re: first net job loss since Hoover. Not quite accurate.

Current Events » in reply to re: first net job loss since Hoover. Not quite accurate.

Chris Vancil — 9/4/2004 8:52:14 AM (archived)

I reference you to this: The administration is hiding bad economic news. At Slate

They don't count the people like they use to so we should really us the new math and Hoover would porbably have a jobless rate more like 6%...

The whole thread (15 posts)

The employment numbers are out, and stronger than predicted - ebnelson - 9/3/2004 1:14:48 PM
- I heard an interesting factoid last night - Larry J - 9/3/2004 7:05:31 PM
- re: Stronger than predicted by whom? When is the "correct" scheduled for? Midnight Sunday? (n/t) - Chris Vancil - 9/3/2004 4:21:58 PM
- Numbers are good, but economists had been hoping for 150,000. - Tom Brosz - 9/3/2004 2:14:52 PM
  - "Disappointing" - Mark Eby - 9/3/2004 10:58:27 PM
    - Remember last spring? - Tom Brosz - 9/4/2004 12:00:23 AM
      - That News Wasn't Buried - Mark Eby - 9/4/2004 2:47:21 AM
        
        re: That News Wasn't Buried - gbaikie - 9/4/2004 6:48:20 AM
  - What's the spin on the first net job loss since Hoover? - Bowser - 9/3/2004 5:56:01 PM
    - re: first net job loss since Hoover. Not quite accurate. - Tom Brosz - 9/3/2004 7:27:43 PM
      - re: first net job loss since Hoover. Not quite accurate. - Chris Vancil - 9/4/2004 8:52:14 AM
      - Wondered what the spin was. I knew I could count on you. And - - - - Bowser - 9/3/2004 9:00:17 PM
      - Don't go messing up their spin and slander with facts, Tom (n/t) - ebnelson - 9/3/2004 7:43:21 PM
  - Dems were hoping for less than 100,000. 144,000 is within margin of error. - ebnelson - 9/3/2004 4:14:03 PM
- 144,000 Jobs Added in August; Unemployment Rate Dips to 5.4% - REB - 9/3/2004 1:40:23 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (15 posts)