32,000 Jobs Created in July (UE Rate Down at 5.5%)

CNBC | August 6, 2004

[RWR8189]

32,000 jobs were created in July. The unemployment rate down at 5.5%

Details to come...

ouch

[Grampa Dave]

The other big monkey wrench in the national job market was Doofus Davis here in California.

He and his tax and spend rats drove businesses out of California the past 3 years.

Yet even in California we have areas of unemployment at 5%.

Areas still hurting are the phoney baloney Clintoon job areas like Siliphoney Valley and Gay Frisco. Many of the other counties in N Cali are running at a low 5% to mid 5.5%. Contractors are turning away business. The fellow who did our decks and lawns is booking jobs 15 months from now. Why, he can't find enough good workers to hire, and he pays union wages.

Doctors and Dentists, who willing to pay $12 to $15's per hour with benefits for a receptionist, skills required: be able to speak, answer phone calls, welcome patients and make appointments are lucky to get one applicant after a week of ads.

[POA2]

- The public doesn't want to hear a sitting President after 4 years say he has a plan....but mean Democrats just won't pass it - (when the media will scream his Party owns both HOUSES)

That's what they are going to hear since it is the truth and notice that I didn't say Congress, I said the Senate.

You may go on with your doom and gloom orgy.

If you think the public are going to embrace the explanation of the "Senate" is blocking my plans.....after 4 years in office and not hardly a peep out of Spence Abraham (Bush's Energy Sec.) in more then 2 years....

That just isn't going to work - The facts are, the DEM's have set the false premise (that has never been responded to, just like the false premises of the War in Iraq, Haliburton, GWB recession, etc, etc) - but the premise has been set that GWB is in bed with big oil -

Is this charge true - NO - but we have to deal with public perception - And public perception is GWB is part of Big Oil - And they aren't going to sit back and hear that it is the Senate's fault (of which is run by the Republicans) as to why gas prices are high - After 4 years in office -

Gas prices have been high now for over a year - As GWB says , results matter - And when it comes to gas prices the results are they are to high -

Again, this isn't Bush's fault (per say) - but it is a reality we are going to have to deal with - It is becoming an bigger and bigger election year issue - As many of us said it would! (I talked about how energy prices were hurting small business months ago and was told I was full of it - appears I was right - but then only a fool would believe we could see higher and higher energy costs and yet no consequence to this in the marketplace)

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

It isn't just one month or one number. Look at the trend. And it won't improve as long as the oil prices stay high. I'm not saying it's Bushs fault, I'm saying all of these things coming together are, like it or not, VERY BAD news for Bush.

Of course its bad news, and here's where it IS Bush's fault...not cleaning house at the Labor Dept and getting them to come up with realistic numbers, and if they can't do that, then stop the survey all together. That 32,000 number, 640 per state, is a downright lie, we all know it but that's what the media will trumpet. Heck, my company probably did 640 last month all by themself.

How Bush responds to it is to play up the 1.5 mil job growth and call Kerry on his 10 million jobs/4 years as nothing more than an extension of what Bush is already doing with this economy and lower taxes.

[POA2]

The way to spin the news is: 1) The household report is positive 2) The UE number is down.

However, the important thing, IMO, is what oil prices do. If oil prices come down, I think everything will be fine. If they stay high, that could be a big problem.

It's annoying that a guy who has not ideas whatsoever could get elected.

EXACTLY - I have already got the emails sent out to all family and extended family saying the "Household figure" - and saying the media is only telling half the story on "job creation" -

Now is the GWB reelection team smart enough to have these talking points out there - (not a chance!) I've already heard a WH Spokesperson say on the Radio today "we know it is hard out there, some places are struggling more then others, but jobs are coming back and we have the right plan to make this happen even more" - They are so fking dumb it is mind boggling - They continually talk from a "defeatist" attitude when addressing the media -

Not a peep out of the WH spokesperson about the Household numbers coming in hugely at 600,000 jobs - NOT A WORD - Blows your mind - (but wait, the "magic" is about to happen....from these morons...yeah).

[Grampa Dave]

Of course the GW backstabbing posters on this thread will never post what would happen if their buddy, moi Kerri was elected.

Here is a current thread on FR showing what their butt buddy moi Kerri would do to jobs in the red zones:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1186409/posts

The Rolls-Royce Affair: The candidate isn’t up to speed in Detroit
National Review ^ | July 29, 2004 | Cesar Conda & Trent Wisecup


Posted on 08/06/2004 10:38:52 AM PDT by SunkenCiv


By any objective measure, Senator Kerry is one of the Big Three's most hostile opponents in Washington, D.C. In 2002, he introduced legislation that would have increased corporate average fuel-economy standards (CAFE) from 24 to 36 miles-per-gallon. The Energy Information Administration estimated that Kerry's proposal would have eliminated 450,000 jobs in the United States and resulted in lost economic input of $170 billion. Kerry's CAFE increase would have hit Michigan's economy especially hard because GM, Ford, and Chrysler are more dependent on the profits from low-mileage SUVS, pickups, and minivans (light trucks) than their foreign competitors. This reliance on light trucks is directly tied to the enormous labor costs associated with paying UAW negotiated wages, health benefits, and pensions. Detroit can't cover its labor and legacy costs by selling sedans.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1186409/posts

These third party losers in life would have us not vote for GW and allow their butt buddy moi Kerri to come in and really run our economy.

It is up to them to name one thing moi Kerri would good for our economy.

The first thing he would do is to raise taxes. That would bring the days of Carter back really quick.

[dangus]

Sorry, coop, but with 200,000/mo. natural growth plus another 200,000/mo. in immigration, job growth of merely 50,000 is downright recessionary. Fewer jobs per worker than last month.

[Rokke]

I guess you're going to have to show me where I said anything about the impact of energy prices. While you're at it, tell me how Bush can change the international price of oil. And I agree the jobs number is bad news. What I don't agree with it that it just lost Bush the election.

[Coop]

Where did you get those numbers? As of Mar 04 the U.S. Census projections estimate a growth of 27 million in the U.S. from 2000 to 2010 (with about the same amount of growth for each of the next three decades). That's 2.7 mil per year, or just over 200K per month. Total.

And we won't even get into the fact that not all (probably a minority, if you ask me) of those new folks are of working age.

[RWR8189]

-1.116 million.

[POA2]

While you're at it, tell me how Bush can change the international price of oil. And I agree the jobs number is bad news. What I don't agree with it that it just lost Bush the election.

GWB should have addressed the nation twice over the past 18 months - First time regarding the seriousness for the need for HIS energy policy to be implemented (an effective growing refinery capacity within the USA would lower oil prices)- He would have looked the American public in the face and demanded that they have the Congress Act -

Secondly, GWB should have addressed the nation in Feb/March of this year - He should have taken on the critics of the War in Iraq (and WOT in general) - he should have looked the public in the eye and told us of the amazing successes we are having in Iraq - along with providing the vision for why what we are doing is right -

But back to the first point - If GWB would have addressed the nation over the seriousness of needing his energy policy passed - This would have either got action done in the Senate....or it would have provided him now the ability to say "see, I told you the seriousness of this" -

All the public knows is GWB is in bed with Big Oil and that Spence Abraham is 500 pounds and seems to do nothing as Sec of Energy - (just as he did nothing as my Senator from MI and of course went on to lose to one of the biggest losers in the world Debbie Stabenow)

[SierraWasp]

I could not possibly agree with you more, in this instance!!!

[Fury]

Why are you sending this to me. That is what I said.

Oops! Sorry about that!

[Dane]

Is this charge true - NO - but we have to deal with public perception - And public perception is GWB is part of Big Oil - And they aren't going to sit back and hear that it is the Senate's fault (of which is run by the Republicans) as to why gas prices are high - After 4 years in office -

And you don't help tamp down that lie by your propagating it on FR.

[SierraWasp]

Some people just enjoy gettin wigged out over any little perceived bump in the road and are immediately ready to say "aw chit!" and throw in their towels!!!

Keep squashin them there pissants, budy!!!

[Grampa Dave]

The reply that needs to be posted to these doomers/gloomers is a simple one.

"Okay, doomer/gloomer, tell me why we should vote for moi Kerri, because it is obvious that you hate GW and prefer moe Kerri. Why will moi Kerri be good for the economy and jobs and Americans like you? Don't tell us to waste our votes on someone who will get less than 2% of the votes. How will your butt buddy, moi Kerri, help the employment of people like you in America?"

[LS]

No question Kerry would harm the economy.

However, as much as I despise the guy, let's be realistic: the economy to an extent is out of the hands of any Pres or Congress. For ex., I thought Clinton would cause a huge recession. What I did not (nor did anyone else) see was that continued low oil prices would help fuel a boom; that the opening of Eastern Europe (thank you RR) would open a vast new market for U.S. goods; and that the continued impact of computers in driving down prices would OFFSET the (relatively minor) Clinton tax hikes.

[Grampa Dave]

His plans to revoke the tax cuts by GW will have a tremendous negative impact.

[dangus]

Oops... my bad.

I read:
"About 200,000 from natural growth, and an equal number from immigration"
When what was printed was:
"About 200,000, some from natural growth and an equal number from immigration."

Yes, the minority of the "new folks" are of working age; they are about 50% newborns. But they are merely displacing those who are able to enter the workforce. The child population hasn't been growing.

The working-age population is growing at least as fast as the overall population.

[WatchOutForSnakes]

I know you must be posting this to somebody else because I'm sure someone as obviously intelligent as you would have read all of the posts and have seen where I said I wanted Bush re-elected and that I would vote for Bush. So, you must be referring to other people that have said you should vote for Kerry. Just want to make sure we are on the same page. We wouldn't want to go throwing wild accusations around to the wrong people, now would we "moi" grampa?

[Rokke]

"- This would have either got action done in the Senate....or it would have provided him now the ability to say "see, I told you the seriousness of this"

Your first choice is so full of sh@#@ I'm surprised the letters aren't brown. And he is doing your second point at almost every campaign stop. So is Dick Cheney. But you still fail to mention how he can effect the international price of oil that is currently, and undeniably impacting our economy.