Deal reached on unemployment, payroll tax cut

cbs ^ | 2/16/2012 | ap

[tobyhill]

Relieved congressional bargainers say they've reached agreement on compromise legislation extending payroll tax cuts and benefits for the long-term unemployed through 2012, edging a white-hot political battle a major step closer to finally being resolved.

Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., and Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the two top negotiators, strode from a conference room minutes after midnight Thursday to say that only technical issues and the drafting of legislative language remained. The bill would assure a continued tax cut for 160 million workers and jobless benefits for several million others, delivering top election-year priorities for President Barack Obama.

"It's a very good deal for the country," said Baucus, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee.

[Yashcheritsiy]

tobyhill, for example, appears to understand the point I am making . . . what's your excuse?

You realise that tobyhill made the same point that I did, right?

[1rudeboy]

Are you dividing by zero, again? What astounds me the most about threads such as these is, when someone makes a comment that is demonstrated to be false, they simply forge ahead.

I mean, I can't count how many times I've "walked back" a comment, or simply admitted I was incorrect. What's with you? Is it an ego thing?

[1rudeboy]

Then why can’t you agree with his comment #31? [snort]

[Brown Deer]

Your statement, that "Because of the way they calculate U3, this (should) ironically make the U3 start shooting back up" [emphasis added], is false.

How is it false? You still have been unable to explain to anyone here how the unemployment rate is calculated!

Then why can’t you agree with his comment #31?

That comment had absolutely nothing to do with any of this. It was in response to your dumb statement, "I really am running out of ways to repeat the same thing over and over. "

what tobyhill said was, "Get ready to see a spike in the unemployment numbers because suddenly these people are counted again."

You just keep on demonstrating your complete stupidity here with your comments! Please explain to us morons how the unemployment rate is calculated. Pretty, pretty please!!!

[Brown Deer]

What astounds me the most about threads such as these is, when someone makes a comment that is demonstrated to be false, they simply forge ahead.

Where was his comment demonstrated to be false?

Still waiting after how many days, for you to explain how the unemployment rate is calculated...

Too complicated for you?

[Brown Deer]

[1rudeboy]

Where was his comment demonstrated to be false?
My comment #99, blind man.

Still waiting after how many days, for you to explain how the unemployment rate is calculated...
Too complicated for you?

No, not at all . . . unemployment compensation is not a factor. Did you forget what we are discussing?

[1rudeboy]

I'll keep repeating it over and over, until it sinks in. Because unemployment compensation is not considered in the calculation of the unemployment rate (U-3 or otherwise), the statement in question is false. You can hold your breath until you turn blue, and it won't change a thing.

[Brown Deer]

Did you forget what we are discussing?

It seems that you have forgotten, and/or like I have already stated, you have absolutely no reading comprehension!

There were two comments made with which you disagreed and stated as false!

1 - "Get ready to see a spike in the unemployment numbers because suddenly these people are counted again."
2 - "Exactly. Because of the way they calculate U3, this (should) ironically make the U3 start shooting back up as tons of people reapply for benefits."

Neither one of them stated anything whatsoever about unemployment compensation. For some reason that is what YOU and you alone keep seeing! It is YOU and you alone that is discussing unemployment compensation.

The fact is, both of those statements ARE very correct and you are a totally ignorant moron.

You keep stating that you understand how the unemployment rate is calculated but so far you have been unable to even try and explain it. So, you obviously DO NOT know anything about it.

[1rudeboy]

Ok, got it. The subject was unemployment compensation, a small number of erroneous comments were made regarding unemployment compensation, but you have determined that the subject is not unemployment compensation. I bow to the master.

[Toddsterpatriot]

1 - "Get ready to see a spike in the unemployment numbers because suddenly these people are counted again."
2 - "Exactly. Because of the way they calculate U3, this (should) ironically make the U3 start shooting back up as tons of people reapply for benefits."

Reapplying for benefits doesn't change the rate.

Never applying for benefits doesn't change the rate.

Benefits running out doesn't change the rate.

If you stop applying for your benefits during the eligibility period, that doesn't change the rate either.

If you stop looking, start looking or if you find a job are the only things that would impact the rate.

Why so dense?

[Brown Deer]

U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.

That changes the rate.

Persons not in the labor force are those who are not classified as employed or unemployed during the survey reference week.

That changes the rate.

Benefits running out doesn't change the rate.

If they run out, and you stop looking for work, indeed it does change the rate.

Reapplying for benefits doesn't change the rate.

If you have dropped out of the workforce and then begin looking for work again, indeed it does change the rate.

Why so dense?

If you stop looking, start looking or if you find a job are the only things that would impact the rate. Yep!

[Brown Deer]

Math is hard easy. Harder if you're stupid.

[Toddsterpatriot]

If they run out, and you stop looking for work, indeed it does change the rate.

Yep.

If you have dropped out of the workforce and then begin looking for work again, indeed it does change the rate.

Yep.

That's the case whether unemployment benefits are extended or not.

Because benefits aren't used to calculate the rate.

[1rudeboy]

It is YOU and you alone that is discussing unemployment compensation.

From the first sentence of the article:

Relieved congressional bargainers say they've reached agreement on compromise legislation extending payroll tax cuts and benefits for the long-term unemployed through 2012.... [emphasis added]

[Brown Deer]

is that your self portrait?

[Brown Deer]

Because benefits aren't used to calculate the rate.

That's right! Benefits and compensation have absolutely nothing to do with it. None of us, has said that. Why do you and 1rudemoron keep arguing that point?

Employment Situation Summary - JANUARY 2009

Labor force: 153.716 million
Employed Persons: 141.637 million
Unemployed Persons 11.616 million
Unemployment Rate 7.6%

Not in Labor force: 81.023 million

Employment Situation Summary - JANUARY 2012

Labor force: 154.395 million
Employed Persons: 142.099 million
Unemployed Persons 12.758 million
Unemployment Rate 8.3%

Not in Labor force: 87.874 million
Marginally attached: 2.809 million
Discouraged workers: 1.059 million

Note that although our population has grown by over 7 million, the total labor force remains virtually unchanged. There are currently almost 4 million marginally attached or discouraged workers. They are NOT counted in the unemployment rate. If only 25% of those workers begin to look for work again, because of the incentive to collect unemployment benefits, the number of unemployed will increase to 13.725 million, which in turn will cause U-3 to rise!

That's the case whether unemployment benefits are extended or not.

So, what's your point? Go back and read the argued statements or are you also as dense as 1rudemoron?

[Yashcheritsiy]

Then why can’t you agree with his comment #31? [snort]

Because the comment to which he was responding (#24 IIRC) has nothing to do with what tobyhill and I were talking about.

[Yashcheritsiy]

What's with you? Is it an ego thing?

No - it's the fact, as Brown Deer apparently pointed out last night and which I was going to this morning when I got on FR, that what you're talking about isn't even addressing the point that tobyhill and I made, making your comments range anywhere from irrelevant to idiotic.

You apparently can't even keep track of what others on the thread are talking about, or you don't understand it, one of the two.

[1rudeboy]

My fault for trying to keep it simple, then. It got the two of you confused. The contention was that extension of unemployment benefits would cause U-3 to rise as "millions" would now be counted as looking for work.

As far as I know, despite all the howling, backtracking, and rhetorical gamesmanship on this thread, extension of unemployment benefits has never caused the unemployment rate to rise. My recollection only goes back to the 1990's recession, whish is the last time (I think) unemployment benefits were extended.

So, if extending compensation will increase unemployment, I'd like to see someone actually prove it, instead of simply claiming "it will happen because I say it will happen."

I posted a link to the BLS website. (Amusing, since I am being asked how the unemployment rate is calculated). The data is out there. It shouldn't be too hard to see the "spike," if it exists, or to determine how many "millions" of workers will be considered to rejoin the labor force. You don't even have to go back to the 1990's, you can go back to the last time the Obama administration extended unemployment compensation.

Finally, your comment that:

Exactly. Because of the way they calculate U3, this (should) ironically make the U3 start shooting back up as tons of people reapply for benefits.

was incorrect, is still incorrect, and will be incorrect for eternity. So if you think that I "can't even keep track" of what has been said on this thread, then keep medicating yourself.