[Plantagenet]

Thus I have clearly, factually and unambiguously proven Planty wrong. There are more than 5 times more new workers working full-time since Obama took office than there are the same working part-time.

Again, you are making the same mistake in basic math.

When you recover something that was lost---it isn't new. It is RECOVERED. For instance if you lost $10,000 in the stock market one year, and then your stocks go back up $12,000 the next year, you haven't made a $12,000 profit. You've RECOVERED the $10,000 you lost and made a $2000 profit.

The math for US jobs works the same way.

The US economy lost 11 million full time jobs in the 2008-9 recession. Since that time it has recovered the 11 million lost jobs and added 2 million new full-time jobs.

Get it now?

Cheers!

OK-----since you are so math challenged, let me give you another example that might make this clear to you. Lets imagine an economy that does into recession and loses 11 million jobs. Then it recovers and gains 13 million jobs. Then it goes into recession again and loses 20 million jobs. Then it recovers and gains 18 million jobs. How many jobs have been created through the two recession cycles? A mathematical illiterate like you might claim that 13 million jobs were created during the first recovery and 18 during the second recovery for a total of 31 million jobs created. But if think about it and you do the math properly, the number of jobs created through the two cycles of recession and recovery is actually zero, i.e. the number of people employed at the end of the two cycles is the same as it was before the first recession.

Which number do you think is right in this example? 31 million new jobs created or 0 new jobs created? If you claim 31 million new jobs were created, then explain why the total number of jobs is the same at the end as it was before the first recession?

Get it now?

Cheers!


Its OK---you are not alone in being mathematically illiterate!

Since co.dunce is unwilling to consider the obvious math error he has made, I have no alternative other than to declare myself the WINNER of this fun little debate.


Feel not badly, little mortal, for better men then you have been defeated by the god of thunder!!!!

[copious.abundance]

Except for the inconvenient fact I proved Planty wrong right here, thus winning the argument without question.

Let us remind him of his original complaint:

Gosh this is great. Obama is running around saying how great the US economy is doing because we're at 5% unemployment, but if you drill deeper most new jobs are part time and pay crappy wages.

Thanks Obama! But a shift in the US workforce from mostly full-time jobs to mostly poorly paid part-time jobs isn't the kind of change we were hoping for!

Clearly his gripe is with Obama, so let us focus entirely on the time period since Obama took office. Obama took office in January 2009, so we'll start all our statistics then:

Full-time data
Part-time data

Jan 2009 work part-time: 26.377 milllion
Mar 2016 work part-time: 27.818 million
----------------------------------------------------
Growth of 1.441 million new part-time workers

Jan 2009 work full-time: 115.818 million
Mar 2016 work full-time: 123.447 million
----------------------------------------------------
Growth of 7.629 million new full-time workers

Thus I have clearly, factually and unambiguously proven Planty wrong. There are more than 5 times more new workers working full-time since Obama took office than there are the same working part-time. It'll be amusing seeing how he weasels his way out of this one!

We now can see how he's tried to weasel his way out of that one.

[Plantagenet]

...he's tried to weasel his way out of that one.

What do you imagine I've weaseled out of, co.dunce?

Do you mean criticizing Obama? Surely you know that when Obama says something dumb I don't hesitate to criticize him.

Or do you mean our dispute over whether recovered jobs are "new" jobs? I've given you a couple of "thought problems" to show you where you've gone off the beam on this one---neither of which you've responded to. If anyone is "weaseling" out of something its you.

Cheers!

[copious.abundance]

Except for the inconvenient fact that it was Planty who said something dumb, not Obama. To wit:

Let us remind him of his original complaint:

Gosh this is great. Obama is running around saying how great the US economy is doing because we're at 5% unemployment, but if you drill deeper most new jobs are part time and pay crappy wages.

Thanks Obama! But a shift in the US workforce from mostly full-time jobs to mostly poorly paid part-time jobs isn't the kind of change we were hoping for!

Clearly his gripe is with Obama, so let us focus entirely on the time period since Obama took office. Obama took office in January 2009, so we'll start all our statistics then:

Full-time data
Part-time data

Jan 2009 work part-time: 26.377 milllion
Mar 2016 work part-time: 27.818 million
----------------------------------------------------
Growth of 1.441 million new part-time workers

Jan 2009 work full-time: 115.818 million
Mar 2016 work full-time: 123.447 million
----------------------------------------------------
Growth of 7.629 million new full-time workers

Thus I have clearly, factually and unambiguously proven Planty wrong. There are more than 5 times more new workers working full-time since Obama took office than there are the same working part-time. It'll be amusing seeing how he weasels his way out of this one!

[Plantagenet]

Planty said:

Gosh this is great. Obama is running around saying how great the US economy is doing

So whats the problem, co.dunce?

If you think Obama is right and the current economy is great and the current jobs are great, you are welcome to your opinion.

Personally, I think Bernie Sanders and his critique of the current economy and the kind of jobs it is creating is more accurate.


Cheers!

[tita]

They are many ways to measure the employment. Something I picked up right now:

Weekly jobless claims are the main economic release of note in the U.S.; they have come in at 267.000, marking the longest streak below 300.000 since 1973

And it's quite good to have such numbers, because when its difficult to hire for a firm, you may have to raise the wages to get people.

Also, I remember a few years ago, an Energizer fabric in a town next from me (switzerland) closed to take production back in the US. Obama's plan. I think he didn't make shitty stuff for the US economy. Anyway, global economy is not in good shape, and we can blame a scapegoat... but it won't change the story.