Anyone reading CNBC would believe that we are in roaring economic times. Any slight improvement in economic data leads to wild cheers and claims we are having unprecedented prosperity. Since Obama has been in office, 8 million people have dropped out of the labor force. This has kept the unemployment rate artificially lower than what it really should be. But, this fact is rarely mentioned or its buried under triumphant headlines.
In the latest propaganda piece, CNBC’s Marc Koba is bragging that now the long term unemployed are decreasing. The article claims this is proof that our economy is booming and a strong job market. In the article itself, the truth is revealed why this is occurring. You guess it, the improvement in long term unemployment is due to people dropping out of the labor market.
The long term unemployed in the U.S are having an easier time finding jobs, while the chronic problem of long-term joblessness may disappear in the months ahead, according to a study released Monday from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
The jobless rate in the U.S. is currently at 7.9 percent, with some 12.3 million people out of work, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Of that, some 4.7 million are considered long term unemployed — meaning they have been jobless for 27 weeks or more.
Using BLS numbers, the report stated that in December 2012, the share of workers who were jobless six months or longer dipped below 40 percent for the first time since late 2009. The portion of unemployed Americans out of work for 99 weeks or longer fell to 11.2 percent in January — the lowest level in two years
[....]
Other reasons for the decline in the long-term unemployed aren’t so positive, however. It’s estimated that some 7 million people have dropped out of the labor force because they’ve just given up looking for work and are no longer part of the official statistics.
“It’s true that a lot of people have just given up, so that’s part of the reason the long-term unemployed numbers have gone down,” Valetta admitted.
This is typical of economic news reported by the media. They jump on any positive aspect to prove the economy is strong. The real reason for any decline is hidden. The 7 Million who dropped out of the labor force is the 800 lb Gorilla the Obama Boom propagandists do not mention. CNBC like most news outlets are dishonest propagandists.
Tags: CNBC, Long Term Unemployed, The Obama Boom
If those seven million had turned out and voted against Obama en masse, he might not be President today. Many of them either voted for him anyway, or “voted” for him by default by not voting. Either way, they were acting against their own long-term interests.
I heard someone on Hannity’s radio show the other day who tried equating the number of boomer’s retiring and leaving the workforce with the number of people giving up actively looking for work and thus not counted for unemployment stats.
He quoted number of boomer’s retiring monthly and the number of people leaving the work force, and while I don’t remember the numbers cited they were close. So his point was that the statistics of those leaving the work force was useless information in attacking the state of the economy, they were just counting people retiring.
I know his point is false, for example for his numbers to work even if they were a good comparison did not take into account new entrants into the work force, but am not quite sure how or if retirees would be included in the figures of those leaving the work force for unemployment reporting.
Absolutely.
What is stunning is that the economy was supposed to improve rapidly after the last recession because that is what economies do!
But not under Hussein.
And why should anything he has done help the economy? Sucking money from productive forces to fund a porkulus bill? The net economic effect MUST be negative. What of suppressing efforts at energy production while sucking up more money to fund “green” boondoggles. Then there’s that fabulous Obamacare, that has massively harmed small business employment. He has only encouraged illegals. Everything he has done, in short, should hurt the economy.
@ Iron Fist:
Obama’s kill Romney campaign worked. By not responding to 3 months of attacks, people began to despise him>S o they either stayed home or voted for the god-king.
@ citizen_q:
ACtually it doesn’t bear out at all. I have seen the talking point debunk.
@ citizen_q:
Ah, but the welfare rolls have and are increasing (e.g. Medicaid, food stamps). This is not consistent with mere retirement.
@ Rodan:
I think not mentioning new entrants is a pretty big hole, but if you come across a link debunking this talking point, I would like to see it.
@ sk (skzion):
Not to mention accelerating numbers of those claiming disability.
@ citizen_q:
Here you go.
@ Rodan:
Thank you very much!
@ citizen_q:
Rodan, how could I have forgotten about all those suddenly disabled?
citizen_q wrote:
There is a point with the baby-boomers retirement but it happened six years earlier than it should. It was expected about 2017
@ Rodan:
Very nice.
@ Guggi:
According to the report from the Heritage foundation that Rodan provided the link to, over the last 3 years the entire reduction of the unemployment rate is due to people leaving the workforce.
Only 1/5 of those leaving the workforce are retiring.
O/T but this mess of a story from DC highlights many of the problems the people fighting to kill the 2nd Amendment help create.
Note this story takes place in DC having very restrictive gun laws. All the people in the story appear to be career criminals, but are armed. One of them was murderer released from jail under “intense supervision” wearing an ankle bracelet which did not prevent him from kidnapping, possessing an illegal gun and using it in a couple of shoot outs.
Kidnapped D.C. brothers charged in captor’s killing
Bruce Willis is uber-times smarter than Sylvester Stallone
waldensianspirit wrote:
So is my Pet Rock.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
So, then CNBC is all on board for long term employment of 20 million amnestized illegals too.
PS
Shout out to Ronald Reagan:
Knock, Knock, Knock at our front doors…!
“Hi, I’m here from the Goverment and I’m here to help with the illegal immigration problem.”
another donk stronghold circling the drain…I sense a pattern here
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/06/city-baltimore-is-on-path-to-financial-ruin-report-says/?intcmp=HPBucket
@ buzzsawmonkey:
“Have ya thought about condominiums Rock?”
“Yo Tony, I don’t use em.”
Type casting.
on Chris Kyle.
The Marine Vet who shot Kyle and his buddy in the back.
He had been sent by his family to the VA hospital in Ft. Worth.
He had been to the hospital just days prior to the shootings.
The guys family was begging the VA to hospitlize the guy.
VA sent him home over the families wishes.
VA will not talk about it with the local news people.
Atty for the kid says it is true the VA said go home.
Yet the dole checks went out on time to the Obama sit on their ass voters.
spit
taxfreekiller messed up brain came up with this
may be old,, but
“Lick Morris” gets pink slip from FoxNews.
The essential pay freeze, however, comes just one year after the Obama administration first pushed for members of the U.S. armed service to pay more for their health care.
what an insult
http://freebeacon.com/obamas-war-on-the-troops/
citizen_q wrote:
This gets back to what I always say about why background checks are nonsense. If theyhadn’t let this thug out of jail, they wouldn’t have had to worry about him getting a gun. Which he was able to do despite DC’s unconstitutionally strict gun control. The gun controllers aren’t interested in crime except insofar as it provides an excuse for their desire for control. They want to go after the law-abiding. They want to make criminals out of ordinary people who don’t comply with their morality. Gun control is not merely stepping on civil rights. It is legislating Leftist morality for all of us.
@ taxfreekiller:
This is gubment health care.
It looks like a clear case of rationing due to budgets.
The VA can be good & not so good, like this.
When ObamaCare kicks in with all of its obscure mandates
and rationing people will be shocked.
The damn thing is Eugenics based & I would argue that
with my last breath.
@ Iron Fist:
This story seems to be a case study in failure on fronts ranging from gun control to the criminal justice system.
@ citizen_q:
I’m sure you could find an identical story from Chicago, or Detroit. It is Leftist government at work, on display for everybody to see. If that kind of thing got the same air-play that Sandy Hook got, people wouldn’t be screaming for gun control (not that they really are, anyway). They’d be screaming for the heads of the Democrats that brought us such a fucked-up system in the first place. Where’s the Outsider? I’d like to see him defend this system that he wants to impose on the entire nation.
Again, those who yesterday were following the discussion following the article by Rick Moran at PJM, “GOP Realists vs. True Believers,” a tongue-bath for Karl Rove, might be interested in some of the followup.
Tanker, from this site, weighed in at post #29; at his request, I posted some stuff at #33 and #34, to which some here kindly responded. Later yesterday evening, I threw in another post at #71, which prompted a reply at #73 that leads to a lengthy exchange.
There are enough idiots in Hollywood to accommodate every
village with an opening.
@ Iron Fist:
Yet the police wonder why few will stand up as witnesses, when murderers are let go, get weapons freely that are denied the law abiding, and are able to continue their criminal activities even while under “high-intensity supervision”.
One could only imagine what they would be doing if the murderers and other violent criminals they let go would be doing if they were monitored so closely. /
@ citizen_q:
One could argue that in such a setting it is criminally negligent of your own life not to break the law and arm yourself. Of course, criminals have the connections to make breaking the law easier for them than it is for ordinary citizens. I wouldn’t know where to get a machinegun, for example, but your criminal element can get them. The reason you don’ thave more crimes comitted with machineguns isn’t because theya re illegal so much as it is that machineguns aren’t particularly well suited to the types of crimes that are being comitted.
RIX wrote:
There’s no doubt about it. The goal of Obamacare is to kill off the old and sick. Just as abortions have been killing off unwanted babies. A smaller America is a cheaper America…
Exactly right, it’s very Darwinian, except the State will make the selections.
@ RIX:
Before the scourge of liberalism is cleansed from America, we are going to need a lot more villages…
@ Da_Beerfreak:
Sebelius: Decrease in Human Beings Will Cover Cost of Contraception Mandate
Doorbell
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Although I agree with you in most points I doubt that there is a single heterosexual man out there who is gay “by choice”. I know that many gays claim they are homosexual by choice but they are lying to themselves.
@ Da_Beerfreak:
Smaller is also easier to control, especially when you control the health care system. Want to get rid of gun owners? Make people get rid of their guns to keep their health care access. Make them “voluntarily” waive their Fourth Amendment rights so that their houses are subject to random, unannounced searches, and cut off anybody caught with a gun. Because a gun represents a “health risk”. Control of the health care system means that ultimately the State can decide not only who lives and who dies, but how much pain and suffering you have to endure while you are here. Nanny Bloomberg is already going after pain medication. They want to increase misery. These people are pure evil.
Truth.
@ citizen_q:
Pelosi believes that Abortions will take the pressure off of Social Security
payouts.
Of course there will lso be less people paying in.
Guggi wrote:
Either you misunderstand me, or you have typed “heterosexual” in that first sentence where you meant to type “homosexual.”
In any event, you are confusing two things; desire and action. Don’t feel bad, though—the gay-rights movement has spent decades working to muddy those two.
Some people (relatively few) feel homosexual desire strongly, to the exclusion of heterosexual desire. Some feel it intermittently; some, not at all. The question then is, what do they choose to do about it? Will they act on it, or not—just as someone who is habitually attracted to blondes may choose to act, or not, upon being attracted to a redhead? Will the married man choose to act on his attraction to another woman? Who can say? These are choices.
There are few homosexual men who are incapable of performing with a woman; most choose not to do so—even when a non-habitual attraction does arise—for reasons of internal and external social pressure. Men who regard themselves as heterosexual are capable of performing with, and even being attracted to, other men—prison is a well-known instance of this—because the social mores (and availability) are different from what obtains outside.
@ RIX:
Many of those aborted children would never become succesful and would only live a life out of welfare checks. It’s a cynical and racist calculation.
RIX wrote:
My understanding of the ponzi scheme that is Social Security is that it will fall apart of there are not enough people paying in to support payouts. The number that I remember in this regards is 10, but take that with a grain of salt. OTOH, if you have a program to help the elderly die off sooner, you won’t need so many contributors.
There are economic advantages for the grabberment on several fronts for us peasants to early and cheaply.
The only word I have for it is evil.
New Thread.
Margaret Sanger must be smiling.
@ citizen_q:
Seriously, Obama & his minions are into herd management.
We are the herd.
O/T wonder what he has to hide?
Hagel Refuses to Disclose Foreign Funders
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
No, I’m not confusing anything and spare me your arrogance and I wrote “heterosexual” because I meant heterosexual.
To compare (homo)sexual orientation with a desire for blondes is disgusting.
Performing sex with someone because of external or internal pressure or exceptional surcumstances (prison) is not the rule and does not codify their sexual orientation.
Guggi wrote:
Why? Reasons, please.
I was not being arrogant; I was trying to understand a sentence that still does not make sense. Perhaps you can take a deep breath, calm down, and explain what you mean.
Perhaps you can explain this too.