I Hate This Chart!

Please Enroll Responsibly: http://goo.gl/jq5Ij (Amazon.com Link) By Lee Doren

It was #1 in the Education Section because of you.

Dumb Chart: http://t.co/DLOEUHd

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Job Loses
• Chart
• Unemployment
• Stimulus
• Bush Years
• Obama Years
• Barack Obama
• Jobs
• Lee Doren
• HowTheWorldWorks
• How The World Works
• vlog
• work

[MrRazzeldazzel88]

liar....

what if someone got a job and then lots that again?

[HowTheWorldWorks]

@MrRazzeldazzel88 LOL. You really want to make that argument. That would mean the Stimulus was a miserable failure too.

[KittenKoder]

How is it, the "stimulus" that Obama used is a success according to his supporters, yet the exact same one Bush did was a failure? I just don't get these brain dead partisans.

[xxNephlimxx]

@TheNobdy Discredit Obama... hahahaha you dont even have to try NDAA nuff said

[TheNobdy]

i hate to say this but this is a really weak argument, youre trying too hard to discredit Obama

[101Snipeshot]

@regelemihai Well I guess I was listening to the right people then. Expect that number probably to increase and the government bsed unemployment to start dropping some more once people start giving up again.

[regelemihai]

@101Snipeshot

It is actually. I checked out recent data from the BLS, and the real current unemployment rate stands at 15%, so you got it exactly right.

[101Snipeshot]

@regelemihai That number might be a bit exaggerated because I'm not 100% sure on the exact statistic, but thats whats said most commonly, however rest assured if that percentage counted everyone who didn't have a job (excluding under 18 or hasn't had a job yet) that percentage would be much higher than 8.3%.

[101Snipeshot]

@regelemihai Yes that what should happen. However the fuzzy math I mentioned earlier is that at the same time as people are losing jobs other people are giving up looking for jobs and leaving the work force. The unemployment of 8.3% isn't actually that because it only factors basically people on welfare and are currently looking for a job. If we did factor in the people who gave up and have left the workforce the percentage would probably look more like 15%.

[regelemihai]

"can't be reported as having lossed a job twice"

I understand. But if more and more people are losing their jobs, wouldn't it also necessarily have to show that the quantity of unemployed has increased?

[yosoydame]

at least with Bush's stimulus, the people actually saw it in their tax returns, the one obama did went straight to the banks x.x

[101Snipeshot]

@regelemihai In a sort of more summed up term the whole thing is explaining that the stimulus wouldn't be the only cause of decrease in job losses since again that people can't be reported as having lossed a job twice in a row and companies will stop cutting back as time passes on and they are making acceptable amount of profit or in a non-profits case they are able to fully pay thier expenses again.

[101Snipeshot]

@regelemihai It is true that we must combat statistics with other statistics. Here we're making a logical arguement that job losses isn't exactly the best way to rate the stimilus sucess. He's talking about the total of people who have a job or the current population. No matter how bad things may get their is always will be anamount of people who have a job and the amount of jobs we lose is never gonna reach to where no one has a job. Its explaining more on to why job loss decreases