Tag: United States Department of Labor

Chris Wysocki: What if they gave a Recovery Summer and no one recovered?

The epic failure that is Obamanomics

Apparently the fifth time isn’t a charm either. Another “Recovery Summer” goes bust.

The U.S. economy added 175,000 jobs in May, a gain that shows employers are hiring at a still-modest but steady pace.

The Labor Department said Friday that the unemployment rate rose to 7.6 percent from 7.5 percent in April.

The government revised the job figures for the previous two months. April’s gains were lowered to 149,000 from 165,000. March’s figure was increased slightly to 142,000 from 138,000. The net loss was 12,000 jobs.

Employers have added an average of 155,000 jobs in past three months, below the average of 237,000 created from November through February.


Are Obama voters stupid?

Let me put it this way. They KNEW about the high unemployment numbers, especially among minorities, and young voters, yet, they voted for Obama anyway. I would say that is, if not stupid, at least unwise

Obama supporters continue to suffer the most in the latest jobs report. Blacks, Hispanics and young adults suffer the most under this administration.

The national unemployment rate is 7.8% (not counting the millions who dropped out of the market.)

The Herald Online reported:

  • The overall unemployment rate for 18-29 year olds for December 2012 is 11.5 percent (NSA).
  • The unemployment rate for 18-29 year old African-Americans for December 2012 is22.1 percent (NSA); the unemployment rate for 18-29 year old Hispanics for December 2012 is 12.2 percent (NSA); and the unemployment rate for 18–29 year old women for December 2012 is 10.4 percent (NSA).
  • The declining labor force participation rate has created an additional 1.7 million young adults that are not counted as “unemployed” by the U.S. Department of Labor because they are not in the labor force, meaning that those young people have given up looking for work due to the lack of jobs.
  • If the labor force participation rate were factored into the 18-29 unemployment calculations, the actual Millennial unemployment rate would rise to 16.3 percent (NSA).

Simply unbelievable


When will the media start expecting the “unexpected”?

Chris offers up the latest outbreak of Unexpecteditis (the latest Liberal Malady I have diagnosed) to hit the media

There’s that word again: unexpectedly. Obama’s Zampolits at the Bureau of Labor Statistics insist last week’s rise in initial jobless claims was completely unexpected.

The number of Americans filing new claims for jobless benefits unexpectedly rose last week, suggesting the labor market is healing too slowly to make much of a dent in the unemployment rate.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits rose 4,000 to a seasonally adjusted 372,000, the Labor Department said on Thursday. That was the highest level in five weeks.

Darn those “unexpected” events. These jobless reports, and rising unemployment numbers just keep catching the Left off guard. Like I have said before, the only thing we know about Obamanomics is that we can expect the unexpected to a lot worse than anyone ever expected!

Your Blog Headline of the Day!


Come to us from Stacy McCain, and it is solid gold!

‘You Didn’t Lose Your Job. Somebody Else Made That Happen.’

And by “somebody else,” I mean, Barack Hussein Obama:

U.S. jobless claims jumped 34,000 to 386,000 last week, the government reported Thursday, reflectingtypical summertime fluctuations in auto-industry employment.
Applications for unemployment benefits are now back tosomewhat elevated levels after falling two weeks ago to a four-year low, suggesting the labor market remains sluggish.
Economists surveyed by MarketWatch had forecast claims would rise to a seasonally adjusted 365,000 in the week ended July 14. The level of claims is a rough gauge of whether layoffs are rising or falling.
Claims in the prior week were revised up to 352,000 from 350,000.

The unemployment applications exceeded forecasts by 21,000 and that’s just “typical,” eh? Unemployment is just “somewhat elevated,” eh?

And by the way, does anyone remember the Labor Department’s unemployment numbers being revised downward during this administration? Or am I correct in suspecting that the initial report pretty much always understates the numbers, and then they come back to “revise upward” later on when they think we won’t notice? Dog-bites-man headline of the day:




Obama’s war on America’s economy rages on


Donald Douglas has the latest on a sharp jump in jobless claims

At LAT, “New jobless claims jumped sharply last week to 386,000“:

WASHINGTON — New claims for unemployment benefits rose sharply last week to 386,000, the biggest jump in more than a year as the labor market continued to show signs of struggling amid the weakening recovery.

The increase of 34,000 in initial jobless claims came a week after a dramatic drop to 350,000, the lowest level in more than four years. But that figure now looks like an outlier amid an avalanche of other data that show the economic recovery is stuck in low gear.

It just gets worse and worse. Obama has done nothing to help the economy. What he has done has served to hamstring domestic energy production, his EPA is waging a war on the coal industry, and businesses are afraid to expand because of all the regulations, and uncertainty on what tax rates will soon be. Then, of course, there is the start of  Obamacare looming as well. There are more regs and penalties for small businesses there too. To me the evidence is pretty clear. This is the “fundamental change” Obama kept talking about in the 2008 campaign. He wants Americans to be dependent on the government. That IS the Collectivist dream that Obama, and his fellow Leftists have had for decades upon decades. Think of it like this, the more of us that depend on government, the more of us will feel that we must vote Democrat. Being dependent on government is almost like an addiction isn’t it? Americans will ultimately feel that they will lose their jobs, or benefits if they vote for any candidate that is not a Liberal. We must never allow that to happen.

Now you might not believe that Obama, and the Democrats WANT more people relying on government. But, consider that Obama recently gutted welfare reform. Also consider what Starr Parker has found

And what about those “shovel-ready jobs? You remember, all the jobs the stimulus was going to provide? The Other McCain wonders about all that stimulus money too!

Here is the press release from the Romney campaign:


Boston, MA – Today, Romney for President released a new television advertisement titled “Where Did All The Money Go?” President Obama’s time in office has been marked by political payoffs to the donor class and layoffs for the middle class. He showered his friends with stimulus funds and sent millions of taxpayer dollars overseas. If we can’t trust him with our money, why should we trust him for another four years?

To View “Where Did All The Money Go?” Please See:http://mi.tt/OS7psJ

Where did it go? Can you say outsourced?


Nanny State Alert!

The Sentry Journal lays out the latest intrusion into our lives!

Most of you have heard how the Department of Labor is proposing a regulation that will prevent kids who grow up on farms from basically doing all things my cousins and I did working on a farm.  These masterminds in Washington D.C. believe that somehow a child doing chores on a family farm equates to a violation of child labor laws.  This wonderful family farm tradition is now being demonized by an unfeeling bureaucratic system that cares more about how something is done than what is actually getting done.   We’re supposed to ignore the fact that this is how family farms have operated in America since before our independence.  Now some D.C. bureaucrat is saying we’ve been wrong all along and that these children should not be subjected to these working conditions.  They want to crack down on these sweatshops.   Not only does this open another door for the government to replace the parent, but it also takes away the opportunity for our young people to learn a valuable skill at a very young age.  Can someone please tell me where in the constitution it authorizes some government official the power to usurp the rights of the parent?  Once again there is no provision in the constitution that permits this because the constitution is a document designed to RESTRAIN the federal government from doing exactly this.

Pathetic! John lays out what this is about

This is what happens in an America when the constitution is ignored by unelected bureaucrats who could care less about our rights.  It turns our traditions and history as a nation on its head and forces us to live in an America that’s upside down.  It was in 2008 when Michelle Obama said we would need to change our traditions and history.  Welcome to Obama’s America.  This is just another attempt to fundamentally change who we are as a people and we must stop it.  The more we allow these elected or unelected bureaucrats to regulate every aspect of our lives the more we lose as a people and as a nation.  The more we become enslaved.


So, why IS Ed Schultz so gung ho for the unions?

Choice number 1 is that Schultz just loves the hard working Americans in unions

Choice number 2 is that Ed REALLY is a man of the people

Choice number 3 is actually choice $200,000

Jack Coleman at NewsBusters has what could be a pretty big media story. He spent some time digging through union disclosure forms at the Dept. of Labor and found that Ed Schultz has been collecting quite a sum from various unions while working at MSNBC:

In fiscal 2011, Schultz received $190,000 from the Communications Workers of America for what the U.S. Department of Labor categorized as “representational activities.”

For swag like that, you’d think Schultz could at least get it right about the CWA name. Instead, he invariably refers to it as the “Communication” Workers of America when its president, Larry Cohen, is a guest on Schultz’s radio show, as Cohen often is.

Coleman wondered if this could be another Ed Schultz, but no apparently not:

A Labor Department spokesman confirmed to NewsBusters that Schultz received $190,000 from CWA  in fiscal 2011, far from than the $7,500 he was paid by the union a year earlier. The spokesman said unions are mandated to report such payments as required by the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act.

The smart money is on option three I would say