Matt Davies by Matt Davies

Matt Davies

Comments (24) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    People who are not counted as unemployed because they have been out of work to long did not start with Obama. It goes back to at least my entire working life.

  2. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, almost 3 years ago

    Every month, the Census Bureau selects several thousand lucky people to be surveyed, and the form says that failure to answer, and answer correctly, is a Federal Offence with fines and jail terms. They ask a bunch of questions, but the two relevant ones are: 1) Did you work AT ALL during the month, even one hour? and 2) Did you apply to at least one place that was accepting applications for employment?


    The same form has been used since 1947 with no changes. So clearly, the results give artificially low and high numbers.


    People who have no money and are living with friends or relatives and who have exhausted every place to apply in their town are NOT unemployed. People who only had half a day’s work shovelling snow after the big blizzard are NOT unemployed. So the numbers are much too low. There are between 15% and 20% out of work under President Obama’s administration, but less than 8% technically unemployed.


    On the other hand, people leaving school who have multiple offers are technically unemployed while they’re trying to decide and while employers are bidding up their starting salaries. The same goes for people leaving the military. Rational people don’t consider them really unemployed.


    So the numbers under Bush, Jr, Reagan and every other Republican president were much too high, they were really 0%. And the numbers undeer every Democratic president were much too low, they were really above 15%. This is clear if one just checks any of the Republican blogs.

  3. jonesb

    jonesb said, almost 3 years ago

    What an idiot, the numbers are phony. Every president since Clinton has fudged the numbers, both parties.

  4. mikefive

    mikefive said, almost 3 years ago

    @Michael wme

    There is a small problem in your concluding paragraph in that there is a one to one and and a half percent of the population that are chronically unemployed, are on workman’s comp, are disabled and find it difficult to find positions that allow them to work, etc. This small percentage of people never goes away; they just fail to include them in the count.

  5. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, almost 3 years ago

    The Admin. Is blatantly lying. Sad.

  6. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, almost 3 years ago

    Every Administration tries to make itself look good. You should look at this table and see all the different ways the government compiles the data. Traditionally the “U-3” scale is the one put out for public consumption. It shows just the people who are “actively” unemployed. They are not working, they are looking for a job. Each month there is a certain section of the “workforce” that exhausts their benefits. They no longer get counted. There are a certain number that just give up. Not counted. There are some that take part time positions that what or need full time. And then there are jobs that go away reducing the number of jobs available which also lowers the “U-3” percentage.

    Check out the “U-6” numbers.

    http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

  7. meetinthemiddle

    meetinthemiddle said, almost 3 years ago

    @jonesb

    There’s only one president I can remember who actually changed how the numbers were counted – Reagan. In 1982, the numbers were too high (between 12-13% I think), so Reagan decreed that the active military (which were previously excluded) be tossed in the pool to lower the rate a couple of points without actually changing anything.

    Of course the new method has been used ever since but impacts it less. As the country grows and the % of active military doesn’t keep up with the growth, the effect is diluted.

  8. Chillbilly

    Chillbilly said, almost 3 years ago

    People DO notice that the GOP celebrates the bad economy.

  9. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    When Reagan got into office the unemployment rate was 10% and it was 7.2% when he was reelected.
    When Obama got into office the unemployment rate was 10% and is now 7.8%.

  10. disgustedtaxpayer

    disgustedtaxpayer said, almost 3 years ago

    the “counters” are humans with opinions and biases…not machines.
    excellent analysis at www.aei-ideas.org (10/5/12) by James Pethokoukis, with an impressive resume of esperience in writing on economic topics.
    “The sickly, stagnant September jobs report”…printed 3 pages.
    -
    “the U-3 unemployment rate fell to 7.8%, the 1st time since Jan.2009…but that’s only due to a flood of 582,000 PART-TIME JOBS.”
    “the broader U-6 rate” (discouraged workers who have given up looking for a job and part-time workers who want full-time included in the counting) “stayed unchanged at 14.7%…” (which is the TRUE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE)…
    “involuntary par-time workers rose from 8.0 million in August to 8.6 million in September”
    -
    Obama promised 5.6% unemployment rate in Sept.2012 if the $800 Billion stimulus package was passed by congress in 2009. And the 2007 recession officially ended June 2009. This everlasting non-recovery is due IMO to Obama’s anti-biz policies.

  11. yohannbiimu

    yohannbiimu said, almost 3 years ago

    If folks would use the case of individual states’ unemployment rates as an indication of how an economy works, they’d clearly see whether Obamanomics was “working” or not. The bottom 5 states with the highest unemployment in the country (with rates between 9.7 and 12.1) are ALLBLUE.” If states that used Obama’s economic model were “recovering” the rest of the country, this would not be the case. Hence, Obama’s Marxist policies are a miserable failure.

    PREDICTION: If Barack Obama is reelected, unemployment will rise to double-figures in 2013, and they will STAY THERE, Mark it down.

  12. josefw

    josefw GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    @Rad-ish

    There ya go, stretching the truth again…


    According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the last time unemployment sat below 8 percent was in January 2009, when it was 7.8 percent. Unemployment rose to 8.3 percent the next month and continued on that track until it hit 10 percent in October 2009. From there, it dropped gradually, reaching 8.2 percent in May 2012, making that the 40th consecutive month the rate had been at 8 percent or higher. June also rolled in at 8.2 percent.

  13. DenverMosaic

    DenverMosaic said, almost 3 years ago

    @josefw

    In other words from Oct. 09 until today, unemployment has been steadily declining from 10% to 7.8%. So where is the bad news you conservatives sought so much?

  14. disgustedtaxpayer

    disgustedtaxpayer said, almost 3 years ago

    @DenverM….in other words, from January 2009 when the unemployment rate was 7.8% and the recession ended June 2009, the U-3 rate is back (through an “annual” jiggering) to 7.8% where Obama started.
    ….the real rate is U-6 which is 14.7% which counts the workers on benefits, plus workers in part-time jobs though theywant full-time jobs (8.6 million) and counting workers who have removed themselves from the Labor Force….14.7% is the true unemployment USA rate.
    -
    Conservatives want Good News….a reversal of Obama’s anti-business policies so American can begin a normal recovery of expanding businesses and more jobs and more employed in jobs that are full-time and pay more….wages have been steadily declining, in inflation-adjusted dollars. Median household incomes have been in an Obama FreeFall.

  15. neuturn

    neuturn said, almost 3 years ago

    @DenverMosaic

    It is not an issue in my mind, but no one can tell us how it dropped so much in just one month when in the past year the numbers have always had to be adjusted and usually in the direction against progress. I can only presume we are seeing the same climb in jobs and lower unemployment as we did last year do to the seasonal hiring. This is always the trend this time of year. As last year those jobs were seasonal and caused many to be back in the unemployment numbers again after Febuary. We cannot put to much into this until we see the numbers continue to drop at this kind of rate. Let’s pray this is going to continue.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (9).
Calvin and Hobbes 30th Anniversary