United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Not that lying is a trait found only in people who hold a specific ideological view... but we are, after all, well into the deep end of a liberal presidency, liberal senate, liberal SC and a liberal media. And the lies have grown to epic levels under these folks.

So, all I hear is the economy is recovering. RE prices, job gains, booming this and exploding that, everything peaches & cream because Jesus H Obama has finally managed to overcome the economy he inherited, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Like any good human, I want the people I live around to prosper. And I even want most of the people I don't live around to prosper. And, being human, there's people I want to see die horrible deaths. But they're not close enough for me to kill so let's just say - I want people to prosper. But it seems we aren't. Prospering that is. Because the BLS says a huge number of us aren't working. Or even looking for work. Huh? That's not what the media and the Jesus Obama people say. They say Obama done fixed up all the stuff Bush broke. Here's the numbers that I'm talking about:

* 11.4 million Americans of working age have left the labor force since Jesus Obama was elected.

* 92 million Americans of working age are classified by the BLS as "not in the labor force".

* 9.5 million Americans are classified as unemployed. Note, that means there are only 9.5 million looking for work. That doesn't include the 92 million that gave up.

* BLS has what is called a "participation rate". Which is effectively the ratio of job participation, actually working or seeking, to the entire job force - which is aged 16 and up and employable. That rate is 62.9%. Which means that 37% of people who can work or look for work, don't.

* Despite the clear and alarming stats above, the feds report unemployment as 6.3%

Uh, okay. So basically, after a while a person isn't technically counted as unemployed because (the nearest I can figure) he/she isn't on a job seeking list. I imagine the list is tied to how many people are currently getting UI or are on the cusp, still in the system. But seemingly once you are no longer eligible and exhaust all federally monitored job programs, etc., you wink out of existence as far as counting as unemployed.

This means you're not unemployed, because we all know that 6.2% is a winning number. What you are is not participating. Which looks a bit more grim for Jesus Obama and Company. Which I imagine is why nobody in the media wants to talk about this reality. They prefer the other reality - the one where the band plays as Jesus O rides through town on the way to another celebrity fundraiser.

And hey, who the fuck cares whether any previous president spun the facts. That is a distraction because they aren't in office and the only reason at all to discuss Bush, Carter, Clinton, Reagan, Lincoln or Roosevelt is because you do not have the guts to discuss Obama. No doubt the BLS has had this type of data and reported it to congress prior to ObamaZombies carrying Jesus O into office on their shoulders. And it's even possible things have been this bad before - but that would have been under a previous democratic president so we'll stay away from that.

I am interested in is how the RSP Hive Mind, along with those rare sparks of light and intelligence known as the RSP conservatives, view this data in respect to the reporting that says all is well because we're beginning to boom again. I'll even read multiple paragraph explanations of what you think these numbers mean so long as I don't have to download random .pdf documents written by Ivory Tower professors who need to service their tenure. To me you can't effectively spin 92 million people dropping out of the labor force into anything but 92 million people not directly building the future of America. No doubt they're eating, driving, making bucks and playing X-Box just like the working stiffs. But they are not paying into the future of the nation. Not directly.

So what does that mean? Who abandoned who? Who failed who? Does Bj up in Wisconsin or Fuckwit over in Kentucky having a job owe these people anything? Do they owe Fuckwit? Or Bj? Because what I see is people doing what people always do - when a government fails them and lies to them, they create their own wealth. Their own futures. People, groups of them, have done this through history. it's the story of mankind versus government. People only support governments that are viewed as tolerant, helpful, safe, fair and, to a lesser degree, principled. Clearly the current regime in America cannot be described using any of those words.

So they leave the government and live despite it. But still use the parts of it that add value to their lives and the lives of their children and family. Schools, roads, military, etc. All of those things are accessible whether you're paying for them or not. And who blames them? I don't. There are 92 million of them. Even at the height of the frenzied O-licking in 2008 he only received about 69 million votes. 23 million less than there are people who have just cut all support to him and the government he leads.

That's how I see it anyway. The narrative I've been talking about here for years cannot include such harsh realities. And since the Hive Mind here is like liberal Hive Minds everywhere in their belief that they alone are smart whereas everyone that isn't like them is stupid. There is no chance that America can recover while being told it's stupid yet at the same time is definitely smart enough to just leave the system, use the parts that are free, and create a separate future that doesn't fit the narrative.

I believe what America needs is a total shift away from the liberal/progressive policies that have engulfed us all and stifled us so severely that almost 1/3 of every American just isn't a part of the process any longer. It's not R versus D to me, it's progressive versus conservative. And not even that in the way ideologies on either side warp and redefine the two philosophies to dehumanize the other side - but in the way each works in principle when governing a large population... and which philosophy is more effective in attracting people who live within the borders of a nation to be a part of the growth and future of the nation.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tripp;

Well, some are anticipating new management coming soon of not too distant agricultural lands which have lain fallow since 2005. If you have farming experience, maybe they're hiring.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
Tripp;

Well, some are anticipating new management coming soon of not too distant agricultural lands which have lain fallow since 2005. If you have farming experience, maybe they're hiring.


Believe it or not Moshe, I am actually not in the working age group. Although, I am self-employed and even file taxes, etc. So I'm kind of too old to buy a farm or work on one, generally speaking. Truth is, I could probably drive one of those air-conditioned harvesters as well as anyone and I look pretty good in plaid work shirts.

5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The unemployment rate is recorded as 6.3% becasue 9.5 million Americans are classified as unemployed. Of course, technically, unemployment means not employed. But within goverment statistics is has (and always has had) a specific meaning.

Also "not in the labor force" does not mean "gave up". There are many classes of people who (due for example to traditional family values) choose to do work in the home to support a family, they are employed, just unpaid. So we would need to know the make up of those "unproductive spongers".

I half agree with you, the Term "unemployed is relatively meaningless (and always was), something like seeking work or in receipt of benefits might be more appropriate.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
The unemployment rate is recorded as 6.3% becasue 9.5 million Americans are classified as unemployed. Of course, technically, unemployment means not employed. But within goverment statistics is has (and always has had) a specific meaning.

Also "not in the labor force" does not mean "gave up". There are many classes of people who (due for example to traditional family values) choose to do work in the home to support a family, they are employed, just unpaid. So we would need to know the make up of those "unproductive spongers".

I half agree with you, the Term "unemployed is relatively meaningless (and always was), something like seeking work or in receipt of benefits might be more appropriate.





Uh, okay. That's kind of what I said in the OP. Does it matter to you if there are in the UK 1/3 or more of the inhabitants who don't actually contribute to the prosperity of the nation (government) but who utilize the things it offers? Do you believe a government can sustain it's existence as the detached population grows? Do you attribute the situation to the liberal policies of the British government? Do you view it as a problem that needs solving or a blessing provided by government?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Welcome Rolling Stones
Latvia
Bullshit
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

This is the new status quo. Expect it to continually get worse as long as conservatives insist that trickle down economics works.

When we change our system back to what built this country, reward people for hard work, and build up the home owning middle class, things will get better.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Liberal SC? Ludicrous.
6 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
49xjohn wrote:

This is the new status quo. Expect it to continually get worse as long as conservatives insist that trickle down economics works.

When we change our system back to what built this country, reward people for hard work, and build up the home owning middle class, things will get better.


Sure John. Conservatives huh? Except for one small thing - conservatives don't run this nation. They haven't run this nation for a long time, a couple decades minimum. Hell, they were a minority in the minority house and senate for the first two years of your Savior's reign.

And now, at the risk of Slaterization...

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
LeeDambis wrote:
The problem is that neither the unemployment rate nor the labor force participation rate is an end-all measure of economic health. Unemployment lops off people who want jobs but have given up looking as well as those who are underemployed. Labor force participation counts everyone, including housewives, students, retirees, and the idle rich.

All you can really say about the discrepancy between the two measures is that unemployment isn't as good as it looks. Labor force participation has been on a steady decline since Clinton left office. Some of that decline is due to an aging population and students being less likely to work while in school. Some of it is due to a sluggish economy, discouraged workers, and increased disability claims.



Maybe I need to be more direct?

Are you fine with the presentation? The clear obfuscation of numbers that reveal the true problem... and trouble? Why cut out the cattle you like - housewives, etc. - in order to convince yourself that this is really just the way we look at numbers?

I don't care who's running things - if 1/3 of the people who can work aren't and they are simultaneously consuming government dollars then this is a whole lot more than jiggering the stats around to make your guys look better than they are. To me it seems like an arterial bleed, not a paper cut that can be covered up by holding a WH briefing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Xander Fulton
United States
Astoria
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
The unemployment rate is recorded as 6.3% becasue 9.5 million Americans are classified as unemployed. Of course, technically, unemployment means not employed. But within goverment statistics is has (and always has had) a specific meaning.

Also "not in the labor force" does not mean "gave up". There are many classes of people who (due for example to traditional family values) choose to do work in the home to support a family, they are employed, just unpaid. So we would need to know the make up of those "unproductive spongers".

I half agree with you, the Term "unemployed is relatively meaningless (and always was), something like seeking work or in receipt of benefits might be more appropriate.



Uh, okay. That's kind of what I said in the OP. Does it matter to you if there are in the UK 1/3 or more of the inhabitants who don't actually contribute to the prosperity of the nation (government) but who utilize the things it offers? Do you believe a government can sustain it's existence as the detached population grows? Do you attribute the situation to the liberal policies of the British government? Do you view it as a problem that needs solving or a blessing provided by government?


You sort of missed one of the implications of slater's post, though.

Say, tomorrow, the ultimate AI and android machine finally is revealed to the public. It can do every labor or service human job - EVERY job - better than a human can, work 3 times as many hours in a week, and run at 1/4 the cost.

Meaningful employment population percentages drops from 60-ish% to 0% in the span of a year, while economic output quadruples.

Is that...good? Or bad? Or...'it depends'?

IE., just looking at the employment numbers on their own, factoring nothing else in...is information, sure. But it doesn't really TELL you anything.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Stiles
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Shaman
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
XanderF wrote:
DWTripp wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
The unemployment rate is recorded as 6.3% becasue 9.5 million Americans are classified as unemployed. Of course, technically, unemployment means not employed. But within goverment statistics is has (and always has had) a specific meaning.

Also "not in the labor force" does not mean "gave up". There are many classes of people who (due for example to traditional family values) choose to do work in the home to support a family, they are employed, just unpaid. So we would need to know the make up of those "unproductive spongers".

I half agree with you, the Term "unemployed is relatively meaningless (and always was), something like seeking work or in receipt of benefits might be more appropriate.



Uh, okay. That's kind of what I said in the OP. Does it matter to you if there are in the UK 1/3 or more of the inhabitants who don't actually contribute to the prosperity of the nation (government) but who utilize the things it offers? Do you believe a government can sustain it's existence as the detached population grows? Do you attribute the situation to the liberal policies of the British government? Do you view it as a problem that needs solving or a blessing provided by government?


You sort of missed one of the implications of slater's post, though.

Say, tomorrow, the ultimate AI and cyborg machine finally is revealed to the public. It can do every labor or service human job - EVERY job - better than a human can, work 3 times as many hours in a week, and run at 1/4 the cost.

Meaningful employment population percentages drops from 60-ish% to 0% in the span of a year, while economic output quadruples.

Is that...good? Or bad? Or...'it depends'?

IE., just looking at the employment numbers on their own, factoring nothing else in...is information, sure. But it doesn't really TELL you anything.


"It tells you what you want to hear" would be more accurate.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
The unemployment rate is recorded as 6.3% becasue 9.5 million Americans are classified as unemployed. Of course, technically, unemployment means not employed. But within goverment statistics is has (and always has had) a specific meaning.

Also "not in the labor force" does not mean "gave up". There are many classes of people who (due for example to traditional family values) choose to do work in the home to support a family, they are employed, just unpaid. So we would need to know the make up of those "unproductive spongers".

I half agree with you, the Term "unemployed is relatively meaningless (and always was), something like seeking work or in receipt of benefits might be more appropriate.





Uh, okay. That's kind of what I said in the OP. Does it matter to you if there are in the UK 1/3 or more of the inhabitants who don't actually contribute to the prosperity of the nation (government) but who utilize the things it offers? Do you believe a government can sustain it's existence as the detached population grows? Do you attribute the situation to the liberal policies of the British government? Do you view it as a problem that needs solving or a blessing provided by government?
Except they do contribute in many cases, they help produce well balanced and productive adults. This of course ignore the fact that if you work hard you need someone to provide for things like food on the table and to clean the house. It enables the "breadwinner" to function far more efficiently at work. So I do not agree they do not (necessarily) contribute to the prosperity of the nation, it is just not a direct contribution.

I agree that as the "unproductive" portion of society grows it will become harder for the goverment to maintain certain services (I hope you have already booked your suicide before you become such a burden).

The situation exists becasue of population growth, not liberal (or conservative polices), unless you include not allowing people to die.

It is neither a problem that needs solving (as I do not see live as a problem and would not wish to live in a society that did) nor a blessing (as it is a problem, just not one that "needs" solving. But I think there are practical options to alleviate the crisis.

We can ban any further longevity research. for a start. A more immoral solution would be suicide on demand thus reducing the surplus population. Another (even more immoral) solution would be expanding abortion, if less people are born this helps reduce the strain on the system. We could even offer inducements.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
linoleum blownaparte
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmb
DW it's great to hear you declare yourself a pragmatist. I too am a pragmatist. I don't care about ideology I care about results. If Iraq was now a flourishing secular democracy and steadfast ally then I would be all for "liberating" Iran next. If tax cuts for the rich skyrocketed the economy I would be for more of them despite their impact on income inequality.

So my question to you is why did Republicans in the House insist on larding the stimulus with income tax rebates despite numerous nonpartisan sources and studies showing that the "bang for buck" was so much lower compared to extending unemployment benefits, food stamps, and infrastructural construction? Even John McCain's economic adviser testified before Congress to that effect. Yet the Republicans insisted there would be no stimulus without tax cuts. Why?

Why does the House continue to refuse to consider legislation that could further stimulate consumer demand and drive job growth? How is that pragmatic?

It feels like the House GOP has staked out an immutable IDEOLOGICAL position that job growth only happens when "job creators" are happy, and many "Democrats" have accepted that frame of reference. You just can't have good governance when you're in the grip of what Bill Clinton famously called "a failed economic theory."


14 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
XanderF wrote:
DWTripp wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
The unemployment rate is recorded as 6.3% becasue 9.5 million Americans are classified as unemployed. Of course, technically, unemployment means not employed. But within goverment statistics is has (and always has had) a specific meaning.

Also "not in the labor force" does not mean "gave up". There are many classes of people who (due for example to traditional family values) choose to do work in the home to support a family, they are employed, just unpaid. So we would need to know the make up of those "unproductive spongers".

I half agree with you, the Term "unemployed is relatively meaningless (and always was), something like seeking work or in receipt of benefits might be more appropriate.



Uh, okay. That's kind of what I said in the OP. Does it matter to you if there are in the UK 1/3 or more of the inhabitants who don't actually contribute to the prosperity of the nation (government) but who utilize the things it offers? Do you believe a government can sustain it's existence as the detached population grows? Do you attribute the situation to the liberal policies of the British government? Do you view it as a problem that needs solving or a blessing provided by government?


You sort of missed one of the implications of slater's post, though.

Say, tomorrow, the ultimate AI and android machine finally is revealed to the public. It can do every labor or service human job - EVERY job - better than a human can, work 3 times as many hours in a week, and run at 1/4 the cost.

Meaningful employment population percentages drops from 60-ish% to 0% in the span of a year, while economic output quadruples.

Is that...good? Or bad? Or...'it depends'?

IE., just looking at the employment numbers on their own, factoring nothing else in...is information, sure. But it doesn't really TELL you anything.
To be fair to Tripp I was just addressing the current situation, not future hypotheticals. I think you have read far more then I intended, not that I disagree with what you have said.

In fact I do have great concerns over the diminishing job market. It is possible to imagine a society where "nonemployment" is the norm, rather then the exception.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
To be fair to Tripp I was just addressing the current situation, not future hypotheticals. I think you have read far more then I intended, not that I disagree with what you have said.

In fact I do have great concerns over the diminishing job market. It is possible to imagine a society where "nonemployment" is the norm, rather then the exception.


There's that, concern over lack of employment opportunity. But there's also the meat of my OP - how an administration, in this case Jesus O's, presents the information to the people who essentially pay for the data and use it to determine who to vote for.

What I see is that the bureaucracy supports the progressive policies and subsequent lies-that-progressives-will-tell, as opposed to lies any other administration might tell. My theory about that is that the type of lie Jesus O tells means job security for the government drones. So it's a win-win for the government employee.

I happen to think we may well be past the point where people actually will be willing to sacrifice and suffer a bit for a better tomorrow. Especially if they keep seeing what they and the spin-masters want everyone to see. Which is, it's all rosy.

I'm pretty sure we're several generation or more from a humankind that can choose not to work because of machines. And I even read Iain Bank's Culture series. Which didn't convince me we're anywhere near something even vaguely like that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Welcome Rolling Stones
Latvia
Bullshit
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
Sure John. Conservatives huh? Except for one small thing - conservatives don't run this nation. They haven't run this nation for a long time, a couple decades minimum. Hell, they were a minority in the minority house and senate for the first two years of your Savior's reign.

Maybe not in charge, but also not allowing anything to get done, unless it is some kind of benefit for 'the job creators'.

Maybe you like it when all policies contribute to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, but I don't.

Conservative economic policies have been in play for 30 years, and we're all getting fucked because of it.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Stiles
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Shaman
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
49xjohn wrote:
DWTripp wrote:
Sure John. Conservatives huh? Except for one small thing - conservatives don't run this nation. They haven't run this nation for a long time, a couple decades minimum. Hell, they were a minority in the minority house and senate for the first two years of your Savior's reign.

Maybe not in charge, but also not allowing anything to get done, unless it is some kind of benefit for 'the job creators'.

Maybe you like it when all policies contribute to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, but I don't.

Conservative economic policies have been in play for 30 years, and we're all getting fucked because of it.


Just about this. Every government plays it's part, but we're just beginning to pay the price for the 80s.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
To be fair to Tripp I was just addressing the current situation, not future hypotheticals. I think you have read far more then I intended, not that I disagree with what you have said.

In fact I do have great concerns over the diminishing job market. It is possible to imagine a society where "nonemployment" is the norm, rather then the exception.


There's that, concern over lack of employment opportunity. But there's also the meat of my OP - how an administration, in this case Jesus O's, presents the information to the people who essentially pay for the data and use it to determine who to vote for.

What I see is that the bureaucracy supports the progressive policies and subsequent lies-that-progressives-will-tell, as opposed to lies any other administration might tell. My theory about that is that the type of lie Jesus O tells means job security for the government drones. So it's a win-win for the government employee.

I happen to think we may well be past the point where people actually will be willing to sacrifice and suffer a bit for a better tomorrow. Especially if they keep seeing what they and the spin-masters want everyone to see. Which is, it's all rosy.

I'm pretty sure we're several generation or more from a humankind that can choose not to work because of machines. And I even read Iain Bank's Culture series. Which didn't convince me we're anywhere near something even vaguely like that.
Which lies?

That there are fewer unemployed then there really are, sorry that is not a progressive lie (governments have always lied about that). You at least have a germ of a good point it, but one rendered irrelevant by partisan hackmanship. Moreover the other side (as demonstrated by your own OP) tries to imply falsehoods about the "real" rate of unemployment too.

That there are more people not in work then they claim (your evidence being...the governments own figures, so not really a lie if they are telling you the real total). But "not being in work" and being "on benefits" is not the same thing (in fact I seem to recall seeing that most benefits go to those in work).

That there are far more "useless drain on society" then the goverment claims, well I have already pointed out that is not even close to reality (it's all a matter of perspective).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Which lies?

That there are fewer unemployed then there really are, sorry that is not a progressive lie (governments have always lied about that). You at least have a germ of a good point it, but one rendered irrelevant by partisan hackmanship. Moreover the other side (as demonstrated by your own OP) tries to imply falsehoods about the "real" rate of unemployment too.

That there are more people not in work then they claim (your evidence being...the governments own figures, so not really a lie if they are telling you the real total). But "not being in work" and being "on benefits" is not the same thing (in fact I seem to recall seeing that most benefits go to those in work).

That there are far more "useless drain on society" then the goverment claims, well I have already pointed out that is not even close to reality (it's all a matter of perspective).


Damn. And just when I thought you were going to post something of substance. Slater, you have done zero pointing out of anything. All you did was say it's a matter of perspective. Either the BLS stats are real or they aren't. I suspect they are as real as such numbers get. Plus, it seems to me that 1/3 of a population the size of America having dropped totally off the radar and now being ignored when Jesus O addresses unemployment and the economy is actively leading our nation downhill.

Yours arrived there some time back and anyone who watched it intelligently (certainly not you) may recognize it happening here.

If the people who vote are being misled about the poor state of the economy and the overall job picture then they cannot vote intelligently. That's one of my points. And then I asked a question, is this all okay with you/RSP/Hive Mind, etc.?

Who the fuck cares what my ideological alliance is? I didn't create the numbers nor did I lie to the public about them. I just looked at what was presented and see a huge lie being told that might have consequences too great to recover from, at least over several generations. If at all.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff
United States
Linden
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Social Justice Wargamer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The rejiggering of unemployment numbers has been part of the problem for a long time. It's real, it's cross-partisan, and it's fucked up.

And it's part of a larger problem. There's no short-term money in fixing these problems. The parties will continue to kick the can down the road and ignore the problem until people start noticing it's fucked up, at which point they will enact token legislation that doesn't even attempt to address the looming problem, so they can get back to the hard work of fear-mongering and can kicking.

EDIT: And let's not forget the most important work: calling up unemployed people and begging for money.

Can we reset the board and start again, this time without fucking up all the rules?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Crypt Keeper
United States
California
flag msg tools
None shall pass!
badge
'Tis but a scratch.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
windsagio wrote:
49xjohn wrote:
DWTripp wrote:
Sure John. Conservatives huh? Except for one small thing - conservatives don't run this nation. They haven't run this nation for a long time, a couple decades minimum. Hell, they were a minority in the minority house and senate for the first two years of your Savior's reign.

Maybe not in charge, but also not allowing anything to get done, unless it is some kind of benefit for 'the job creators'.

Maybe you like it when all policies contribute to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, but I don't.

Conservative economic policies have been in play for 30 years, and we're all getting fucked because of it.


Just about this. Every government plays it's part, but we're just beginning to pay the price for the 80s.

LOL! Now it's Reagan's fault. Next, I suppose, they'll be blaming Lincoln.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Which lies?

That there are fewer unemployed then there really are, sorry that is not a progressive lie (governments have always lied about that). You at least have a germ of a good point it, but one rendered irrelevant by partisan hackmanship. Moreover the other side (as demonstrated by your own OP) tries to imply falsehoods about the "real" rate of unemployment too.

That there are more people not in work then they claim (your evidence being...the governments own figures, so not really a lie if they are telling you the real total). But "not being in work" and being "on benefits" is not the same thing (in fact I seem to recall seeing that most benefits go to those in work).

That there are far more "useless drain on society" then the goverment claims, well I have already pointed out that is not even close to reality (it's all a matter of perspective).


Damn. And just when I thought you were going to post something of substance. Slater, you have done zero pointing out of anything. All you did was say it's a matter of perspective. Either the BLS stats are real or they aren't. I suspect they are as real as such numbers get. Plus, it seems to me that 1/3 of a population the size of America having dropped totally off the radar and now being ignored when Jesus O addresses unemployment and the economy is actively leading our nation downhill.

Yours arrived there some time back and anyone who watched it intelligently (certainly not you) may recognize it happening here.

If the people who vote are being misled about the poor state of the economy and the overall job picture then they cannot vote intelligently. That's one of my points. And then I asked a question, is this all okay with you/RSP/Hive Mind, etc.?

Who the fuck cares what my ideological alliance is? I didn't create the numbers nor did I lie to the public about them. I just looked at what was presented and see a huge lie being told that might have consequences too great to recover from, at least over several generations. If at all.
You did not create the numbers no, but you have chosen how to present them.

As to perspective, the matter of perspective to which I refer is how you are judging "being a productive member of society". Such as people getting an education, or raising kids. It also includes (of course) the retired, in one respect you have a point, their use to society is over.

As to the great lie, I do not think you have demonstrated a great lie, you have demonstrated a disingenuous way of trying to manipulate raw data without looking at what that data actually says. The shame is you have a valid point about actual unemployment being far higher then it really is. But you are so desperate to maker your point you claim that getting an education is not productive (I trust you never use a doctor). I love the idea that students and the retired have "just dropped of the radar" just becasue they are include in a rather large grouping of people who are "not in work". Maybe you shoudl look at all teh figures that break down things like how many retired there are, or how many students there are or how many stay at home mothers there are.

Like most of your posts a valid point is hidden in so much rhetoric and partisan dishonesty that it drowns under the weight of your own bile, and your discourse just turns into another rant about "the hive mind!".

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derry Salewski
United States
Augusta
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
I'm only happy when it rains...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Do you have a better break down of those 92 million? You make interesting points, but I still want to know how many of them are, say, students, single parents, prisoners, disabled, etc.

I agree it's a little silly to talk about an unemployment rate when it means something else than those English words mean. I'm 29. I don't really care what it means except that seven years ago the rate was high and I couldn't find work and today it's lower and I have a good job.

But I have a job working with mental health, and there's probably twice as many staff that I interact with as clients. So if you tell me a third of the population is classified as unable to work, My first reaction is 'duh.'
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tripp: I'm not sure the 'lies' you see are really that. IT's just data. You're worried about the people not participating in the labor force? Hit up BLS and check their data going back as far as 1948. Our Labor Force participation is down from the highs of the 90's, but it's still way up from the 50's. And we all know what lazy fuckwits everyone in the 50's and 60's was right?

That means most likely:The data isn't telling you what you think it is telling you.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Stiles
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Shaman
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Gialmere wrote:

LOL! Now it's Reagan's fault. Next, I suppose, they'll be blaming Lincoln.


Hey, I just said '80s. I'll happily assign the proper share of blame anybody responsible for supply-side and the deregulation craze.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.