US unemployment rate hits Obama-era low

[Maxf1ex]

US unemployment rate hits Obama-era low
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19845234
Last month's rate came in at 7.8%, down from 8.1% in August.

The latest numbers also showed that the US economy added a further 114,000 jobs in September, beating expectations.

A .3% drop in unemployment equals 114,000 jobs?

And yet ... Nonfarm payrolls rose by a seasonally adjusted 163,000—the largest monthly gain since February—the Labor Department said Friday. The politically salient jobless rate, derived from a separate survey, ticked up to 8.3% from 8.2% online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444320704577566790169187310.html it seems like 163,000 jobs here only added .1%, who may I ask, is playing with the math?

Or does it really mean that more people are not looking for work and therefore are no longer thought of as unemployed?

Another thought is the up coming layoff ... (AXcess News) - In case you missed it over the weekend, the Obama administration's Friday afternoon document drop was a memo from the Department of Labor telling defense contractors not to provide legally-required notice to thousands of employees that they are about to be laid off, if automatic spending cuts agreed to by the President and the Congress take effect. axcessnews.com/index.php/articles/show/id/23094

And while it is not worth my time chasing it down I seem to recall a time or two were the release unemployment numbers had to be change in just a few weeks after being release.

Give it a week or two will will see if the numbers change once again.

[jayohen]

Oct 5, 2012 16:47:11 GMT -8 Maxf1ex said:

Give it a week or two will will see if the numbers change once again.

yep, gonna go lower!
Despite the GOP's 4 year path of obstruction, our President has fulfilled his campaign promise of getting unemployment below 8% during his first term.

[george1861]

Oct 5, 2012 19:03:09 GMT -8 jayohen said:

Oct 5, 2012 16:47:11 GMT -8 Maxf1ex said:

Give it a week or two will will see if the numbers change once again.

yep, gonna go lower!
Despite the GOP's 4 year path of obstruction, our President has fulfilled his campaign promise of getting unemployment below 8% during his first term.

At what cost??? A govt spending to create jobs approach that doubled the deficit? The real number of unemployed is far higher, they just don't count those who have given up. Based on the work force in 07-08 the real rate is @ least 15%.

[Maxf1ex]

Oct 5, 2012 19:03:09 GMT -8 jayohen said:

Oct 5, 2012 16:47:11 GMT -8 Maxf1ex said:

Give it a week or two will will see if the numbers change once again.

yep, gonna go lower!
Despite the GOP's 4 year path of obstruction, our President has fulfilled his campaign promise of getting unemployment below 8% during his first term.

You say 4 year path of obstruction, I say 4 years of trying to keep use out o the poor house.

But since we already know about the lies (do not announce the layoffs) (past unemployment numbers which had to be revise) why should we expect this time for it to be any different?

[Maxf1ex]

Oct 5, 2012 19:03:09 GMT -8 jayohen said:

Oct 5, 2012 16:47:11 GMT -8 Maxf1ex said:

Give it a week or two will will see if the numbers change once again.

yep, gonna go lower!
Despite the GOP's 4 year path of obstruction, our President has fulfilled his campaign promise of getting unemployment below 8% during his first term.

~chuckle~ thought that was suppose to happen in his first year?

Below is just a reminder of what has happen under Obama watch

Barak Obama Campaign Promises
jon-ewall.hubpages.com/hub/barakobamacampaignpromises

[msguide]

The miniscule dip in unemployment numbers in no way says we are on a path to prosperity. The number barely represents the numbers of NEW workers entering the work force because they are now old enough or have finished their degrees. It does nothing to address the fact that 800,000 fewer women are working now than when Obama took office. It also does nothing to deal with the many hundreds of thousands who lost jobs on Obama's watch and who continue to be unemployed or underemployed.

And we will not count on the vast numbers of illegal immigrants destined to be absorbed by our labor market because the President will not enforce federal law.

[george1861]

Seems California, the world's 8th biggest economy, wasn't included in the numbers...

[msguide]

I would like a closer examiniation of the numbers. Obama has offered several programs to reduce the unemployment numbers. One has to do with grants and loans for people to go back to school. Well, guess what? A unemployed person who goes to school is reclassified as a student. They still don't have a job, but now they disappear from the unemployment numbers. To me, this doesn't pass the smell test. A gainfully employed person who loses his job is unemployed. Sending him to school doesn't change the fact that he still doesn't have a job. He is just doing something else with his days. There is a very high likelihood there won't be a job waiting for him when he gets done in the classroom. New graduates are not finding jobs.

Delivering pizzas or toting luggage is not a full time job with benefits. It's work, but it's not a career with a future. It's not something that will pay off a student loan. It's not a job that will support a mortgage. it's not a job that will support a family. When we are talking about jobs, we are talking about upwardly mobile, career-oriented, permanent positions with benefits.

[jayohen]

Oct 11, 2012 17:16:53 GMT -8 msguide said:

When we are talking about jobs, we are talking about upwardly mobile, career-oriented, permanent positions with benefits.

sorry, Romney sold those jobs to China.

[msguide]

Not exactly. American tax policy did that. The American worker can produce more and better products than any other work force on earth, yet the government has put policies in place to hamper them at any turn.