When Bush was president 200,000 new jobs was considered anemic as it didn't cover the rise in working age adults.
When Bush was president, the USA gained 3 million jobs. Sounds like a lot, but that amounts to 93,750 jobs a quarter over his 8 years. 200,000 would have been on average a GOOD report for him.
Now, with a greater population 187k is considered great. A sign that the economy is truly booming.
Obama has added somewhere in the (very rough) neighborhood of 10 million jobs during his term. Considering he was handed a economy that was *losing* jobs and took a few months to turn around, doing 3-4 times better than Bush in the same amount of time isn't too shabby. You can see where the talk around these jobs numbers would be a bit more positive, even for cherry-picked reports that happened to have the roughly same number for that month.
Also, this is not exactly the same USA it was in 2008. The Baby Boomers are starting to retire now, (2016-1947 = 69 years). So the labor force is not growing like it was back then. There are some who argue it is now shrinking. So 200k new jobs for a quarter now would be more like 400k back in 2008.
Still, I have not heard anybody use the word "booming". Economists will actually tell you that you don't want "booming" because that has a nasty tendency to be paired with a bust (and inflation). What you'd like to see is sustained moderate growth. That way WHEN the next recession happens after that (they happen), it shouldn't be too horrible, because it doesn't have so much over-exuberance to correct for. Roller-coasters need to stay in the amusement parks.
Does it detect earthquakes when the phone's vibrator goes off?
Indeed. I'd like a good iMac please, like we used to get before Steve died.
Everything in Europe is better than in th US.
I know a wee bit about the process myself, and some of the info there looked kinda dubious, so I went out to look at the home page for that website....
...uh...Oh wow. This guy
So do you have a source for any of this information that isn't from a website full of one-sided (and sometimes ridiculous) attacks against Democratic politicians?
Please 2016, not another one.
2016: I've still got a whole month left. Mwahahahah!
Seriously thou I don't see a problem with the US burning taxpayer's money to bring the guy back. He's
More to the point, this is something they end up having to do all the time, with much younger people there. For example, just five months ago, two other people had to be evacuated for health reasons. Having to do this every now and this is just part of the price of operating there.
So its not like it means he's necessarily any less hardy that anyone else out there.
But something tells me only the right-wing politicians and supporters will get banned. Call it a crazy intuition
No, I call it a persecution complex. Twitter bans and suspends accounts every day. For some crazy reason, nobody gets up-in-arms about it until it happens to a right-winger.
It's my 15th wedding anniversary today, and my wife said look at this.
Facebook had without her asking, put together an anniversary congratulation, that included a slide show of engagement photos (from 16 years ago!) and wedding photos!
What I find even more interesting is that Facebook knew enough to do that for her, but not for you.
Thanks. I may go do just that.
But the point here is that Google already is silently doing this to lots of people. You know...the "Don't be evil" people. Probably others too. Uber's just trying to hitch their own boxcar onto the back of the gravy-train.
You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tuna fish. -- from the tunefs(8) man page