posted on April 2, 2004 03:30:18 PM new
replay - I know.
Somewhere else I read that employment in the 17-18 battleground states saw only 9 of those states with improved job numbers.
But....this latest report is very encouraging news. And maybe the 'lag' time between the economy improving and job creation is now behind us. I have my fingers crossed anyway.
posted on April 2, 2004 03:33:46 PM new
That's a great start Linda, but we all know the real numbers don't start until the 3+ million jobs that have been lost are replaced.
posted on April 2, 2004 03:37:53 PM new
It is, isn't it KD. I'm doing the happy dance.
But I don't think all 2.3 [my figures] of the jobs lost will need to be replaced for American's to see that this President's economic policies ARE working. We have 7 months until the election....three/four more months of continued job growth and this will no longer be an election issue.
posted on April 2, 2004 04:52:54 PM new
After seeing your 3+ million job loss figure, KD, I did a quick search on Yahoo news. Most articles show the job loss at 1.5 - 1.8, almost 1/2 of what you've read or heard and even lower than the number I'd read.
Here is a list of companies we've confirmed are "Exporting America." These are U.S. companies either sending American jobs overseas, or choosing to employ cheap overseas labor, instead of American workers.
those 300,000 jobs what jobs are they, let's see some details.....most are fast food jobs, and others are mercenary jobs ...let's see linda, what jobs they are.....show us, back up your figures........
posted on April 2, 2004 05:52:42 PM new
Why is it that for all the bs about jobs, jobs, jobs, I am ABSOLUTELY sure that the biggest whinners here buy their Red Chinese hammers at Walmart rather than Stanleys made in good ole New Britian, CT.
posted on April 2, 2004 08:07:06 PM newWhy is it that for all the bs about jobs, jobs, jobs, I am ABSOLUTELY sure that the biggest whinners here buy their Red Chinese hammers at Walmart rather than Stanleys made in good ole New Britian, CT.
I won't set foot in a WalMart, but you might notice that the Stanley Works is listed on the CNN list of jobs exporters linked above...look at a good selection of Stanley tools and you'll see that they're not all made here, not any more...there is almost no way to "buy American" anymore, unless you're buying from small, boutique type producers, which I try to do as much as possible. The net has greatly aided that ability....
___________________________________
posted on April 2, 2004 08:14:52 PM new
Some of the Craftsman line of tools are still made in the USA as well as SnapOn
Friends don't let friends vote Republican!
posted on April 2, 2004 09:11:32 PM new
I think some of our so called friends from Canada should start worrying about the 20,000 job loss in Feb. & unemployment rate of almost 8% in Canada.
Canada has become a heaven for terrorist. which means for once will have to defend themselves or become another France.
posted on April 2, 2004 11:36:46 PM new
skylite - those 300,000 jobs what jobs are they, let's see some details.....most are fast food jobs, and others are mercenary jobs ...let's see linda, what jobs they are.....show us, back up your figures........
LOL....first of all, they aren't MY figures, and they are backed up in the URL I gave. Second, if you'd like to see any "details" you're free to search for them yourself.
Why in the world you'd expect me to do the searching for a question you want answered, I'll never know. Look it up yourself or DEMAND someone else do it for you.
posted on April 3, 2004 04:40:43 AM new
And a couple of years ago good old (wave the flag, buy American!) Stanley was planning to register their corporate entity offshore in order to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. I recall the Connecticut officials having to do some arm twisting - don't recall final outcome.
For President Bush and his presumed Democratic challenger, John F. Kerry, the most important figures may be the large job losses in Ohio and Missouri and the smaller decline in Pennsylvania. Among them, the three states account for 52 of the 270 electoral votes needed to win the White House
Since Bush took office, the states have seen their employment level drop by at least 2.5%, well above the national average, with even more severe losses in manufacturing jobs. And experts say it is increasingly unlikely that the economy will recover enough by November to avoid a net loss of jobs during Bush's term in these political battlegrounds.
"I don't think there is any chance states like Ohio or Pennsylvania can come back to the point where they have more jobs than in January 2001," said Charles W. McMillion, president of MBG Information Services, a Washington-based economics firm that studies job-growth trends.
posted on April 3, 2004 07:48:54 AM new
The amazing part of this post is that Linda somehow managed to find the one article that talks about the bump without mentioning that despite those 308,000 new jobs, the unemployment rate still managed to rise to a current level of 5.7.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 3, 2004 08:00:07 AM new
Yes fenix, however many economists are now saying this is a normal recovery...
The Labor Department (search) said non-farm payrolls climbed a steep 308,000 in March, the biggest gain since April 2000 and well above the 103,000 rise expected on Wall Street.
The unemployment rate, which is determined by a survey separate from the jobs tally, ticked up to 5.7 percent from the two-year low of 5.6 percent in January and February. But economists largely dismissed the rise as insignificant.
"All in all, this is a very strong report," said Kurt Karl, head of research at Swiss Re in New York. "It bodes well for the economy going forward."
The big jump in payrolls stood in sharp relief to the average gains of around 75,000 new jobs in the prior six months. It trimmed the number of jobs lost since January 2001 to a still-hefty 1.8 million.
Hmmmm not 3 million as some here are screaming...
Guess liberal counting needs some work...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
http://www.nogaymarriage.com/
[ edited by Twelvepole on Apr 3, 2004 08:11 AM ]
posted on April 3, 2004 09:02:00 AM new
Yes, twelve, it's always been interesting to me that each and every month while I have posted the unemployment rate is going down.....that's been continually discounted...because [they say] what COUNTS are jobs created. But when the jobs created are getting better, they fall back to recognizing the unemployment figures. LOL
Helen....try to be happy that all those people found jobs and that not only is our economy improving, but so now is the job market. It appears to me you're hoping the job market doesn't turn around for your own partisan reasons. sad
posted on April 3, 2004 09:16:48 AM new
Then let's examine the part of helen's link she didn't post.
The best news for Bush in February's job report was in Wisconsin. The state gained nearly 9,000 jobs in February, and has now seen employment rise by 16,000 in the last year. Gore carried Wisconsin by a razor-thin margin in 2000.
The report released Wednesday details employment on a state-by-state basis through February; on Friday, the labor bureau is scheduled to release the national employment figures through March.
Across the nation, the economy has lost more than 2.2 million jobs since Bush took office in January 2001. The national average for the decline is 1.7%.
The employment numbers have become a central issue in the developing debate between Bush and Kerry and the early decisions by their campaigns about the states to concentrate on in their pursuit of the White House.
Of the dozen states currently seen as the most competitive, only Florida, New Mexico and Nevada have gained jobs since Bush was inaugurated.
According to MBG data, seven others have seen their employment drop by more than the national average: Ohio, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Oregon, New Hampshire, West Virginia and Iowa. Two others have suffered job losses smaller than the national average: Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Against this economic landscape, many Democratic strategists have tilted their focus away from Florida ? the most intensely fought battleground in 2000 ? because the state has gained more than 217,000 jobs under Bush, including 16,000 in February.
Ohio has moved to the center of both parties' calculations largely because of its faltering economy.
In February, the state lost an additional 10,900 jobs, putting its employment decline under Bush at nearly 239,000 jobs. That represents 4.3% of its total employment, according to an analysis by MBG. Only four states have lost a larger share of jobs during the Bush administration, MBG found.
Missouri shed 19,200 jobs in February; the state is down more than 75,000 jobs since Bush took office.
Pennsylvania saw little change in February ? it lost about 2,000 jobs. But it remains down almost 143,000 jobs since January 2001. [b]please note - Bush took office 1-21-01] Jobs lost BEFORE Bush took office are still blamed on him by some here. LOL
posted on April 3, 2004 09:28:11 AM new
Please note on this graph, from the Department of Labor, the time period between 1-1-00 and 1-1-01, remembering this President took office on 1-21-01...after the recession had already begun.
posted on April 3, 2004 10:11:33 AM new
Data extracted on: April 3, 2004 (12:54:14 PM)
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Series Id: LNS14000000
Seasonal Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent
Age: 16 years and over
YearJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecAnnual
posted on April 3, 2004 10:53:44 AM new
Hi Linda
Was reading the Times, our local paper and this was on the front page today
Job market springs to life with 308,000 March hires
WASHINGTON — The U.S. economy surprised forecasters by adding 308,000 jobs in March, triple the expected number and the largest monthly increase since 2000.
The Labor Department figures gave the Bush administration something to brag about, after months of criticism from Democrats about the "jobless recovery."
Even the top Democrat on Congress' Joint Economic Committee, Rep. Pete Stark of California, conceded, "I have to say 308,000 jobs ain't bad."
If you read the whole article, I'm sure Helen can find some not so good news in there too.
Here's one
A strong national economy is felt in the Seattle area. King County's unemployment rate was 5.7 percent in February, down from 6.9 percent in February a year ago. But in Snohomish County, heavily dependent on Boeing, the unemployment rate was 7.1 percent in February, down from 8 percent a year earlier.
Boeing has been a big 'unemployment indicator' up here.
Gotta go. Have a good weekend.
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
Where all can see it DOES mention the 5.7 unemployment rate .....right on top, at the very beginning of the article. I'm not trying to deceive anyone by 'hand picking' out my sources.
