OT, Whew, sure glad that "Recovery Summer" is over. 283,000 jobs lost.
Alim Nassor
number6
> http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
The Secretary of Labor in USA Today on the Official Government
Propaganda Page says there are plenty of jobs out there ... I guess
she believes workers are just too dumb to find them ... Psst ... want
ads in local papers ...
RGP Loner
> http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
Unemployment % for blacks...17%
For teenagers....26%
Lord only knows what the unemployment rate is for Black Teenagers .
I think California better legalize Pot soon to sedate the unemployed Black
Teenagers. Or they are going to have a crisis on their hands .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw&feature=channel
Watch first 2 Min.
*************************************************
$50 says neither Annette nor Hellmuth cashes in the 2010 WSOP main event.
--Morphy
Uhh, excuse me? I'm not a welching scumbag like davoice. If both
Hellmuth and Annette cashed as was clearly indicated in both mine and
Alan's posts, and Alan would have asked for payment,
I would have sent it with no questions asked.
You are right though, I did not think I had a bet with Alan
---Morphy
--------
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
BillB
"RGP Loner" <aaa...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:orh7l7x...@recgroups.com...
> Unemployment % for blacks...17%
> For teenagers....26%
>
> Lord only knows what the unemployment rate is for Black Teenagers .
Somewhere in the 50-60% range.
Puppytoes
Lol ... the assumption is they want to find them. It's better to sit
on their dumb asses and collect extended benefits!
---
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
Dave the Clueless
Cite?
________________________________________________________________________
BillB
"Dave the Clueless" <frac...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1lu7l7x...@recgroups.com...
>> Somewhere in the 50-60% range.
>
> Cite?
Irish Mike
There is only one solution. Obama must pass another $trillion dollar pork
barrel stimulus, without reading it of course. But this time it must have
more ear-marks than the piddly 8,000+ included in the first one. We must
devote more taxpayer money to studying the mating habits of South American
ants and the impact of cow farts on the environment. Oh yeah, and lets
be sure to let the Bush tax cuts expire so we can raise taxes on
corporations, small business owners and private investors. That will
definitely create more private sector jobs!
Irish Mike
Recession: When your neighbor loses his job.
Depression: When you lose your job.
Recovery: When Obama loses his job.
____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
Jerry Sturdivant
"Alim Nassor" <alimn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bc588bb0-9b13-4f02...@n19g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
Just imagine how bad it would be if Bush hadn't started the stimulus and
Obama continue it.
Jerry 'n Vegas
Alim Nassor
> "Alim Nassor" <alimnas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
I can imagine that it would be about the same, without adding
trillions to the debt.
K9way
> http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
this from the guy who is taking money to facilitate the loss of jobs of
his friends and neighbors
et tu judas ?
do you have a telephone number or a social security number or an address
or a ....
Alim's answer: None of those track my every move
_____________________________________________________________________
DFSPON
> http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
WOW, you are QUITE A MORON there ALIM. 283,000 Jobs lost this summer
but you intentionally failed to note that Temporary Census Workers
accounted for a decline of 482,000 between June-Aug (564,000 in May,
82,000 in August). Therefore there was an actual add on of 199,000
Real Jobs during the summer.
Although the Jobs Growth isnt great, I despise Right Wing Liars who
try to distort the true meaning. Private Sector Growth in August was
67,000 Jobs. Since its low in December 2009, private-sector employment
has risen by 763,000 jobs.
The Stock Market reacted favorably to todays Job Report thus further
negating Alims nonsense.
Irish Mike
> On Sep 3, 10:55 am, Alim Nassor <alimnas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
>
> WOW, you are QUITE A MORON there ALIM. 283,000 Jobs lost this summer
> but you intentionally failed to note that Temporary Census Workers
> accounted for a decline of 482,000 between June-Aug (564,000 in May,
> 82,000 in August). Therefore there was an actual add on of 199,000
> Real Jobs during the summer.
>
> Although the Jobs Growth isnt great, I despise Right Wing Liars who
> try to distort the true meaning. Private Sector Growth in August was
> 67,000 Jobs. Since its low in December 2009, private-sector employment
> has risen by 763,000 jobs.
You want to focus on a number? How about 2,500,000. That is a
conservative estimate of how many private sector jobs have been lost since
Obama passed his $trillion dollar, pork barrel "stimulus" bill. Which,
BTW, not a single Democrat read before voting to pass it. As the polls
show, Obama has become the biggest case of buyer's remorse in American
history. If the American people knew in November, 2008 what they know
today, McCain & Palin would have won by a landslide.
Irish Mike
Recession: When your neighbor loses his job.
Depression: When you lose your job.
Recovery: When Obama loses his job.
------
Alim Nassor
Whoa there numbnuts. I gave you the link. All I did was add up the
negative numbers for the three months. If you left wing slack jawed
drooling idiots are going to trumpet those jobs when they were
created, and you know you did, then you better be ready to own up
when they go away.
risky biz
"Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practice to deceive”.
bub
wrote:
>Temporary Census Workers
>accounted for a decline of 482,000 between June-Aug (564,000 in May,
>82,000 in August)
barry was sure puffing out his chest when he used them for news jobs
added by him
Jerry Sturdivant
"Alim Nassor" <alimn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ce1a300e-d174-4278...@p12g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
How do you 'imagine' that? You don't believe the stimulus stimulated? All
those jobs weren't created?
Jerry (stimulated) 'n Vegas
Jerry Sturdivant
"Alim Nassor" <alimn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:df079860-2bf0-41fe...@a4g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 3, 11:59 pm, DFSPON <DS...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Sep 3, 10:55 am, Alim Nassor <alimnas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
>>
>> WOW, you are QUITE A MORON there ALIM. 283,000 Jobs lost this summer
>> but you intentionally failed to note that Temporary Census Workers
>> accounted for a decline of 482,000 between June-Aug (564,000 in May,
>> 82,000 in August). Therefore there was an actual add on of 199,000
>> Real Jobs during the summer.
>>
>> Although the Jobs Growth isnt great, I despise Right Wing Liars who
>> try to distort the true meaning. Private Sector Growth in August was
>> 67,000 Jobs. Since its low in December 2009, private-sector employment
>> has risen by 763,000 jobs.
>>
>> The Stock Market reacted favorably to todays Job Report thus further
>> negating Alims nonsense.
> Whoa there numbnuts. I gave you the link. All I did was add up the
> negative numbers for the three months.
So add up the positive and give us a count. Show us if the total overall
jobs over the last eight months have increased or decreased.
> If you left wing slack jawed
> drooling idiots are going to trumpet those jobs when they were
> created, and you know you did, then you better be ready to own up
> when they go away.
That's why I'm asking for you totals.....
Jerry 'n Vegas
Steam
Exactly what jobs were created? and not some mythical "jopbs saved", jobs
have imploded and continued to implode long after the stimulus package.
>
>
> Jerry (stimulated) 'n Vegas
________________________________________________________________________
Jerry Sturdivant
"Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:3qhal7x...@recgroups.com...
> On Sep 4 2010 8:27 AM, Jerry Sturdivant wrote:
>
>> "Alim Nassor" <alimn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:ce1a300e-d174-4278...@p12g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>> > On Sep 3, 7:24 pm, "Jerry Sturdivant" <jerr...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> "Alim Nassor" <alimnas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >>
>> >> news:bc588bb0-9b13-4f02...@n19g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> >>
>> >> >http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
>> >>
>> >> Just imagine how bad it would be if Bush hadn't started the stimulus
>> >> and
>> >>Obama continue it.
>> >>
>> >> Jerry 'n Vegas
>>
>> > I can imagine that it would be about the same,
>> > without adding trillions to the debt.
>>
>> How do you 'imagine' that? You don't believe the stimulus stimulated?
>> All
>> those jobs weren't created?
> Exactly what jobs were created? and not some mythical "jopbs saved", jobs
> have imploded and continued to implode long after the stimulus package.
Everybody's been warned about getting their information from FOX. Apparently
you miss the warning. Jobs have been increasing every month for the last
eight months. The 'numbers' you hear from the right wingers are
"Unemployment figures are up! Where are the jobs!?" The fact (the thing you
don't get from FOX and Limbaugh) is that more people are looking; not that
job totals are down. 67,000 private sector jobs were created last month,
alone.
Now fess up; admit you were under the wrong impression because you listened
to some right wing wacko.
Jerry 'n Vegas
Steam
Sorry to disappoint you, I never watch FOX or Limbaugh
--------
Steam
I don't need an opinion from the right wing tards or the left wing tards,
I can see things for myself
bub
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
using cbo's "projection" the stimulus "increased the number of people
employed by" approx. 2.2 million jobs . that's only $392000 PER JOB.
good money spent since the money was taken out of the private sector
and there is no guarantee that those jobs create any output
give one small business $392,000 and see how many jobs they can create
also, alot of the jobs funded by the stimulus last year are being
eliminated since the "funding" for them dried up. now the states are
asking for more money to keep the jobs going
"i'm from the government. give me your money and i'll help you out"
must be sad some of you think the government knows how to use your
money better than you do.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
K9way
he will no more respond to this than my comments about him helping to take
the jobs overseas and fuck his friends
do you have a telephone number or a social security number or an address
or a ....
Alim's answer: None of those track my every move
_______________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
Alim Nassor
> "Alim Nassor" <alimnas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Uh, Jerry. If the number of jobs was negative, there ain't no
positives. See, a negative..... Oh never mind.
Alim Nassor
> "Steam" <a74b...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
workforce, which is why the unemployment rate went up. A healthy
growing economy creates enough jobs to keep up with workforce growth
and then some.
> Now fess up; admit you were under the wrong impression because you listened
> to some right wing wacko.
>
Alim Nassor
> On Sep 4 2010 11:33 AM, Jerry Sturdivant wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
I'll respond to it. I already did. My job, that I am paid to do by
my employer, requires me to move this equipment. Everyone at our
plant is doing what they have to do now to get by. Our techs are
working overtime to disconnect equipment and get it ready for
shipping. Operators are working OT to build up inventory to sustain
the business during the transition. All of these people are my
friends. And they are doing their part to make the move happen. None
of us like losing our jobs next year, but all of us are doing our jobs
now.
We could all pout and maybe have a sit in, bit it would not change a
damn thing.
So fuck off and die you near 60 year old coward.
> do you have a telephone number or a social security number or an address
> or a ....
>
> Alim's answer: None of those track my every move
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> looking for a better newsgroup-reader? -www.recgroups.com- Hide quoted text -
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>
>Exactly what jobs were created? and not some mythical "jopbs saved", jobs
>have imploded and continued to implode long after the stimulus package.
Do you think they might have imploded even more without the stimulus?
A main criticism of the stimulus from the left was that it was too
small.
It's hard to imagine how spending lots of money on various projects
wouldn't create jobs. Someone has to do the work on those projects.
That means those are jobs that wouldn't exist if not for the projects.
Jerry Sturdivant
"Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:nmoal7x...@recgroups.com...
You're wrong here, too: I'm not disappointed. I was indicating you got bad
information and suggested it was from FOX or Limbaugh. I then indicated you
had obviously 'listened to some right wing wacko.'
Apparently you don't want to admit you were under the wrong impression. But
that's okay; you now have the correct facts.
Jerry (glad to help) 'n Vegas
Jerry Sturdivant
"Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:d0pal7x...@recgroups.com...
All evidence to the contrary, as I showed.
Jerry 'n Vegas
Jerry Sturdivant
"bub" <b...@plottus.com> wrote in message
news:seg586hfn5hldmqoo...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 13:08:17 -0700, "Jerry Sturdivant"
> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> using cbo's "projection" the stimulus "increased the number of people
> employed by" approx. 2.2 million jobs . that's only $392000 PER JOB.
I believe you missed the point that those jobs, paychecks and expenditures,
created other jobs. (Look up stimulus). I believe there's a figure out there
that a dollar spent passes through 7 hands. But that might be old figures; I
can only hope you understand the point.
No; judging by the rest of your post; you may not understand. I'll give you
a little example: The guy that got the new job spend his money at a store.
That store makes money (and hires) and the companies that make the product
they sold make money (and hires). The system is 'stimulated.' It's why
they're using the word, stimulus. You understand now?
> good money spent since the money was taken out of the private sector
> and there is no guarantee that those jobs create any output
Yea, they do.
> give one small business $392,000 and see how many jobs they can create
Are you indicating it would not create jobs? Or that it would not be a
stimulus? You're not clear.
> also, alot of the jobs funded by the stimulus last year are being
> eliminated since the "funding" for them dried up.
Of course. Stimulus was not meant to last forever. It's to 'stimulate.'
> now the states are
> asking for more money to keep the jobs going
Of course. Why not? The states get a lot of their money from the federal
government. It's part of how the system works.
> "i'm from the government. give me your money and i'll help you out"
>
> must be sad some of you think the government knows how to use your
> money better than you do.
You believe that what I think? It appears your making up a position for me,
then arguing that incorrect position.
Jerry 'n Vegas
Jerry Sturdivant
"Alim Nassor" <alimn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f19170cc-5d8e-4209...@m17g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
> Uh, Jerry. If the number of jobs was negative, there ain't no
> positives. See, a negative.....
Actually there were.
> Oh never mind.
Ah! So you finally got it?
Jerry 'n Vegas
Jerry Sturdivant
"Alim Nassor" <alimn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:05afd2b1-d066-4b3b...@x20g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
Good for you! I knew you'd finally get it.
> A healthy
> growing economy creates enough jobs to keep up with workforce growth
> and then some.
Of course. That's what we're working toward.
Jerry 'n Vegas
Alim Nassor 1
>
> - Show quoted text -
Jerry, if the losses are greater than the gains, it is a net negative
number. Sheesh.
Alim Nassor 1
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not succesfully it appears. If you can't create enough jobs to keep
the UE rate from going up, then it's hard to see how you can call that
a success.
Steam
> Apparently you don't want to admit you were under the wrong impression. But
> that's okay; you now have the correct facts.
>
>
> Jerry (glad to help) 'n Vegas
There has been an infinitessimally tiny improvement in jobs in california
over the last 6 months, but for all intents nd purposes, it is so small
and so anemic, it might as well be zero, and a good chance that is only
temporary, so ai have not seen a thing that impresses me yet. Is that
what you are crowing about? Unemployemtn here is still vitually
unchanged, but maybe a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny tiny, tiny bit of
improvement that you can only see with an electron microscope
------
Jerry Sturdivant
"Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:iqqcl7x...@recgroups.com...
> On Sep 5 2010 7:12 AM, Jerry Sturdivant wrote:
>
>> Apparently you don't want to admit you were under the wrong impression.
>> But
>> that's okay; you now have the correct facts.
>>
>>
>> Jerry (glad to help) 'n Vegas
>
> There has been an infinitessimally tiny improvement in jobs in california
> over the last 6 months, but for all intents nd purposes, it is so small
> and so anemic, it might as well be zero, and a good chance that is only
> temporary, so ai have not seen a thing that impresses me yet.
You seem to be up on this. You don't happen to have the numbers, do you?
> Is that what you are crowing about?
What? You not being impressed? Or that you were under the impression that
there were fewer jobs because the unemployment number was bigger? I believe
the point was that there are more jobs, not less.
> Unemployemtn here is still vitually
> unchanged, but maybe a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny tiny, tiny bit of
> improvement that you can only see with an electron microscope
Again, rather than 'tiny to the fifth,' do you have some numbers?
Jerry 'n Vegas
Jerry Sturdivant
"Alim Nassor 1" <AlimN...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1001aa69-3ee2-4c43...@s17g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> Jerry, if the losses are greater than the gains, it is a net negative
> number. Sheesh.
So you DID get it. You DO understand there were more jobs and not less.
Jerry 'n Vegas
Jerry Sturdivant
"Alim Nassor 1" <AlimN...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d9e6543c-bda6-4959...@v35g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> Not succesfully it appears.
Of course it is. We're going 'toward' that goal. Now if you're complaining
that it's not FAST enough, that's another thing.
> If you can't create enough jobs to keep
> the UE rate from going up, then it's hard to see how you can call that
> a success.
The 'success' is the fact we've more jobs; not less. Again, the Republicans
can only complain that it's not increasing fast enough. Yet they haven't a
suggestion on how to speed the recovery. Have you?
Jerry 'n Vegas
Steam
> "Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:iqqcl7x...@recgroups.com...
> > On Sep 5 2010 7:12 AM, Jerry Sturdivant wrote:
> >
> >> Apparently you don't want to admit you were under the wrong impression.
> >> But
> >> that's okay; you now have the correct facts.
> >>
> >>
> >> Jerry (glad to help) 'n Vegas
> >
> > There has been an infinitessimally tiny improvement in jobs in california
> > over the last 6 months, but for all intents nd purposes, it is so small
> > and so anemic, it might as well be zero, and a good chance that is only
> > temporary, so ai have not seen a thing that impresses me yet.
>
> You seem to be up on this. You don't happen to have the numbers, do you?
>
>
> > Is that what you are crowing about?
>
> What? You not being impressed? Or that you were under the impression that
> there were fewer jobs because the unemployment number was bigger? I believe
> the point was that there are more jobs, not less.
>
>
There has to be more jobs than there are more people looking for them for
it to have any impact on unemployment, I may get some numbers later, but
right now I am doing other things first.
> > Unemployemtn here is still vitually
> > unchanged, but maybe a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny tiny, tiny bit of
> > improvement that you can only see with an electron microscope
>
> Again, rather than 'tiny to the fifth,' do you have some numbers?
>
>
> Jerry 'n Vegas
____________________________________________________________________