On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 01:23:37 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote:


The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now.
BLS says there was no net job creation last month.

I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts.

They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked."

You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14%
(For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%)

You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the
ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that
chart.

I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in
question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily
climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included,
so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is
likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a
causation effect.

As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't
been very successful in doing so.


Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you
actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would
know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call
them facts.

http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709

And, you blame who for this? Assuming this is true, this still has
nothing to do with the fact that the stim created jobs, the trend is
UP not DOWN (as under Bush) and that Obama is "to blame" for that.

http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142

Feel free to continue to be a jerk in your language to me. I'm sure it
makes you feel good.