About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Beck attacks White House statement that snow storms can distort unemployment data

March 03, 2010 6:39 pm ET

From the March 3 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Previously:

Memo to right-wing blogs: Snow storms can distort job numbers

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by bintx (March 03, 2010 6:42 pm ET)
      2  
      Of course, he's attacking the White House. It's Wednesday.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Bongo Fury (March 03, 2010 6:47 pm ET)
        1  
        He "saw" what they are saying?Is he peaking now or crashing?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by BISHAMON (March 03, 2010 9:34 pm ET)
        1  
        Actually, it was the Federal Reserve's Beige Book that reported the snowfall connection to economic activity. Please see: http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-03-03-beige-book_N.htm

        If Beck's viewers can read -- or bother to watch or listen to something other than the FOX (Cartoon) News network -- he might be in some trouble.

        Of course that is a big "If."
        Report Abuse
    • Author by seahawks123 (March 03, 2010 6:46 pm ET)
      1 9
      Well, you know with unemoloyment benifits being extended AGAIN, no need to go look for work snow or no snow. Besides, didn't Obama's job summit just create like a million jobs. AND jobs are sooo important Obama is working on healthcare.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by raddave43 (March 03, 2010 6:51 pm ET)
        4 1
        Well in order to qualify for unemployment benefits, you must actively seeking employment, not just sitting on your buttocks drinking beer. Obama is working on MANY issues at this time to include two wars, jobs, healthcare...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by soze169880 (March 03, 2010 10:02 pm ET)
             
          not just sitting on your buttocks drinking beer.

          Well, seahawks and BJfan are both SOL, then.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (March 03, 2010 6:58 pm ET)
        5 1
        You have to prove that you are actively seeking employment to get benefits. In Texas, you have to qualify every two weeks and give names, addresses and phone numbers of your contacts.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by bintx (March 04, 2010 10:33 am ET)
             
          I got a thumbs down for posting Texas unemployment procedures??? LOL!
          Report Abuse
      • Author by marco21 (March 03, 2010 7:46 pm ET)
        1 1
        Typical right winger - But, but, but... look over here!!!!


        Report Abuse
        • Author by John Paradox (March 03, 2010 9:21 pm ET)
             
          Reminds me of, I think it was Marty Allen (?), who would come out doing "dah-de-dah-dah" and do dumb magic tricks.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by dogbreath (March 03, 2010 6:46 pm ET)
      1  
      Yea, doctor my a$$. That's a new prop for the King of Flake.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dirtylittlereligion (March 03, 2010 8:35 pm ET)
        1  
        No, No...they are real doctors. They have to be on the set to monitor Psych Ward patient #040884 at all times.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (March 03, 2010 7:40 pm ET)
      2  
      One of life's lessons I learned at an early age was to ignore people who can only communicate with great histrionics while hyperventilating.

      Glenn...your gig's gotten old. Very old...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MagCynic (March 03, 2010 9:44 pm ET)
        4
      I think the White House is already distorting unemployment data. In fact, I know they are.
      It does not matter if the hours were worked by a person who was newly hired, a person whose job was saved by the Recovery Act, or a person who is in an existing position that is now being funded by the Recovery Act.
      Recovery.gov
      Report Abuse
      • Author by raddave43 (March 03, 2010 11:11 pm ET)
        1  
        That has nothing to do with unemloyment. It's talking about people who have jobs.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by MagCynic (March 04, 2010 12:24 am ET)
            2
          It factors into how they calculate that "jobs saved or created" statistic to show how well they think the stimulus is doing. By including jobs that would've existed with or without the stimulus, they are inflating their statistics.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by raddave43 (March 04, 2010 1:45 am ET)
            1  
            You cannot comprehend very well. First, all jobs that are paid for using recovery funds has to be reported. This method went into effect in January of this year and simplified the process of reporting those jobs paid for by recovery funds by breaking the reporting down to quarters of the year.

            Recipients of Recovery Act contracts, grants, and loans are required to report quarterly on the number of jobs paid for with Recovery funds. The method or formula for calculating jobs was simplified after the first round of recipient reporting


            Second, if you read the example given, a part time job is only counted as .5 of a job.

            This does not state anywhere that this is how the "jobs saved, jobs created" is figured. But, the intent of the stimilus bill was to pay for jobs that would have been eliminated and creating new jobs, it stands to reason that any job that is being paid using recovery funds was a job that was saved.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by raddave43 (March 04, 2010 1:58 am ET)
               
            And last but not least, it has nothing to do with unemployment figures that you claimed it did in your original post.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by MagCynic (March 04, 2010 8:23 am ET)
                2
              It's all employment data. If they include jobs that would have existed without the stimulus, how can they count those as a saved or created job? That job would've been there anyways. If they gave money to a company with 50 employees and those employees weren't in danger of losing their jobs, that's 50 jobs that were "saved or created" right there alone. And if they fudge that statistic what makes you think they won't fudge the general unemployment rate?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by raddave43 (March 04, 2010 11:29 am ET)
                   
                I think the White House is already distorting unemployment data. In fact, I know they are.


                You said UNEMPLOYMENT data, not employment data. It does not state that those numbers would be considered a job saved, but if a company is taking recovery funds and paying an employees salary from it, where before the company was paying for it, than it means that job was probably saved from being eliminated. They aren't fudging anything.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by MagCynic (March 04, 2010 1:17 pm ET)
                    1
                  It does not matter if the hours were worked by ... a person who is in an existing position that is now being funded by the Recovery Act.
                  How clearer can you get? An "existing position" is one that would not have been lost either way at that time. It therefore can neither be saved nor created. It's making the stimulus appear to do better than it actually is.
                  Report Abuse
    • Author by Quicksilver M.S (March 03, 2010 10:34 pm ET)
         
      Someone help me out here!

      Big Government is bad! If it is not in the Constitution it can not be legal or good for America!

      WHY? Why, is important that Washington/Obama is a jobs Creator?
      Creating jobs is nowhere in the Constitution!
      Why, is the Right demanding Washington to Create jobs...is that what the Private Sector is for?

      Someone help me out here!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MaineiacMan (March 04, 2010 8:30 am ET)
        1
      What will happen this summer? Will the White house be blaming unemployment increases on a heat wave? I'm no fan of Bush, but if his White House had tried to use snow storms as an excuse, you'd be jumping all over him.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (March 04, 2010 10:37 am ET)
           
        mybrotherskeeper posted: "Actually, it was the Federal Reserve's Beige Book that reported the snowfall connection to economic activity. Please see: http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-03-03-beige-book_N.htm"


        The White House didn't blame unemployment increases on the snowstorms, the Federal Reserve did.
        Report Abuse