Saturday, December 6, 2014

BloggeRhythms

While the incumbent president and the liberal press tout an apparently significant reduction in unemployment rolls, analysis of the numbers shows a very different picture. 
 
Ali Meyer of CNSNews.com, reports that, “The labor force participation rate remained at a 36-year low of 62.8 percent in November, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.”
 
“The 156,397,000 who participated in the labor force was 62.8 percent of the 248,844,000 civilian non-institutional population, which matches the 62.8 percent rate in April, May, June, August and October of 2014 as well as the participation rate in March of 1978. The participation rate hit its lowest level of 62.7 percent in September 2014.”
 
What’s most interesting, however, is how the unemployment rate’s presently derived, whereas this administration has changed the calculation method. Because, “[o]f the 156,397,000 who did participate in the labor force, 147,287,000 had a job, and 9,110,000 did not have a job but were actively seeking one -– making them the nation’s unemployed.
 
The 9,110,000 job seekers were 5.8 percent of the 156,397,000 Americans actively participating in the labor force during the month of November. Thus, the unemployment rate was 5.8 percent, the same as it was in October.”
 
Which means that those who’ve given up searching for employment are no longer part of the equation, although they still have no jobs. However, Ms Meyer provided the data regarding them, as follows: 
 
“Another 92,447,000 people did not participate in the labor force. These Americans did not have a job and were not actively trying to find one. When President Obama took office in January 2009, there were 80,529,000 Americans who were not participating in the force, which means that since then, 11,918,000 Americans have left the workforce.”
 
And, for the record, the last time the labor force participation rate sank that low, 62.7, was in March of 1978, when that other brilliant economy expert, Jimmy Carter, was president. 
 
On another subject, FoxNews.com reports that, “Hillary Clinton is taking heat for saying America should “empathize” and show “respect” for its enemies.”
 
She made the remarks during a speech Wednesday at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C, “Touting an approach she calls “smart power,” she urged America to use “every possible tool and partner” to advance peace.
 
“This, she said, includes “leaving no one on the sidelines, showing respect even for one’s enemies, trying to understand and insofar as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view.” 
 
Fox noted the her remarks came, “At a time when the U.S. military is launching airstrikes against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, some called the comments out of place.”
 
And then, a reader once again posted a pointed comment offering a quite appropriate summation of Bill’s wife’s opinion.
 
Shwilliams wrote, “Apparently, Hillary is off her meds..!  Emphatic rhetoric for ISIS but there was less empathy for the US Ambassador tortured in Benghazi. "What difference does it make"? Seemingly, Hillary's run for president will exhibit her true hate and blame of the United States by understanding and respecting terrorists who have beheaded American citizens. Absurd comments and disrespect for the American people at its highest.  Hillary Clinton is a train wreck with less ability and capability of leading the United States than Obama, if that is possible. Evil people who behead Americans, stab American teachers or fly airplanes into American buildings, DO NOT deserve our respect or understanding.”
 
Now, its reasonable to assume that most Fox readers tend toward conservative politics. Yet, Shwilliams thoughts seem to be indicative of a large segment of the voting public. And if that’s truly the case, as the midterm elections seem to indicate, Bill’s wife making it back to the White House is quite far from a slam dunk. 
 
That’s it for today folks.
 
Adios

No comments:

Post a Comment