Hanafuda, each and every way the Bureau of Labor Statistics measures unemployment is in decline. The causal relationship between the stimulus and declining unemployment numbers is evident. At the very least, no matter how one looks at it, to say Obama has made unemployment or the economy worse is a blatant lie that is unsupported by evidence.Edit: just to be a little more clear about this ... all your graph is showing is the rate at which jobs have been lost over the last several years. What your graph doesn't show is how many jobs are simultaneously being created. Jobs are always being lost at some rate, while people are also being hired at new jobs all the time too -- hopefully with more new jobs being created than jobs being lost. With your graph, all we see is how many jobs have been lost since 2007. We can't see how many people were getting new jobs during the same period. My guess ... not a hell of a lot.
The problem is that Ron Paul's cuts would likely lead to an economic depression. His cuts would instantly cause at least a 7% cut to GDP. And that's just at first. His cuts would put a stop to many things that infuse the economy with money (unemployment, foods programs, etc).Once again, Ron Paul believe in states rights, but what you are saying however, i just past the realms of reality.
The reasons he wants to cut all those departments is that they pushes prices up and destroy the market, and close down states buisnesses, and thus not creating jobs.
The reason he doesn't support it a federal mandate, is that it would involve the federal government regulating states, and telling them what to do.
And since you bring it up, a health insurance mandate is the only way a system without pre-existing conditions can exist, just for starters.
Actually, unemployment is going down because unemployment is going down. The market is getting better and jobs are being created. In my first chart, you are correct, you might not have been counted. But the trend still shows a better market, more jobs being created, less jobs being lost, and the causal relationship the stimulus had. The second chart I posted likely counted you in the total unemployment numbers, which is still going down.Unemployment is only going down because once you no longer receive unemployment, you are no longer considered unemployed.
Like here in Ohio unemployed went down from 7.9 to 7.7%, but payroll in the same time period went down 25,000. So how can unemployment go down and the number of people receiving a check also go down? Shouldn't if unemployment is going down, payroll numbers should be going up?
I am unemployed, but I am not being counted as such because my unemployment compensation ran out in Feb.