Did you know that the unemployment rate?

Really, So this explains how out of 314 million document citizens in USA plus an unknown amount of undocumented the Capitalist have as indentured slaves Total Pop Unknown? These numbers you have and main stream media & pundits always claim are accurate, I think NOT.

Just take the 314m known against the current 2011 nation IRS individual filing of 133.4 million and a small percent out this number aren't jobs they are people with just an income. What are the remaining 180.6 million up to you say, well 77 million will NOT be in the job arena. So that leaves roughly 102.4 million citizens that are considered in the available workforce as what? income-less or unknown think about how kind Capitalism is do they over pay for most jobs? Does everyone have Financial Security? Answer = NO.

My figures come from the IRS and dept of labor. The media reported unemployment figures are a huge lie to keep THE LIE going. Are YOU really sheeple enough to believe those numbers reported. Hope you can figure out why they paint such a phony picture of USA.

Your 1982-1985 stat sites a 3.5% decline in essentially 2 years, so I'm really failing to see how you are drawing this conclusion. All the while lowering taxes, raising wages, and lifting the American standard of living.

Wow, you really make a point very poorly.

I say that you can't cherry pick your facts, and historic analysis of the unemployment rate by itself is not an indication of anything.

There is no question among historians or economists that Reagan spurred this country to the largest economic expansion in modern history. It would have been far greater had Congress not gone back on their promise to reduce spending by $3 for every $1 in tax cuts; in fact, they actually increased spending during that period. Revenues to the government increased by over 50% as a result of more people paying taxes due to increased economic activitiy.

There is also no question about the fact that Clinton inherited this expansion but nearly squandered the political capital during his first term in office - it was his dramatic shift to the center from his far-left origins that ultimately kept our economy going. Clinton also benefited from the "dot.com" boom of the late 1990's.

Despite the claim that "The Private Sector Is Doing Fine", today's unemployment numbers are lower for very different reasons. One reason is increased government hiring. Another reason is that people have been unemployed for so long they have given up. Another reason is that people are "underemployed"; no longer claiming benefits but not working in their fields anymore.

Reagan's unemployment figures were due to true economic expansion as a direct result of policy change. Clinton's were due to his knowing good policy when he saw it, his shift to center, his reduction in spending and the massive increase in employment due to the Internet.

Bush's went the wrong way, partly because of the crash of so many high-tech companies, but also becasue of his misguided spending and his waging of two concurrent wars.

Obama? What is he doing? I would challenge you to cite a single policy that has led to anything that can remotely be called economic expansion. Obama is merely playing with the numbers.

EDIT - "You tell me" - I asked first. Merely drawing a correlation without citing a specific policy is meaningless. My challenge stands - name a single policy of Obama's that has led to anything that can be remotely be called "economic expansion". Otherwise you could just say that merely "Being Obama" has done it.

I cited examples of Reagan's tax policy and how it was documented that it led to increased tax revenues for the Government, and how there is a direct correlation between the gradual phase-in of his policies and the reduction in unemployment.

Your point about outsourcing is well taken - maybe companies are not only outsourcing because they can, but because due to healthcare, liability, environmental regulation, high cost of energy it has become prohibitively expensive to do business in this country.

I think I also gave a few specific examples of what Clinton and Bush did that affected the economy under their administration, but frankly I don't have a clue about Obama and how his policies have actually reduced unemployment or expanded the economy. There is evidence that the reduction in numbers is based on people just giving up - but please enlighten me. Policy, please.

The BLS is playing with numbers = Proof:

The Government’s 9 Million Jobless Vanishing Act

http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/daniel-...

&

Shrinking US workforce masks an otherwise sky-high jobless rate

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/10/jobless...

&

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

This shows about 10,000,000 more in Actual Unemployed than is in Reported Unemployed.

________________________________________________________________________

Just for comparison - the "debtclock" only goes to 2000 - But

In 2008 on this day Government Spent only 300 Billion more than it takes in.

Now the government spends 1.3 Trillion more than it takes in

There were only 4,000,000 more Actual Unemployed than Reported Unemployed.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/2008.html

_______________________________________________________________________

The present administration doesn't seem to care about outsourcing jobs!

White House Jobs Czar, GE CEO Immelt Moves Jobs to China

http://westorlandonews.com/2011/08/02/white-house-...

"GE has been busy sending them abroad. Since Immelt took over in 2001, GE has shed 34,000 jobs in the U.S., according to its most recent annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. But it’s added 25,000 jobs overseas."

If you include the current number of unemployed persons who have given up looking for a job because of Obama's (swt) administration's destruction of the US economy, the unemployment rate is closer to 15%.