Actually, the way I see it, is that Democrats are the ones in trouble with this. If we agree that lowering taxes and/or repealing Affordable Care Act does not make difference - WHAT DOES?
I mean, once you remove yourself from this partisan bickering, the question remains, what are you doing - or, what have you done, to increase job numbers.
CEO’s are almost back at the levels of compensation pre-2008, Government “made” (not printed) money on TARP and auto-industry assistance, dollar is still pretty strong world-wide, oil is cheap… so, what gives?
I’m not surprised you feel that way (even though it makes little sense after your previous post).
Other than not gutting the federal budget and slashing taxes? Encourage business, look for ways to keep encouraging economic growth and accelerate the recovery. The economy has been getting better slowly, and the answer is to look for ways to sustain that recovery and speed it up instead of ditching every helpful policy we’ve had.
As a Republican, it is my duty to twist this as saying that we should have had 520,000 new jobs in September so Obama is underperforming at only a quarter of the job growth we should expect. Also I would like to point out that Canada has high taxes, universal health care AND A QUEEN. We fought a WAR so that we wouldn’t have a queen. Americans bled and died so we can have low taxes and the right to not get insurance.
God Bless You All! <start playing Lee Greenwood’s “Proud to be an American”>
So, my suggestion to Obama is to dial Clinton again to help him formulate this in simple terms as only Bill knows. To me, that’s the winning formula given situation.
While giving him all due respect for his debate performance (not the substance therein, mind you), it is getting a bit comical on how Romney just cannot get a break, isn’t it?
Yeah, if I was a Republican I’d be having anger management issues by now. And if I were one of the fatcats bankrolling Romney I’d have been downing antacids by the handful for the last month or two.
I’ll laugh after he loses. But like I said earlier he seems to be trying to pivot hard to the center in early October, and if I were less annoyed by all the prevaricating he and Ryan have been doing, I would say it’s comically late.
That’s actually a very good point. Why don’t more polls about debates also ask how and if their answer changes the respondent’s vote? Does that make the sampling too complex?
Contrary to what some people in this thread believe, there is reason to be highly skeptical of these job numbers. The BLS has two separate data points; the establishment survey and the household survey.
The establishment survey said the total working age population grew by 206,000 in September while only 114K jobs were added in the same month; that means that there were 92K fewer jobs created than needed to be to match population growth (that results in higher unemployment). The total number of unemployed dropped by 456K last month, meaning 342K people dropped out of the labor force. In other words, for every 1 job created about 3.7 people gave up looking for work.
The reason we get such “great” numbers is because the BLS’ household survey states that 873K jobs were added in September, of which 582K were part time. The BLS surveyed 60K households which would mean that, if you believe those numbers to be true, each household created about 14.55 jobs. Some of you guys may believe that, but I as hell sure don’t. Expect those numbers to be revised downward, especially when most economists were predicting ~114K jobs added and ~8.2% unemployment.
So Obama get good unemployment numbers and if this keeps up I suspect Romney is going to have to waste time explaining why his supporters are pushing conspiracy theories. That’s just what Romney needs at this point.
Again, if he’s well coached on the issues he can expect to be questioned about, he does fine. The problem with the first debate is that Romney raised issues he was completely unprepared to rebut.
Also, most Congressmen are not policy wonks. You could school the average Congressman as well.
I gave you a good reason to be skeptical which was more than “they are too good”. From July 2012 to August 2012, there were a total of 119K job losses according to household data. From August 2012 to September 2012, there were 873K jobs added. That 873K jobs added would be the best number dating back to 1983, when the economy was is a far better recovery than we are now. The more plausible explanation is that the 873K is an outlier and is more likely people who already have a job having to take on another job of some sort or the BLS inflating numbers (either that or there are some straight up liars out there who say they are employed when they’re not :p).
Missed edit window: Again, there is also the problem of simple math (or as Clinton would say, #arithmetic). Do you believe that each household surveyed added an average of 15 jobs each during September?
What does this have to do with what I said? I didn’t question whether or not the household survey data always finds more jobs than the payroll data (because it usually does). I asked if you believed the magnitude of jobs added per household reported by the survey.
