Main Stream Media....The real American terrorist.
If Obama was a Republican president,he wouldn't have made it through the first year.
That's how much lying is done to cover him.
Obama Cooks the Books On Unemployment Rate; 11 Million Jobless, Not Considered
jr
2012/02/19 20:10:32
Desperate to win reelection, Obama is resorting to underhanded tactics to put lipstick on the pig of the economy he has created. The chart below will enlighten as to our real unemployment disaster created by the Obama administration, by looking at the percentage of working age Americans that have jobs.
Excerpts, Read More @ Daily Caller
The increasingly visible statistic shows that roughly 11 million
working-age Americans are being excluded from the nation’s formal tally
of 13.75 million unemployed Americans.
Given the nation’s working-age population of 240.5 million, that 4.5
percent drop means that roughly 11 million Americans have fallen out of
the workforce. They are excluded, however, from the nation’s formal
unemployment rolls — which document only 13.75 million unemployed
Americans.
By excluding those non-working Americans, the White House can claim that
the formal unemployment rate has fallen to 8.3 percent in January 2012,
down from a peak of 10 percent in 2009.
Excerpts, Read More @ Daily Caller
The increasingly visible statistic shows that roughly 11 million
working-age Americans are being excluded from the nation’s formal tally
of 13.75 million unemployed Americans.
Given the nation’s working-age population of 240.5 million, that 4.5
percent drop means that roughly 11 million Americans have fallen out of
the workforce. They are excluded, however, from the nation’s formal
unemployment rolls — which document only 13.75 million unemployed
Americans.
By excluding those non-working Americans, the White House can claim that
the formal unemployment rate has fallen to 8.3 percent in January 2012,
down from a peak of 10 percent in 2009.
Top Opinion
-
Dandydon 2012/02/19 20:24:10
You can keep your ALEC for your self! http://alecexposed.org/wiki/A...
How are we to make new jobs if they pay us so low?
I cant afford anything, I have $20 in the bank before the next payday!
No sales, no need for jobs! Now be an Republican & blame others for it!
It took Bill 8 years to get out of Old man Bush & might take him 16 years with Bush JR &
Obama has been here 3 years! TARTED!
Cry if you need to....
http://www.craigsteiner.us/ar...
Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.
The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B $123B $230B = $422B, not $360B).
While not defending the increase of the federal debt under President Bush, it's curious to see Clinton's record promoted as having generated a surplus. It never happened. There was never a surplus and the facts support that position. In fact, far from a $360 billion reduction in the national debt in FY1998-FY2000, there was an increase of $281 billion.
Verifying this is as simple...
Cry if you need to....
http://www.craigsteiner.us/ar...
Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.
The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B $123B $230B = $422B, not $360B).
While not defending the increase of the federal debt under President Bush, it's curious to see Clinton's record promoted as having generated a surplus. It never happened. There was never a surplus and the facts support that position. In fact, far from a $360 billion reduction in the national debt in FY1998-FY2000, there was an increase of $281 billion.
Verifying this is as simple as accessing the U.S. Treasury (see note about this link below) website where the national debt is updated daily and a history of the debt since January 1993 can be obtained. Considering the government's fiscal year ends on the last day of September each year, and considering Clinton's budget proposal in 1993 took effect in October 1993 and concluded September 1994 (FY1994), here's the national debt at the end of each year of Clinton Budgets:
Fiscal
Year Year
Ending National Debt Deficit
FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion
On the square.
"Shut down the government!" Im sure that helped the chart there!
Worst President EVER!!!
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-...
normally the number who give up don't make a differnce because they track the unemployment rate. as the unemployment rate bottomed out in the early/mid 2000s, the difference in rate (real and 'official') would be very small.
what we have now is a different situation. the gap between the people who can still collect their 99 weeks and the people who have gone beyond THEIR 99 weeks is an unreported gulf.
i know he'd never do it in a million years because it would be an impossible election hurdle to overcome, but if he had an ounce of integrity for the American people, he'd post the real unemployment figure, along with that 'official' rate.
if you just ball park 1M as 1%, we're looking at a real rate of 10+% up to as high a rate as 16+%.
scary numbers, regardless.
A. Because he's not done lying yet.
Millions of jobless file for disability when unemployment benefits run out.
More than 10.5 million people aged 25 and 64 received disability checks in January from the federal government, an 18 percent jump from before the recession.
http://www.foxnews.com/politi...
>He acts like he has never had a dollar before
You act like you've never made a rational argument before. Hyperbole eleventy billion times much?