THANKS OBAMA! Jobless claims hit 15 year LOW, consumer spending RISES! GOOD ECONOMY!

[duane1969]

Have a read of this. Hopefully it's not too complicated for you and Duane. BTW, I am a Canadian, not a Canadien. Canadiens are a hockey team.

http://qz.com/286213/the-chart-obama...uth-behind-it/

I thought Canadiens were French speaking Canadians because that is the way the French spell it.

[habsheaven]

What are you talking about? I never said anything about cases. I have contended from the beginning that it was people.



I can admit when I am wrong. Can you? Why don't you provide the link you promised. Or is there no link and you really were just making stuff up?

Post #15 You stated the "job participation rate" was down 3.5% or 11 million people.

Post #17 You reference the "welfare numbers" are up 13 million people.

You implied that these to numbers are related.

Here's the problem. The first number includes people over 16 years of age. The second number includes people under 16 years of age. So you cannot compare the numbers unless you can show that the percentage on welfare under 16 is insignificant. Now I ask you again, how many kids do you think are included in that 13 million number? How many kids does the average welfare recipient have?

Saying you never said it was cases is bogus. You compared a number (job participation rate) we know is singular in nature to a number we now (welfare recipients) is plural and then tried to back off of it with ridiculous notions that I implied ALL 13 million are children.

And I posted the link in my reply to beachbum. Try reading it.

That should show where I think you are WRONG. Show me what I have posted as wrong and I will gladly admit to it.

[habsheaven]

So let's see. Old people are leaving the job market and are not being replaced by young people who are reaching young adulthood. I wonder why? That is the way it has always happened before, but now it isn't? Too bad the article doesn't address the conundrum between the idea that the Obama admin is "creating" jobs while simultaneously elderly are retiring and nobody is being hired to replace them.

No, it's called the baby boom generation. You have heard of it right?

That article does a pretty good job of tossing some BS at the wall and hoping it sticks. There is one other major flaw with it. People who reach retirement age and leave the job market don't go on welfare. They go on 401k.

The article is about the "job participation rate". It has nothing to do with what they do when they retire. It is all about explaining the job participation rate and the real reason it is down. Of course you are going to call it BS. To do otherwise would admit you never really thought about it, and are WRONG.

Also I don't know where the idea that as soon as people reach 65 they leave the job market came from. My dad didn't retire until 80. My mom retired at 71. I work with teachers that are well past 65 every day. That in itself is an asinine idea.

There are plenty of exceptions with anything. They do not alter the overall demographics of the population. The graphs are real data.

[beachbum]

Have a read of this. Hopefully it's not too complicated for you and Duane. BTW, I am a Canadian, not a Canadien. Canadiens are a hockey team.

http://qz.com/286213/the-chart-obama...uth-behind-it/

I know how canadian is spelled, didn't you notice I didn't capitalize it either. I have no respect for you or your type because you show no respect to others, you deserve nothing. You've clearly been called it and can't admit you are making crap up yet you persist to blame Duane and create accusatory diversions.

[habsheaven]

I know how canadian is spelled, didn't you notice I didn't capitalize it either. I have no respect for you or your type because you show no respect to others, you deserve nothing. You've clearly been called it and can't admit you are making crap up yet you persist to blame Duane and create accusatory diversions.

I didn't ask for anyone's respect. I provided a link that was requested showing my "cute" opinion on a topic. Notice how you failed to respond to the link and just attacked me. Duane can call me out all he wants. Like I stated, I provided the link that proves I am not making anything up. READ IT!

Interesting how Duane is "calling me on it" regarding my posts (in your words), and when I call Duane out on his posts; it's "accusatory diversions".

Where is the diversion? Where did I talk about anything other than HIS posts?

I just love it when you hold someone to account for their words you are suddenly being disrespectful. If that's disrespect, expect a lot more of it when people make inaccurate claims.

Nice DIVERSION though, by YOU.

[duane1969]

There are plenty of exceptions with anything. They do not alter the overall demographics of the population. The graphs are real data.

Yes I have heard of the baby boom. Have you heard of common sense? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that 13 million people didn't work their entire lives, retire from the work force and go on welfare, which is exactly what that article is trying to elude to. Der!

Regarding actual data, not just some tribble website. All numbers come from the US Census Bureau and Fed Bureau of Labor and Statitics.

Number of people employed in 2008 - 137.9 million
Number of people employed 2015 - 119.9 million
- A net loss of 18 million.

Number of people between 18 and 65 in 2008 - 181.6 million
Number of people between age of 18 and 65 in 2015 - 199.6 million
- A net gain of 18 million.

Hmmmm...

[shrewsbury]

habs, how do you know that number includes children?
from what I read 109 + million are in households receiving welfare, so perhaps that 13 million is households, not individuals.

so 11 million go out of work, and 13 million households on welfare, seems pretty easy to relate the numbers.

[sanfran22]

DO they count the kids as "on welfare"? They can't go and receive benefits can they? I'm thinking it's whomever applies for the benefit.

[habsheaven]

habs, how do you know that number includes children?
from what I read 109 + million are in households receiving welfare, so perhaps that 13 million is households, not individuals.

so 11 million go out of work, and 13 million households on welfare, seems pretty easy to relate the numbers.

Jay - I don't know where Duane got the number from. Perhaps he can post a link and then we will know. When you search many of the stats for "welfare", welfare encompasses many of the different benefits which leads to another issue. Many people on food stamps for example work. Employment insurance is included in the "welfare" numbers. As well as old age security. That's how we get to the infamous Romney quote of 47%.

Regardless, the discussion was about the "job participation rate" and it's decline. I posted a credible link, with credible numbers on it. All Duane could retort was that it was BS. He didn't bother to explain what was BS. He just dismissed it outright. It's hard to respond to vague claims. Then he follows it up with stats that don't even include the demographic which my link claims is a major cause of the decline.

[habsheaven]

DO they count the kids as "on welfare"? They can't go and receive benefits can they? I'm thinking it's whomever applies for the benefit.

They have plenty of stats for the percentage of different aged kids on welfare, so I assume they are counting them somewhere.