Read back, RG. You'll see that Harry turned an statistical/informational
thread into a political one. And then thunder piled on with his "take it
back to 1977, only when a Republican was in the WH" claim.


"armchair partisan political hacks that populate this forum"

If the shoe fits...

If it serves you to claim no political intent to this post, and if you
believe such a claim extends to exonerate you any history of such activity,
then I simply leave you to the enjoyment of your delusion. And please don't
allow your sense of self-importance to allow you to believe that I am
singling you out. I usually make a point of trying to protect the innocent,
it's just that they're so god damned hard to find around here.

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 15:10:51 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

Since June 2003, the economy has seen 27 straight months of net job
gains...yielding a *net* gain of 4,172,000 jobs over that same period.


In the last 18 months alone, we've added 3,533,000 jobs.

Since the election, we've added 1,837,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate stands at 4.9%...which is exactly where it was prior
to 9/11.

Unfortunately, Katrina will probably have a negative impact on the numbers
for the next few months.

http://tinyurl.com/dnb7a



Yeah, but these are all minimum wage jobs, according to the libs. They never
seem to get the idea that there must be *some* decent paying jobs developed,
just to supervise all the minimum wage earners!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

Harry:

I pay well and still have a hard time finding good high tech people. I
have to recruit from the local university staff so the university is
mad at me.

David OHara

NOYB wrote:
Since June 2003, the economy has seen 27 straight months of net job
gains...yielding a *net* gain of 4,172,000 jobs over that same period.


In the last 18 months alone, we've added 3,533,000 jobs.

Since the election, we've added 1,837,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate stands at 4.9%...which is exactly where it was prior
to 9/11.

Unfortunately, Katrina will probably have a negative impact on the numbers
for the next few months.

http://tinyurl.com/dnb7a

Holy ****, talk about SPIN!!! I just love how you pick and choose just
exactly which statistics you prefer to post and believe!!!!! I take it
that you didn't look at the whole labor picture? I also like how you
take a specifice period that is only when bushco has been president to
use as a model for your "net gain".

On 12 Sep 2005 10:28:31 -0700, wrote:


NOYB wrote:
Since June 2003, the economy has seen 27 straight months of net job
gains...yielding a *net* gain of 4,172,000 jobs over that same period.


In the last 18 months alone, we've added 3,533,000 jobs.

Since the election, we've added 1,837,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate stands at 4.9%...which is exactly where it was prior
to 9/11.

Unfortunately, Katrina will probably have a negative impact on the numbers
for the next few months.

http://tinyurl.com/dnb7a

Holy ****, talk about SPIN!!! I just love how you pick and choose just
exactly which statistics you prefer to post and believe!!!!! I take it
that you didn't look at the whole labor picture? I also like how you
take a specifice period that is only when bushco has been president to
use as a model for your "net gain".

Did you keep any stats on your 'Desmo'? What kind of gas mileage did it get? How
fast did it go in the quarter mile? How many wheels did it have?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Since June 2003, the economy has seen 27 straight months of net job
gains...yielding a *net* gain of 4,172,000 jobs over that same period.


In the last 18 months alone, we've added 3,533,000 jobs.

Since the election, we've added 1,837,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate stands at 4.9%...which is exactly where it was prior
to 9/11.

Unfortunately, Katrina will probably have a negative impact on the numbers
for the next few months.

http://tinyurl.com/dnb7a

These numbers are meaningless without information on how peoples' incomes
have changed as they take these "new" jobs. We know that YOU like to think
in terms of evil welfare recipients whose incomes are headed upward when
they get jobs. However, the grownup news has carried numerous stories about
people who were in the 50k-75k white collar category and had to take nasty
pay cuts in order to find ANY job in the area where they preferred to live.

Try again, but with real data, this time. And, if you have some spare time,
take a course in statistics.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Since June 2003, the economy has seen 27 straight months of net job
gains...yielding a *net* gain of 4,172,000 jobs over that same period.


In the last 18 months alone, we've added 3,533,000 jobs.

Since the election, we've added 1,837,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate stands at 4.9%...which is exactly where it was
prior to 9/11.

Unfortunately, Katrina will probably have a negative impact on the
numbers for the next few months.

http://tinyurl.com/dnb7a

These numbers are meaningless without information on how peoples' incomes
have changed as they take these "new" jobs.

Then I could argue that the numbers from the 90's are meaningless without
information on how many single-earner households became two income
households out of necessity during that time period. And how much the second
income earner's money contributed to a boost in GDP each year.



We know that YOU like to think
in terms of evil welfare recipients whose incomes are headed upward when
they get jobs. However, the grownup news has carried numerous stories
about people who were in the 50k-75k white collar category and had to take
nasty pay cuts in order to find ANY job in the area where they preferred
to live.


That's because you listen to those wacky liberal news stations like NPR.



Try again, but with real data, this time. And, if you have some spare
time, take a course in statistics.

Real data? If I can't get the data from BLS, where am I supposed to get it
from?

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Since June 2003, the economy has seen 27 straight months of net job
gains...yielding a *net* gain of 4,172,000 jobs over that same period.


In the last 18 months alone, we've added 3,533,000 jobs.

Since the election, we've added 1,837,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate stands at 4.9%...which is exactly where it was
prior to 9/11.

Unfortunately, Katrina will probably have a negative impact on the
numbers for the next few months.

http://tinyurl.com/dnb7a

These numbers are meaningless without information on how peoples' incomes
have changed as they take these "new" jobs.

Then I could argue that the numbers from the 90's are meaningless without
information on how many single-earner households became two income
households out of necessity during that time period. And how much the
second income earner's money contributed to a boost in GDP each year.



We know that YOU like to think
in terms of evil welfare recipients whose incomes are headed upward when
they get jobs. However, the grownup news has carried numerous stories
about people who were in the 50k-75k white collar category and had to
take nasty pay cuts in order to find ANY job in the area where they
preferred to live.


That's because you listen to those wacky liberal news stations like NPR.

Heh. Would you like whipped cream on that foot, as long as it's in your
mouth? Three weeks ago, our local NPR radio station interviewed two people
from the NYS department of labor. They were bemoaning the FACT that although
they can offer retraining to mid- and senior-level engineers who will lose
their jobs when Delphi (the auto parts maker) shuts its doors, they know for
a FACT that companies simply do not exist here which can offer these people
anywhere near the money they were making before. They were talking about
people going from 75k to 100k, down to 30k-40k. Not funny when you're 45
years old and your first kid's going to college next year.

But, I guess that the DOL people who are actually interviewing displaced
workers have no idea what they were talking about, because they were
interviewed on an NPR affiliate station. Right?


Try again, but with real data, this time. And, if you have some spare
time, take a course in statistics.

Real data? If I can't get the data from BLS, where am I supposed to get
it from?

The data is not real because it is not accompanied by missing numbers
required to give it meaning. It's as if I said to you "My friend lost all
her teeth by the time she was 40." It only tells you she lost her teeth. You
have no idea how.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
Since June 2003, the economy has seen 27 straight months of net job
gains...yielding a *net* gain of 4,172,000 jobs over that same period.


In the last 18 months alone, we've added 3,533,000 jobs.

Since the election, we've added 1,837,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate stands at 4.9%...which is exactly where it was
prior to 9/11.

Unfortunately, Katrina will probably have a negative impact on the
numbers for the next few months.

http://tinyurl.com/dnb7a

These numbers are meaningless without information on how peoples'
incomes have changed as they take these "new" jobs.

Then I could argue that the numbers from the 90's are meaningless without
information on how many single-earner households became two income
households out of necessity during that time period. And how much the
second income earner's money contributed to a boost in GDP each year.



We know that YOU like to think
in terms of evil welfare recipients whose incomes are headed upward when
they get jobs. However, the grownup news has carried numerous stories
about people who were in the 50k-75k white collar category and had to
take nasty pay cuts in order to find ANY job in the area where they
preferred to live.


That's because you listen to those wacky liberal news stations like NPR.

Heh. Would you like whipped cream on that foot, as long as it's in your
mouth? Three weeks ago, our local NPR radio station interviewed two people
from the NYS department of labor. They were bemoaning the FACT that
although they can offer retraining to mid- and senior-level engineers who
will lose their jobs when Delphi (the auto parts maker) shuts its doors,
they know for a FACT that companies simply do not exist here which can
offer these people anywhere near the money they were making before. They
were talking about people going from 75k to 100k, down to 30k-40k. Not
funny when you're 45 years old and your first kid's going to college next
year.

Just because someone was earning $75-100k doesn't mean that they are
guaranteed that amount in the future.

Consider this:

Before you could look up the exact dealer cost of an automobile on
edmunds.com, car salesmen were all earning 6 figures. Now, they earn on
average one-third to one-half that.

The reality of a dynamic world has changed the profession. Consumers would
say for the better...and employees would say for the worse.





But, I guess that the DOL people who are actually interviewing displaced
workers have no idea what they were talking about, because they were
interviewed on an NPR affiliate station. Right?

In true NPR fashion, they interviewed only folks from one side of the
equation.

My brother just took an engineering job paying a lot more than he was
earning when Bush took office. NPR hasn't interviewed him though.





Try again, but with real data, this time. And, if you have some spare
time, take a course in statistics.

Real data? If I can't get the data from BLS, where am I supposed to get
it from?

The data is not real because it is not accompanied by missing numbers
required to give it meaning. It's as if I said to you "My friend lost all
her teeth by the time she was 40." It only tells you she lost her teeth.
You have no idea how.

In most cases, the "how" really doesn't matter. The fact is that she now
has no teeth, and needs a denture or implants to replace them.

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

That's because you listen to those wacky liberal news stations like NPR.

Heh. Would you like whipped cream on that foot, as long as it's in your
mouth? Three weeks ago, our local NPR radio station interviewed two
people from the NYS department of labor. They were bemoaning the FACT
that although they can offer retraining to mid- and senior-level
engineers who will lose their jobs when Delphi (the auto parts maker)
shuts its doors, they know for a FACT that companies simply do not exist
here which can offer these people anywhere near the money they were
making before. They were talking about people going from 75k to 100k,
down to 30k-40k. Not funny when you're 45 years old and your first kid's
going to college next year.

Just because someone was earning $75-100k doesn't mean that they are
guaranteed that amount in the future.

Obviously not, but you're using your incomplete information to "prove" that
wealth is being created, when, on the whole, it may not be.



Consider this:

Before you could look up the exact dealer cost of an automobile....

Blah. This does not support your use of incomplete data. I assume you
realize that if this were a discussion in an economics or statistics class,
your professor would've humiliated you by now.



But, I guess that the DOL people who are actually interviewing displaced
workers have no idea what they were talking about, because they were
interviewed on an NPR affiliate station. Right?

In true NPR fashion, they interviewed only folks from one side of the
equation.

That's a stupid thing to say. Long weekend? Not recovered yet? Drink more
water.