Umemployment Rate the Same Today as when Obama First Took Office

[cow451]

All of these are counted in the U6 unemployment rate as also reported by the BLS. Because the primary change during the month was that 582,000 on net shifted from unemployed to employed part time for economic reasons, this U6 unemployment rate remained unchanged last month at 14.7%. The total suffering this U6 unemployment was 23.2 million.
Moreover, even this doesn’t nearly fully account for the 8.2 million Americans who have given up hope during the Obama term of office, and dropped out of the work force altogether. When you are considered out of the work force, you are no longer counted as unemployed, even though you still do not have a job, and you still want and are available for work.
Obama's Real Unemployment Rate Is 14.7%, And A Recession's On The Way - Forbes

Considering the fact that our unemployment is much higher than 7.8% and the Bush unemployment rates only spiked in late 2007 to 2009, (after Democrats controlled both houses of congress), I'll say that all this is demonstrating is that the Bush administration was significantly more honest to the American people than the Obama Administration.

So, what was the "real unemployment rate" in 2001 and 2009? Just so we can compare apples to apples.

 

[GarfieldJL]

So, what was the "real unemployment rate" in 2001 and 2009? Just so we can compare apples to apples.

We didn't have people unable to find jobs for over 3 years back in 2001 or 2009...

In all reality I think this situation of a bad economy with so many people dependent on the government dole is deliberate.

 

[cow451]

We didn't have people unable to find jobs for over 3 years back in 2001 or 2009...

In all reality I think this situation of a bad economy with so many people dependent on the government dole is deliberate.

Oh, that's right. The economy was really strong when Bush took over and it didn't tank until 2006 (per the conservative American Spectator). But, thankfully it wasn't Bush's fault.

 

[Crusader05]

I voted for Obama in 2008 but this time I couldn't bring myself to vote for him or Romney. I am just very unimpressed by Obama's performance on the economy. You'd think that after 4 years we'd see something approaching a recovery, not a miracle or magic, but getting us back to 5% like Obama promised.

My questions is where are we going to be in another 4 years? Are we still going to be at 7.8%? Is the plan to sacrifice economic performance for economic "fairness"?

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

US manufacturing is heading south. Just look at the most recent industrial reports out last week. We've had a bit of an optimistic ride up until now, the stock market is at very high levels, some all time high levels. However, between the fiscal crisis in Europe, the new strain of Obamacare on the economy, and income tax increases for middle and upper classes that was signed, I see a double dip recession ahead.

 

[SharonL]

Obama seemed angry with his speech and actions - unless the Republicans are strong enough to stick to their guns, we are in for a rough ride - he is determined to get all his agenda put through even though he is going into his lame duck time. He has turned his campaign people into attack mode and the majority of people will listen to them. Rough times ahead.

 

[dgiharris]

We just need to sit aside party lines and look at facts. Unemployment is actually 14 or 15% when you put the figures in that belong, like those stopped looking, those that have run out of benefits.
Triple A credit rating gone..

This is due to the poor economy he inherited. Seriously, do you have any idea how close we came to another Depression, not recession, Depression with a "D".

Obama spends too much, regulates too much, borrows too much. .

Sorry, again, this is 100% due to what he inherited. Do you guys have selective memory.

Seriously watch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_Big_to_Fail_(film)
CNBC: How housing boom was a house of cards - Business - CNBC TV | NBC News

One of the absolute biggest reasons why we were a hair away from another Depression is due to the complete and total lack of regulation during the Bush/Cheney era as relates to Wall Street. It was like a bunch of Foxes charged with guarding the hen house.

At the time of the housing market crisis, almost every single economist on both sides of the political fence agreed that we had to borrow and spend our way out of it. Then factor in the costs (two wars for crying out loud) that Obama inherited...

Lastly, the biggest problem I have with the GOP is that when it comes to spending $1 TRILLION on wars you guys don't even bat an eye, but when you propose spending a few billion on domestic programs, you guys run around with your hair on fire screaming SOCIALISM!!!!

A very devisive president, pitting party against party,.

Man, what are you smoking. From day 1, Republicans have opposed him. Before he even took office Republicans submitted a bunch of talking points drawing lines in the sand.

When 9/11 happened, Democrats came together and worked with Republicans, basically giving Bush/Cheney a blank check and supported almost every initiative the GOP submitted.

When Obama took office, things were WORSE than 9/11... We were fighting two wars and on the edge of a great Depression but Republicans came together to ACTIVELY OPPOSE OBAMA and the GOP held this country hostage playing brinkmanship with this country's future. Either do it the GOP way or we will impede any legislation and let the country burn... Time and time again Republican's idea of compromise is "Do it our way or no way at all..." despite what the America people (the majority) wanted.

Seriously, GOP has been anti-Obama since day one and opposed the Dems a thousand times more than the Dems have ever opposed Bush.

Taxes too much - we will soon run out of other people's money. .

With all the legal loopholes and tax shelters the rich pay LESS in taxes than the middle class. He (along with the MAJORITY) of the country feel this is unfair.

... Wants the people depending on the government - the more people on the dole - the more control he has.

This makes no sense. What is this so called "control" you are talking about? Do you mean votes? the people you are talking about being on the dole will vote for Obama no matter what?

Again, GOP types have no problems paying for bigger prisons and supporting longer prison sentences. But prison costs $45k/yr per prisoner. Not to mention the cost of the judicial process to try/convict prisoners. Can't you get it through your heads that if you took a fraction of that money and rolled it into educational and other social programs you will reduce crime while simultaneously increasing your tax pool (i.e. these same people are then more likely to get jobs). Now, will there be some people who abuse the system? Sure. But holistically, the aggregate will be positive (more tax revenue/less prison sentences) than the negative and it will save us more money over time...

He says one thing and does another and no one ever holds him accountable..

Examples please?

Sometimes, he has had to change positions because GOP drew a line in the sand and he *gasped* had to compromise. And a few times he has changed positions because *gasp* he acknowledged that he was wrong. This is a refreshing change from Bush who refused to change positions even though all evidence and facts showed he was wrong on a point.

You will not pay one dime more in taxes - right - that really worked didn't it. .

He has been consistent in his tax platform but GOP drew a line in the sand so he had to compromise...

Your healthcare won't cost you more - it will decrease - it has now raised $2,500 - that really worked.

I'm not that well versed in the healthcare stuff but I suspect this is due to GOP drawing lines in the sand and forcing this...

...
He won't allow drilling on public lands - all the drilling being done is on private lands..

Most Americans are against drilling on certain public lands...

....Wants to take our guns little by little.
.

You mean the licensing and registration and tracking and correlations with mental health professionals that the MAJORITY of the public is in support of since we are on the heels of yet another bunch of children getting massacred??? Yeah, that has been his secret "agenda" all along. To get your guns despite him not doing ANYTHING his first term...

Again, he is reacting to the will of the people and after the 7th mass shooting in recent history, the people are fed up and want "something" done so again, please stop making this out to be Obama's fault. When the majority want something, then shouldn't the public elected officials in a democratic society do that something? And the polls show, MAJORITY of Americans want those gun control measures. But hey, never let facts get in the way of your opinions

....Approval of abortions - gays and making churches go against their beliefs..

There was this little court case back in 1973 called Roe v Wade
Roe v. Wade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Again, seems you republicans have a problem with that thing called facts. And again, the MAJORITY of Americans support abortion Abortion

.gays.....

Again, the MAJORITY of Americans support gay rights. GOP is on the wrong side of history on this point. Aren't we the land of the free? Why should your rights not apply if you just happen to be gay?

.making churches go against their beliefs..

Ahhh I love this GOP talking point. If churches are going to accept government money then they are not exempt from the law. I can't remember the exact specifics on this issue, I recall it had something to do with women birth control pills as part of a health care provision that somehow involved churches... But what I do FIRMLY remember is that there was some option that churches had to outsource the part that they had a contention with but the churches took that as an opportunity to say, "See he's trying to force us" when in reality that wasn't the case. GOP grabbed onto it, twisted it, and made it into an "See Obama is trying to force churches to support birth control..."

I don't care if you are a church or not, if you are part of a system you must comply with the law. And the provisions around this point of contention clearly was reasonable but the churches and GOP twisted it so they could make it an issue...

...
Won't even go into Fast & Furious

Agreed, Fast and Furious was a huge screw up

...Libya

There are two parts to Libya, Deposing the dictator he did a bang up job, the recent loss of the Ambassador, agreed, that was a huge mistake.

.drones without Congress' approval

You are kidding right? He is well within his authority on his drone strikes. President Clinton and Bush both made use of this... Seriously, this is a ridiculous point, his drone strikes wiped out a significant portion of Al Qaeda.

No matter what he does - it's ok with 47 % of the American people - I don't think you can blame Bush for that.

Its not a matter of blaming Bush as it is a matter of accepting reality. The reality is, when Obama took office, this country was literally in the worst shape since the Great Depression. Do you understand that fact? I don't think you do.

Seriously, do you understand just how bad things were at the end of 2008? Two wars + a recession/depression.... And then throw in that the GOP made it their mission to balk Obama on every single issue.

You can't undo that in 4 years, it's simply impossible.

Obama seemed angry with his speech and actions - unless the Republicans are strong enough to stick to their guns, we are in for a rough ride

You got that backwards, the reason we are in for a rough ride is BECAUSE the GOP has done a great job of sticking to their guns. GOP has made it clear, they would rather the country burn than Obama do a good job. They will make sure that they oppose Obama on everything. GOP's position is "do it our way or don't do it at all".

he is determined to get all his agenda put through even though he is going into his lame duck time. .

Yes, a president should be determined to put his agenda through, you know, the agenda the people knew about when they voted for him and he won... Another point GOP is incapable of accepting. We had 8 years of the GOP during a time when GOP had UNPRECEDENTED control and support and now the people want to try it the Dems way but GOP is hell bent on not allowing that because obviously GOP knows best.

He has turned his campaign people into attack mode and the majority of people will listen to them.

He has to be in attack mode to counter the GOP's aggressive anti-Obama stance. Obama could develop the cure for cancer and GOP would block it.

Rough times ahead.

I agree, rough times ahead...

 

[kermit]

Obama seemed angry with his speech and actions - unless the Republicans are strong enough to stick to their guns, we are in for a rough ride - he is determined to get all his agenda put through even though he is going into his lame duck time. He has turned his campaign people into attack mode and the majority of people will listen to them. Rough times ahead.

US manfacturing has been heading south for the past few decades.

My wife used to work for a local manufacturer that had a factory store locally. After she took time off for materity leave she went to work for the store part time in Jan 2008. A customer asked where they made the stuff and she told them that all their products were made in the US and most were made in locally, and in the the store was in the front of of the factories (the old style brick-building factory). The guy accused her of lying and stormed out of the store. A full year before Obama took off office the idea that something is manufactured in the US had become so shocking as to be unbeleivable.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

If churches are going to accept government money then they are not exempt from the law. I can't remember the exact specifics on this issue, I recall it had something to do with women birth control pills as part of a health care provision that somehow involved churches... But what I do FIRMLY remember is that there was some option that churches had to outsource the part that they had a contention with but the churches took that as an opportunity to say, "See he's trying to force us" when in reality that wasn't the case. GOP grabbed onto it, twisted it, and made it into an "See Obama is trying to force churches to support birth control..."

I don't care if you are a church or not, if you are part of a system you must comply with the law. And the provisions around this point of contention clearly was reasonable but the churches and GOP twisted it so they could make it an issue....

I tend to find it interesting that many churches ignore the other ones who've noted that there were already ways given to them to be exempt.

Churches are unique in that they enjoy a special status under the tax code. Normally, to be considered exempt from income taxes, an organization must apply for an exemption from the IRS and demonstrate that it meets the requirements to be considered one of the exempt categories of section 501(c) of the tax code. Every organization that does not fall within one of the exempt categories of section 501(c) of the tax code is considered taxable.

But churches are different. Under section 508(c)(1)(A) of the tax code, churches are exempt from applying to the IRS for tax exempt status. Thus, churches are automatically exempt from income taxes under the federal tax code without first applying to the IRS for recognition of exempt status. This is where the misunderstanding comes in. Some think that this unique status of churches under the tax code means that churches are not regulated by the tax code at all. However, the bottom line is that whether or not a church applies to the IRS for recognition of tax exempt status or chooses not to do so, they are still subject to the tax code.

Cases have dealt with this issue. In Taylor v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the United States Tax Court agreed that, under section 508(c)(1) of the tax code churches do not have to apply for tax exempt status and are considered automatically exempt. But the court also stated, “Nothing in section 508(c)(1) relieves a church from having to meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3).”

Essentially, what the Taylor court was saying is that churches are still subject to the restrictions in section 501(c)(3) of the tax code even if they never apply to the IRS for recognition of tax exempt status.

In a similar case called Universal Life Church v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the Tax Court stated:

Section 508(c) exempts various organizations, including churches from the notification requirements of section 508(a). Thus while most organizations claiming tax exempt status under section 501(c)(3) must inform the Commissioner of their application for exempt status… churches need not make such a notification.
​

D
espite this, the Tax Court went on to hold that this unique status does not prevent the Commissioner of the IRS from auditing a church.

Most churches believe that they will lose their Tax Exempt status if they speak about politics, or social issues that spill over into politics or endorse a candidate from the pulpit. And in studying the issue, it seems that this simply does not hold water. The part of the IRS Code that most churches have fallen prey to is Section 501-c-3 which requires charities to fill out IRS Form #1023 and #1024 in order to be considered for a Tax Exemption. Most churches without delving into the issue would simply file these two forms with the IRS to get their Tax Exemption. Problem is that once you apply and are approved for a 501-c-3 Tax Exemption, then the IRS can tell you what you may or may not say from the pulpit - or, in the case of birth control, what you are or are not allowed to give out.

But in IRS Publication 557 it is noted:

Some organizations are not required to file Form 1023. These include: Churches, interchurch organizations of local units of a church, conventions or associations of churches, or integrated auxiliaries of a church, such as a men’s or women’s organization, religious school, mission society, or youth group. These organizations are exempt automatically if they meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3).


​

Again, all of this is covered in Section 508-C-1-A which excludes churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches. To me it means that if your church would normally qualify under Section 501-c-3, then the church, interchurch organizations, conventions or associations of churches, or integrated auxiliaries of a church, such as a mens or womens organization, religious school, mission society, or youth group automatically qualify for the Tax Exemption. Under this section of the IRS code, it is my feeling that the IRS cannot limit your speech from the pulpit, or tell you what organizations your church may belong to or participate in, as they may in section 501-c-3. The church has AUTOMATICALLY been granted the Tax Exemption they sought simply by being a church under section 508-C-1-A of the IRS Code.

For reference:

• Internal Revenue Manual - 7.25.1 Introduction
• 508(c)(1)(A) Free Church vs. 501(c)(3) State Church

....By registering as a 5013c, the orgainization is subordinating itself to the secular, sometimes atheist or judaic govt and it's rules...and that is a problem whenever churches don't say things for fear of losing its status. More can be found at Hush Money and here/here..and here.

As another pastor noted, " in New Jersey, the state cancelled the tax-exempt status of a Methodist-run boardwalk pavilion used for religious services because the religious organization would not host a same-sex "wedding" there. San Francisco dropped its $3.5 million in social service contracts with the Salvation Army because it refused to recognize same-sex "domestic partnerships" in its employee benefits policies. Similarly, Portland, Maine, required Catholic Charities to extend spousal employee benefits to same-sex "domestic partners" as a condition of receiving city housing and community development."

When you're on a tax-exempt status, there are privelages that come with it...and yet there are curses..and for many, because they're so focused on the benefits, they're willing to take the negatives of having to choose avoiding certain actions which their faith may require them to do if the government/state asks them to do opposite. Whereas others are freaking out on that aspect, there are many groups who say there'd no issues if returning to how the early church was when it wasn't so immeshed with the State.

 

[questftbest]

Did Obama give up on black employment? The unemployment rate for blacks is sky rocketing.