MSM Headline: "Unemployment levels unchanged"

Those aren't $30+/hr union jobs for low and non-skilled minority workers in blighted urban areas, so according to the MSM they don't count.

How many months have the numbers been "more than economists expected" over the past 2+ years? Sounds like the journalists and the government need to listen to new economists.....or economists need to update their forecast models.

Unemplyment levels haven't changed because unemployment levels are reported to the nearest tenth of a percent. The change this month wasn't enough to bump the UER% down by 1/10th of a percent, so......NO CHANGE. It's just an artifact of the reporting method.

seems to me that if unemployment levels have changed less than 1/10 of 1%, then they really haven't moved a worthwhile amount...

The quarter of a million-plus people pulling in paychecks may disagree with that....

All I know is that reading todays economic section you see that Ford and GM have been downgraded to "junk bond" status.

And, despite that, the market had an excellent day on the whole, so really that doesn't anything relevant to this discussion.

I do hope you realise that if today was October 25th 2004 Um Yeah and the vast majority of the democratic party would be holding their fingers in their ears screaming "NYANYANYANYANYA LALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU LALALALALLA BUSHITLER RUINED OUR ECONOMY LALALALALA"

You know what would be nice for Republican idiots like yourself to be screaming "Hey maybe we can take a look at this deficit or skyrocketing healthcare or this fucking war" but then all Rush would have to say is "look an evil Librul" *points to Liberal* and you monkeys would be mollified once again.

Yes I agree, that would be very nice for you. Unfortunately, many conservatives suffer from a disease which limits there ability to think and communicate to strictly rational and logical methods. It is a horrible affliction, that forces it's sufferers to actually live in reality, rather then a fantasy world full of fluffly pink bunnies and cotton-candy trees.

So until the pharmaceutical industry discovers a legal cure for common sense, I'm afraid you'll have to continue humming protest songs loudly while pretending we don't exist.

many conservatives suffer from a disease which limits there ability to think and communicate to strictly rational and logical methods.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Yeah sure.

The last straw was the thousandth or so time a guy like Steve went after evil libruls for being both Illogical AND not religous/devout enough.

BTW MJ you do KNOW that you arent that bright right?

Everyone else seems to know but you.

I am still trying to see something positive here. OK, it's 274,000 jobs. It could be a lot less, so this is positive. Is it worthy of a Hip.... Hip..Hoorah? Not hardly, Bush policy is limping.

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=669035

We are still dealing with "sagg economy." Wage increases? With inflation factored...nada..zip!!

You still don't believe in commas and apostrophes, do you UY?

seems to me that if unemployment levels have changed less than 1/10 of 1%, then they really haven't moved a worthwhile amount...

Well, geeee matt....if they're way down as they are (5.2%)....they aren't going to go down much more.....and a change of 274K is a huge amount to those that are among the 274K.....but just because it wasn't big enough to change the UE rate, doesn't mean squat, except to those that want it to be negative. They DO teach math in college these days don't they? Take a look at Europe and see what REAL unemployment numbers look like (France...10+%, Germany 11.8%).

This conversation is great. Numbers are numbers and don't budge just because you'd like to see them budge. Its not being negative, its being accurate.

Yes, if there is one new job in the country and its your's, then it makes all the difference. Whoop-dee-do.

I have nothing that I'd "like" to happen concerning the unemployment rate. Just because YOU are partisan and want the numbers to look worse than they are, doesn't mean they ARE worse than they are. The rate didn't change in APRIL because it changed in MARCH to 5.2% and the 274K from last month wasn't enough to change it again (which is sucha non-point that tries to disuade attention from 274,000 fewer jobless claims).

...but, just as the media feels that they have to try to find some bad news when it's nothing but good....so do YOU. It couldn't just be great news that 274K people just found jobs....they have to point out, and YOU have to lap-up, the meaningless tripe that the rate didn't change......of course, that's the rate "as reported by the government BLS" to keep it simple enough for the dimwits to understand. If they reported to the hundredth or thousandth of a percent.....it WOULD have changed.

"Whoop-dee-do"...spoken like a true student.

The double-digit unemployment rates in Europe don't even tell the whole story. LONGTERM unemployment (people who are unemployed for a year or longer) account for 10% of all unemployed people (or .5% of the workforce) in the US, and it's about 12% in Canada, but throughout most of Europe long-term unemployed accounts for 30-50% of all unemployed.

Mattk, rounding off numbers to the nearest tenth isn't called being accurate, it's called being imprecise.

Just because YOU are partisan

AHEM and uh you arent?

Pathetic little child....show me a single partisan thought I have injected into this thread. Oh wait....I just reread everything I've said and you won't be able to because it's not there....so STFU already. Got nothing to say...then say exactly that.....NOTHING.

show me a single partisan thought I have injected into this thread.

So you are Partisan? Thats why you used the qualifier "into this thread"?

EVERYONE is partisan....some choose to not be partisan at times (such as me in this thread)....dickheads like you don't have the choice, because you are not able. STILL have nothing to say?

EVERYONE is partisan.

Then why go after anyone else for being partisan?

When someone injects their partisanship into a conversation on the unemployment rate by trying to downplay a gain of 274K jobs....I'm gonna call 'em on it.....not that I need to explain myself to a pathetic little child with nothing to say...