The Real Hockey Stick

Democrats win House, promise new direction
POSTED: 6:05 p.m. EST, November 8, 2006

(CNN) — Democrats promised Wednesday to lead the country in a new direction after winning control of the House for the first time in 12 years in midterm elections.

By early Wednesday, Democrats had picked up at least 29 seats; they needed 15 to capture a majority in the House. Two Democratic seats in Georgia that were targeted by Republicans remained too close to call.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-California, is now poised to become the first female speaker of the House.

Pelosi promised to lead the nation in a new direction “in partnership, not in partisanship.”

Democrats win House, promise new direction – CNN.com  

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to The Real Hockey Stick

  1. _Jim says:

    Pelosi – elevated far beyond her competency level (ref: The Peter Principle)

    I always envision her as that wild city-council-woman who see things in a totally warped way.

    NOT qualified for congress in any manner, way, shape or form.

    .

  2. Shazaam says:

    While the credulous peanut gallery would have a collective coronary, you might try also posting the unemployment stats from John Williams’ Shadowstats.com up there with the “official” government numbers….

    He is using the measuring method for unemployment that was used through the 70’s and 80’s.

    Our ever-so-truthful US government has been gaming the unemployment statistics as well as temperature measurements. I know, I know, it’s hard to believe 😉

    There method of “adjustment” for unemployment statistics is that if someone is unemployed so long that they run out of unemployment benefits, they are no longer counted as unemployed. Cute eh?

    They still don’t have a job, and now they don’t have any money, nor are they counted as unemployed. It does make the laughingstock-in-chief look like he’s making progress on the jobs issue….

    • Mike D says:

      ์์์์Not exactly right. They actually do surveys of people for the Household Survey which is the basis of the unemployment rate. Anyone who hasn’t looked for work for 4 weeks is when the criteria for dropping them out of the stats. Since people getting unemployment must be looking for work to continue getting it (or just sign the paper saying they are looking), they are considered part of the workforce.

      Below the table on this page, you can see the categories of people “not in the labor force”

      http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2014/article/unemployment-continued-its-downward-trend-in-2013-6.htm

      • Mike D says:

        To clarify, what I’m saying is if someone’s unemployment ran out and they looked for work, they’d be considered as unemployed. In reality, anyone hitting the max these days doesn’t have much chance of getting a job so many just don’t try. It is not the expiration of benefits that takes them out of the unemployment stats.

        I think that myth actually started during the Bush years when people were trying to say the 4% unemployment rate wasn’t as great as it seemed.

      • _Jim says:

        re: Mike D says May 9, 2014 at 11:35 pm
        ์์์์Not exactly right. They actually do surveys of people for the Household Survey which is the basis of the unemployment rate.

        How do they assure an accurate survey today (an accurate sample of the population) in this age of non-wireline telephones (cellphones instead), some of which may be non-contract, pay-as-you-go, not-assigned by name (some ppl like it this way on account of anonymity).

        I’ve got to think the error bars have widened on this ‘survey’ these days (unless they are done via snail-mail).

    • Gail Combs says:

      You beat me to it.

      What is interesting is how the US government hides the real numbers:
      “GOVERNMENT ECONOMIC REPORTS: THINGS YOU’VE SUSPECTED BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK!”
      “Employment and Unemployment Reporting”
      (Part Two in a Series of Five)

      August 24th, 2004

      …Up until the Clinton administration, a discouraged worker was one who was willing, able and ready to work but had given up looking because there were no jobs to be had. The Clinton administration dismissed to the non-reporting netherworld about five million discouraged workers who had been so categorized for more than a year. As of July 2004, the less-than-a-year discouraged workers total 504,000. Adding in the netherworld takes the unemployment rate up to about 12.5%.

      The Clinton administration also reduced monthly household sampling from 60,000 to about 50,000, eliminating significant surveying in the inner cities….

  3. darrylb says:

    I really have a problem with CA politicians. Incredibly devoid of honesty.
    But then, heading a little East the domicile of Harry Reid is even more laughable.
    One cannot evaluate much of what he says because he is simply intolerable to listen to.

  4. -=NikFromNYC=- says:

    Chart of Reagan vs. Obama recoveries corrected for population growth:

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/131256-simple-graph-compares-reagan-obamas-recoveries/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s