Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

berni_mccoy

(23,018 posts)
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 09:13 AM Sep 2012

Mark Zandi (Moody Analyst) Just said the jobs number is low because...

The Government is shedding jobs. Said it just now on MSNBC to Chuck Todd who tried to insist the problem is a loss of manufacturing jobs. Zandi basically said government jobs aren't keeping pace with the normal rate of job creation seen in government agencies.

We all know this is a direct result of GOP obstructionism.

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Mark Zandi (Moody Analyst) Just said the jobs number is low because... (Original Post) berni_mccoy Sep 2012 OP
Of course it is. The Gov's in Red States are intentionally sabotaging this President JaneyVee Sep 2012 #1
"we" all know that. barbtries Sep 2012 #2
The answer is to make a digestible chart showing jsmirman Sep 2012 #3
Yep... deutsey Sep 2012 #4
Many of us are, but a lot of help is still needed to inform others. Thanks for all that YOU do!! Scuba Sep 2012 #5
not enough. barbtries Sep 2012 #6
It drives me nuts when Chuck Tool keeps referring to the "disappointing jobs report." Before the Texas Lawyer Sep 2012 #7
The Jobs Number Is Low DallasNE Sep 2012 #8
 

JaneyVee

(19,877 posts)
1. Of course it is. The Gov's in Red States are intentionally sabotaging this President
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 09:17 AM
Sep 2012

by laying off workers by the thousands. almost 700,000 total. Our unemployment rate would be 7.4% and Obama would easily win re-election. But its part of their plan to make Obama a one term Prez.

barbtries

(28,787 posts)
2. "we" all know that.
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 09:29 AM
Sep 2012

but we're high info voters. too much ignorance in this country and the republicans just love that.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
3. The answer is to make a digestible chart showing
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 09:30 AM
Sep 2012

employment numbers adjusted to remove government job number fluctuations.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
5. Many of us are, but a lot of help is still needed to inform others. Thanks for all that YOU do!!
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 09:42 AM
Sep 2012

barbtries

(28,787 posts)
6. not enough.
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 09:50 AM
Sep 2012

not enough, but thank you Scuba. mostly what i do is read and comment on DU! must get busier. i generally don't like canvassing because i'm shy but with a fistful of talking points i think i'm ready to go have some conversations.

Texas Lawyer

(350 posts)
7. It drives me nuts when Chuck Tool keeps referring to the "disappointing jobs report." Before the
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 10:25 AM
Sep 2012

report came out, the consensus was 100,000 jobs and any drop in unemployment would be a great jobs report.

The job total was just 4,000 shy of the 100,000 total, and unemployment dropped from 8.3 to 8.1 percent.

This is a pretty good jobs report but falls shy of a very good report; it's not not "disappointing" unless you are deliberately trying to undermine the President.

DallasNE

(7,402 posts)
8. The Jobs Number Is Low
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 02:09 PM
Sep 2012

Because it is August. A lot of plants are shut down for parts of the month for vacation, retooling, etc. Seasonal factors influence these numbers making it a lot more complicated than the overly simplistic view of Chuck Todd. Those same seasonal factors also helps to explain why the unemployment rate came down.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Mark Zandi (Moody Analyst...