years or decades?

well, turns out Obama is the boomers savior president......

Unemployment Rate Drops to 7-Year Low

Quoted Text

ABC News:
“The U.S. unemployment rate fell to a seven-year low in August as employers
added a modest 173,000 jobs.
The Labor Department says the unemployment rate fell to 5.1 percent from 5.3 percent,
the lowest since April 2008.”

How about the 94 million still unemployed and can't find work Box does he get credit for that too?

Quoted from Shadow

How about the 94 million still unemployed and can't find work Box does he get credit for that too?

The Big Lie: 5.6% Unemployment
by Jim Clifton

Here's something that many Americans -- including some of the smartest and most educated among us -- don't know: The official unemployment rate, as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor, is extremely misleading.

Right now, we're hearing much celebrating from the media, the White House and Wall Street about how unemployment is "down" to 5.6%. The cheerleading for this number is deafening. The media loves a comeback story, the White House wants to score political points and Wall Street would like you to stay in the market.

None of them will tell you this: If you, a family member or anyone is unemployed and has subsequently given up on finding a job -- if you are so hopelessly out of work that you've stopped looking over the past four weeks -- the Department of Labor doesn't count you as unemployed. That's right. While you are as unemployed as one can possibly be, and tragically may never find work again, you are not counted in the figure we see relentlessly in the news -- currently 5.6%. Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are either out of work or severely underemployed. Trust me, the vast majority of them aren't throwing parties to toast "falling" unemployment.

There's another reason why the official rate is misleading. Say you're an out-of-work engineer or healthcare worker or construction worker or retail manager: If you perform a minimum of one hour of work in a week and are paid at least $20 -- maybe someone pays you to mow their lawn -- you're not officially counted as unemployed in the much-reported 5.6%. Few Americans know this.

Yet another figure of importance that doesn't get much press: those working part time but wanting full-time work. If you have a degree in chemistry or math and are working 10 hours part time because it is all you can find -- in other words, you are severely underemployed -- the government doesn't count you in the 5.6%. Few Americans know this.

There's no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.

And it's a lie that has consequences, because the great American dream is to have a good job, and in recent years, America has failed to deliver that dream more than it has at any time in recent memory. A good job is an individual's primary identity, their very self-worth, their dignity -- it establishes the relationship they have with their friends, community and country. When we fail to deliver a good job that fits a citizen's talents, training and experience, we are failing the great American dream.

Gallup defines a good job as 30+ hours per week for an organization that provides a regular paycheck. Right now, the U.S. is delivering at a staggeringly low rate of 44%, which is the number of full-time jobs as a percent of the adult population, 18 years and older. We need that to be 50% and a bare minimum of 10 million new, good jobs to replenish America's middle class.

I hear all the time that "unemployment is greatly reduced, but the people aren't feeling it." When the media, talking heads, the White House and Wall Street start reporting the truth -- the percent of Americans in good jobs; jobs that are full time and real -- then we will quit wondering why Americans aren't "feeling" something that doesn't remotely reflect the reality in their lives. And we will also quit wondering what hollowed out the middle class.  http://www.gallup.com

SO... If we are going to discuss "unemployment" we could use lots of different standards.  But the one being used
when we compare those employed today is the same one that has been used for years.

A new system to measure unemployment could be used, but it would be meaningless if you compared it to
the present system.

Quoted from Box A Rox

SO... If we are going to discuss "unemployment" we could use lots of different standards.  But the one being used
when we compare those employed today is the same one that has been used for years.

A new system to measure unemployment could be used, but it would be meaningless if you compared it to
the present system.

this has been an ongoing issue under ALL presidents.....as if they are the wizards of unemployment...no, they are not, they
just have people under them who play the stats game...

the public isn't stupid unless it chooses to be.....the problem is that with the current ability to seek out 'how things work' so
easily, people are questioning the reasoning and the 'bumper sticker' slogans of all elected leaders and their posse'

it's not just about Obama, it's about the nations populace now....the millenials will make sure it all goes back into the
populace's hands and will shred the status quo...

Quoted from Box A Rox

SO... If we are going to discuss "unemployment" we could use lots of different standards.  But the one being used
when we compare those employed today is the same one that has been used for years.

A new system to measure unemployment could be used, but it would be meaningless if you compared it to
the present system.

A new system to measure is being used.  The unemployment measurement today can only compare unemployment statistics from 1994 to today.  Prior to 1994, a different formula was used.  If you use the formula prior to the 1994 change, current unemployment would measure higher.

Quoted from CICERO

A new system to measure is being used.  The unemployment measurement today can only compare unemployment statistics from 1994 to today.  Prior to 1994, a different formula was used.  If you use the formula prior to the 1994 change, current unemployment would measure higher.

So according to Cissy... if we used the pre 1994 system... Obama would look just as fantastic
as he does today's recovery from the Bush Economic Meltdown.

Quoted Text

Forbes:
Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs, Growth And Investing

Using Cissy's pre '94 system, Obama even beats St Ronny!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ad.....rowth-and-investing/

the president is NOT in charge of employment....how is it possible that the public believes that the president is 'the grand employer'??

another national brainwashing much like the war mongering and those 'terrorists'

Quoted from bumblethru

Yes... 2001 when G WORST Bush took office...
Unemployment was at a low from the Clinton Prosperity years.


2008 The Bush Economic Meltdown hit...
2009 Obama takes office.

Today we are almost back to where we were under Clinton

nothing has gotten any better....it's only going to get worse as technology moves in.....