists that it wouldn't be such a bad thing to let the economy run a little hot for a couple of years to get wages rising more consistently and fight off the deflationary forces building in the economy." Let's not be the EU lite.
5
A more informative statistic would have salary information.
If 100% were employed but 90% received a minimum wage then it would be sad news indeed. There would not be enough savings even to afford essentials. How long can the market economy keep going then?
Even more interesting to know is what kind of work people do when so much of routine labor is automated. There is more to come. Uber is checking into driverless cars. Amazond, FedEx, UPS is not to far behind.
http://ideabits.blogspot.com/2014/05/job-market-pyramid.html
If 100% were employed but 90% received a minimum wage then it would be sad news indeed. There would not be enough savings even to afford essentials. How long can the market economy keep going then?
Even more interesting to know is what kind of work people do when so much of routine labor is automated. There is more to come. Uber is checking into driverless cars. Amazond, FedEx, UPS is not to far behind.
http://ideabits.blogspot.com/2014/05/job-market-pyramid.html
6
These are great numbers, for January. They are great numbers for jobs in November and December. However, there seems to be great slack in the job market, meaning there are lots of workers who had left the job market and are beginning to return. IT may take more months of jobs numbers like these for the unemployment rate to drop as it begins to make a dent in the growth of the job market. And even after the unemployment rate drops, the Fed shouldn't raise interest rates until we see more months of wage growth. Only then will the Fed begin to reverse it's low wage, low inflation approach to managing the economy and we can begin to see a reduction in inequality. After all, while workers' wages have been stagnant for 25-30 years, profits and the wealth of the top 1% have skyrocketed. It's time we begin to reverse that trend and the Fed Bank can do it's part by keeping interest rates low so workers' wages can begin to catch up.
5
What has interest rate got to do with wages? Interest rates have been zero or close to it since 08'. Wages will never go up and the Fed can do nothing about it. Everything the Fed has done since 08' has helped increase income inequality. The Fed is the problem, free trade agreements favoring corporations are the problem. Technology, robotics, and global supply chain have done more to eliminate wages and jobs. Good paying jobs are never coming back- thank your politicians for the free trade agreements and the Fed for loaning money with zero interest rates and running printing presses at full speed for Wall Street. Since the U.S. closed the gold window in 71' money has been created backed by nothing but a promise to bomb a country if they tried to move away from it. Your comment about the Fed doing their part for us is ridiculous. The Fed does not operate in our best interest- they serve bankers. You know it is a private bank don't you- it is not part of the federal government.
3
It is not possible to equate non income wealth and investment with hourly wages. Many people of wealth, might work in a job that does not pay a large salary, but they have assets. They might work for a non profit like Chelsea Clinton who doesn't care much for money, or they might not take a salary. Salary and wages are driven by how many workers there are for the job. If there is only one person who can do it, Big Salary, if 99,000 apply online, you don't need to pay much to fill it.
1
We need to know how many of the newly created jobs are decent paying and reasonably secure ones, and how many are more of the minimal wage no security ones that "the economy" has been so good at creating.
And please put the 0.5% income hike into context. How much have salaries and bonuses been going up at the same time in corporate headquarters and on Wall Street
And please put the 0.5% income hike into context. How much have salaries and bonuses been going up at the same time in corporate headquarters and on Wall Street
9
Also, in NYS this year the state workers have recouped their furloughs and pay freeze, so that many mid level state workers have seen their salaries go up $10K just this year. A lot more state work should be done at miniumum wage, to be more like real life.
This BLS jobs report is such rubbish, it beggars belief.
As Jim Clifton, CEO of Gallop wrote the other day: "Right now, we’re hearing much celebrating from the media, the White House and Wall Street about how unemployment is ‘down’ to 5.6%. The cheerleading for this number is deafening. The media loves a comeback story, the White House wants to score political points and Wall Street wants you to stay in the market.
None of them will tell you this: If you, a family member or anyone is unemployed and has subsequently given up on finding a job and stopped looking over the past four weeks — the Department of Labor doesn’t count you as unemployed. That’s right. While you are as unemployed as one can possibly be, and may never find work again, you are not counted in the figure we see relentlessly in the news — currently 5.6%. Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are either out of work or severely underemployed. Trust me, the vast majority of them aren’t throwing parties to toast ‘falling’ unemployment.”"
Considering that only 46% of the Employment to Working Population (16-54 age group) are currently employed, this suggests that an unemployment rate of just 5.6% is very misleading. The BLS didn't include the 21,000 dropped in the oil sector, and used "seasonal adjustment" to bolster all the other low numbers. The BLS defined away the bulk of discouraged workers and when added back into the total unemployed number, unemployment rises to about 19.8%.
A far cry from 5.6%.
As Jim Clifton, CEO of Gallop wrote the other day: "Right now, we’re hearing much celebrating from the media, the White House and Wall Street about how unemployment is ‘down’ to 5.6%. The cheerleading for this number is deafening. The media loves a comeback story, the White House wants to score political points and Wall Street wants you to stay in the market.
None of them will tell you this: If you, a family member or anyone is unemployed and has subsequently given up on finding a job and stopped looking over the past four weeks — the Department of Labor doesn’t count you as unemployed. That’s right. While you are as unemployed as one can possibly be, and may never find work again, you are not counted in the figure we see relentlessly in the news — currently 5.6%. Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are either out of work or severely underemployed. Trust me, the vast majority of them aren’t throwing parties to toast ‘falling’ unemployment.”"
Considering that only 46% of the Employment to Working Population (16-54 age group) are currently employed, this suggests that an unemployment rate of just 5.6% is very misleading. The BLS didn't include the 21,000 dropped in the oil sector, and used "seasonal adjustment" to bolster all the other low numbers. The BLS defined away the bulk of discouraged workers and when added back into the total unemployed number, unemployment rises to about 19.8%.
A far cry from 5.6%.
8
The under-reporting of those that have ceased looking for work is not new. And yes, the effective unemployment rate may be closer to 20% as you suggest. More complain-worthy might be the fact that wages have stagnated for years and many that are employed are under-employed working with no benefits.
But we do need some metric, and the significant thing about this report is the increase in people coming into the job market-which actually suggest that some who may have given up on looking for a job 2 or 3 months ago are back looking again. No one interprets the 5.6% unemployment to mean 94.4% of America is working. The metric may be flawed, but for comparison purposes it is what we have to measure job activity, not quality.
But we do need some metric, and the significant thing about this report is the increase in people coming into the job market-which actually suggest that some who may have given up on looking for a job 2 or 3 months ago are back looking again. No one interprets the 5.6% unemployment to mean 94.4% of America is working. The metric may be flawed, but for comparison purposes it is what we have to measure job activity, not quality.
16
I have a question:
Were your pants actually on fire when you wrote that comment?
Just one thing among many...the Employment to Working Population rate is only one metric that by itself means nothing. It doesn't take into account students which skews the rate lower. And if you had read the attendant report in the Times today you would have seen that the rate takes into account the many Americans who, encouraged by the positive economic trend, have returned to searching for work.
I'm sorry things are going well in America. I'm sure Romney will take credit.
Were your pants actually on fire when you wrote that comment?
Just one thing among many...the Employment to Working Population rate is only one metric that by itself means nothing. It doesn't take into account students which skews the rate lower. And if you had read the attendant report in the Times today you would have seen that the rate takes into account the many Americans who, encouraged by the positive economic trend, have returned to searching for work.
I'm sorry things are going well in America. I'm sure Romney will take credit.
16
Actually the BLS tracks the very workers you are talking about, publishes a report, and will even help you find a link to it on their web page. Hardly a secret. And, I dont recall anybody complaining about not counting discouraged workers in the unemployment totals for Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush. We didnt count them during the "Reagan Miracle" either.
10
If McCain / Palin had won in 2008, with Republican majorities in Congress, giving us their kook view of the world and slavish adherence to anti-stimulous, reward-the-rich economics in our near depression…
We'd all be living in our cars instead of buying them in record numbers.
To reference the great movie, we dodged Pottersville and we now see that one man's life (and our vote for him) does make a difference.
We'd all be living in our cars instead of buying them in record numbers.
To reference the great movie, we dodged Pottersville and we now see that one man's life (and our vote for him) does make a difference.
51
I doubt things would be much different. Obama has been a major disappointment. He did nothing to rein in the banks and legislation that was enacted, although weak, was rescinded under his watch. Citibank even wrote legislation and it was put through. The stimulus did little, bought maybe 12 months of relief. As for all the car buying most of them have been subprime loans- that's right- just like the houses. Many of those buyers are losing those cars. Now instead of using homes as ATMs banks are allowing people to take out money of their vehicles equity. Obama made a lot of promises and spewed a lot of rhetoric but in the end he is no different than any other bought and paid for candidate. America is done- corporations and bankers run it and the middle class will be eliminated. It was discussed in Davos. The sentiment is we have too much.
5
Actually America's economy has outperformed almost all of the major developed countries' economies. As for banks, the CFPB has recovered over a billion dollars for consumers ripped off by credit card companies and banks. Furthermore, capital requirements have been raised. You would be correct if you had said banks are still allowed to be too large but it is inaccurate to say they "did nothing'. Also when people have voted for the GOP beginning in 2010, they have made action much more difficult.
3
The FED target of 5% unemployment is an abomination. If we our economy can't sustain full employment, a job for every person who wants one, then we need a new economic model.
2
Full employment is a statistical impossibility, get real.
15
Full employment is impossible and even it were achieved inflation would shoot up. Learn some economics before spouting off about abominations.
Let the grown ups talk for awhile.
Let the grown ups talk for awhile.
7
The reality is that full unemployment in practice means roughly 3% unemoloyment. The utopian vision of 0% would mean no one quits their job to looked for a better one, and that everyone achieved the same regardless of skill or motivation. While I think unemployment in general is problematic, it can spur on positive self-development. It can be a character-building exercise and, ironically, a confidence-boosting one too. The world we live in tends often to the messy.
1
Excellent news for job seekers. Mitch McConnell is looking for a microphone anywhere to take credit for saving the economy.
Wage pressure will be uneven, with most of it in higher skilled jobs. Hopefully, the Congress can grasp this opportunity to raise the gas tax and fund some massive infrastructure improvements, which could put displaced oil workers and veterans to work.
But don't count on it when there is useless wind bag speeches blasting from Capitol Hill "leadership" in service of their Koch masters.
Wage pressure will be uneven, with most of it in higher skilled jobs. Hopefully, the Congress can grasp this opportunity to raise the gas tax and fund some massive infrastructure improvements, which could put displaced oil workers and veterans to work.
But don't count on it when there is useless wind bag speeches blasting from Capitol Hill "leadership" in service of their Koch masters.
27
Dream on.
Well I guess we have to credit somebody, why not the Republicans? They have a history of hoping everyone forgets the economic disasters that their worn out voodoo supply side economics has produced, and then taking the credit when the policies of a Democratic majority have succeeded despite their obstructionism.
14
Gee once you get used to poor to lousy news then fair news is thought to be great. When the participation rate goes back up a lot and the unemployment rate is say 5% then we can say good.
6
You're correct to identify that the Republican Party has beat us down so bad that we have become a culture of low expectations. That's why the Obama people tried the "hope & change" thing. But the right wing is relentless, aren't they, and have debased America even further.
13
Great news? Says who?
Revenue and profits have increased for many months. The stock market has soared. But labor force participation remained low with lots of potential workers on the sidelines. Many part-time workers wanted full-time jobs. Wages were held constant. Employers were in the cat bird seat.
At the first sign of tightening of the labor force and increasing wages, the stock market drops. Does that tell us anything - like how owners feel about sharing profits with workers?
Business gurus all say treat your employees well and they will treat your customers well. Target knows what that means - pay them peanuts, give them pathetic benefits but call them "team members". CostCo doesn't get it - they call their workers employees, pay more than twice what Target does and give them much better benefits.
Who is getting much better results? The red company that paid their CEO $21,000,000 last year (and that was a 37% cut from the prior year) then pushed him out this year with a golden parachute of $61,000,000? No. How about the company that has only had 2 CEOs since 1983 and pays their CEO $650,000 with a bonus potential of $200,00?
Revenue and profits have increased for many months. The stock market has soared. But labor force participation remained low with lots of potential workers on the sidelines. Many part-time workers wanted full-time jobs. Wages were held constant. Employers were in the cat bird seat.
At the first sign of tightening of the labor force and increasing wages, the stock market drops. Does that tell us anything - like how owners feel about sharing profits with workers?
Business gurus all say treat your employees well and they will treat your customers well. Target knows what that means - pay them peanuts, give them pathetic benefits but call them "team members". CostCo doesn't get it - they call their workers employees, pay more than twice what Target does and give them much better benefits.
Who is getting much better results? The red company that paid their CEO $21,000,000 last year (and that was a 37% cut from the prior year) then pushed him out this year with a golden parachute of $61,000,000? No. How about the company that has only had 2 CEOs since 1983 and pays their CEO $650,000 with a bonus potential of $200,00?
60
The stock market dipped in anticipation of rising interest rates.
I'm totally on board with your Target v. Costco analysis, though.
I'm totally on board with your Target v. Costco analysis, though.
4
"Does that tell us anything - like how owners feel about sharing profits with workers?"
In a word, no.
For one thing, the S&P is up this morning - presumably on the labor dept news. But the market often does reacts negatively to good news like this because it fears, as this article details, it will lead to the Fed raising interest rates.
I agree that most CEO's are vastly overpaid. Nevertheless, they understand that if they are going to sell more product, workers are going to have to have more money to spend. So an increase in wages is very much seen as a plus by most companies.
Let's hope this is a trend and not a blip and wage and job growth continues to accelerate. Only time will tell.
In a word, no.
For one thing, the S&P is up this morning - presumably on the labor dept news. But the market often does reacts negatively to good news like this because it fears, as this article details, it will lead to the Fed raising interest rates.
I agree that most CEO's are vastly overpaid. Nevertheless, they understand that if they are going to sell more product, workers are going to have to have more money to spend. So an increase in wages is very much seen as a plus by most companies.
Let's hope this is a trend and not a blip and wage and job growth continues to accelerate. Only time will tell.
1
The stock market rises and falls for lots of reasons. It's not that investors don't want to see raises. It's that the prospect of wage growth means the fear of deflation has receded so the Fed can someday begin raising interest rates. And when interest rates rise, bonds become a little more attractive relative to stocks.
But it is still a very good climate for economic growth and for stocks. As long as inflation is relative tame, Wall Street is really not unhappy about wage growth -- because wages flow back into the economy.
But it is still a very good climate for economic growth and for stocks. As long as inflation is relative tame, Wall Street is really not unhappy about wage growth -- because wages flow back into the economy.
So the economy is humming, wages are increasing, and the Fed can end QE infinity. That is all despite (or is it partly because of) the sequester and the refusal to indefinitely extend unemployment benefits. Does this moot the president's request for more taxes and redistribution?
1
It means oil prices are already beginning to boom! Many of these workers may not have enough money when they fill their gas tanks despite the wealth of oil.
1
Voodoo Math -How anyone would buy these numbers just blows my mind...How about the people not on unemployment any more and the people whom drop out of the work force, or joined the millions of people who work under the table now...
7
Workforce participation is up over 700,000; the article addresses your first two points in disseminating that fact. And if the number of people working under the table has increased, that means even more people are working than indicated by the official figures, not fewer.
You're trying to invent reasons to be skeptical. Why?
You're trying to invent reasons to be skeptical. Why?
22
The Administration's critics have questioned the validity of all the data produced by the Federal Government for years now, particularly that from the BLS and the Census Bureau. Any positive data must simply be the result of professionals in those agencies shilling for the Administration because, by definition, the Administration's policies must be leading us down the road to ruin.
The new meme on the right is especially hilarious, that the Obama Administration has fostered income inequality because it has risen during the President's term in office. You can see how much effort it takes to give the correctly-nuanced presentation of this canard by watching the famous "do-over" by Ted Cruz in his response to the State of the Union address. He first mentions that inequality has risen "for over a decade" then realizes his mistake and starts over. The mistake, of course, is not that his comment was incorrect, but that "over a decade" includes the Bush Administration. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/20/ted-cruz-video_n_6512668.html
For those more interested in data than rhetoric, I recommend this graph by economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/03/income-inequality. Inequality has been on the rise since the arrival of Ronald Reagan and strikingly continued to grow throughout the Clinton Administration as well.
The new meme on the right is especially hilarious, that the Obama Administration has fostered income inequality because it has risen during the President's term in office. You can see how much effort it takes to give the correctly-nuanced presentation of this canard by watching the famous "do-over" by Ted Cruz in his response to the State of the Union address. He first mentions that inequality has risen "for over a decade" then realizes his mistake and starts over. The mistake, of course, is not that his comment was incorrect, but that "over a decade" includes the Bush Administration. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/20/ted-cruz-video_n_6512668.html
For those more interested in data than rhetoric, I recommend this graph by economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/03/income-inequality. Inequality has been on the rise since the arrival of Ronald Reagan and strikingly continued to grow throughout the Clinton Administration as well.
15
Wages have stagnated and inequality began to rise since the U.S. decoupled from the gold standard in 71' . The Federal Reserve has printed and printed and funneled it to Wall Street.
1
Thanks to the un-elected Federal Reserve. No thanks to our elected Congress.
26
Makes you think American voters are often incapable of acting in an informed and self-interested way, huh?
Mr. Obama's election remains one of the few real success stories, along with Ms. Warren's.
Mr. Obama's election remains one of the few real success stories, along with Ms. Warren's.
1
This is all that Obama's fault.
88
I'm not asking Republican pundits and politicians to give President Obama credit for what is shaping up to be a remarkable economic performance since 2009 when he inherited the second worst economic crisis in American History. That's not how our political system works. But it would be refreshing if they could at least stop spouting the same old lies and nonsense.
Recently Congressman Ryan claimed that the Presidents economic policies (the politics of envy?) didnt work. Didn't work?! Unemployment is down, job growth in the millions, wages now going up, health care cost growing more slowly, limited inflation, and falling deficits. By what measure have the Presidents economic policies not worked?
Of course if they stop spouting lies and misinformation they will have to admit that they have been wrong about pretty much everything for the past 6 years. So they have to do their best to convince their base and as many uninformed voters as possible that the opposite is true so they can increase their control over the government and return us to the economic policies of George W. Bush -- exploding deficits, financial ruin, and economic disaster.
Recently Congressman Ryan claimed that the Presidents economic policies (the politics of envy?) didnt work. Didn't work?! Unemployment is down, job growth in the millions, wages now going up, health care cost growing more slowly, limited inflation, and falling deficits. By what measure have the Presidents economic policies not worked?
Of course if they stop spouting lies and misinformation they will have to admit that they have been wrong about pretty much everything for the past 6 years. So they have to do their best to convince their base and as many uninformed voters as possible that the opposite is true so they can increase their control over the government and return us to the economic policies of George W. Bush -- exploding deficits, financial ruin, and economic disaster.
107
Well said
2