April Jobs report looks dismal, March numbers to be revised????

[JRK]

FOX has a lot of nerve calling anyone a liar!!!

First of all, the government does count that rate, it's the U-4 rate currently at 8.7%.
And the number in Jan 2009 was 5.866 million and it is 6.041 million now. So in typical CON$ervoFascist fashion, 175 thousand got exaggerated into 600 thousand by the America-hating lying scum at FOX.

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

You got a link proving them to be a liar?
Not sure I follow your logic.
I willl have to re read the thread
But numbers have been changed all-most every month and the one that gets me is the available work force number plummeting

I fixed the link, simply select the "total" check box in the "Persons who currently want a job" category under "not in the labor force." Then click on "retrieve data"

Table A-16. Persons not in the labor force and multiple jobholders by sex, not seasonally adjusted

The link you provided was the right one, it tells the true story
72707
2003 74596 74421 74516 74615 74701 72897 73430 74540 75612 75252 75310 76007 74658
2004 76093 76203 76025 76497 76308 74718 74204 75511 76755 76214 76176 76763 75956
2005 77712 77392 77492 77167 76792 75584 75031 75952 76855 76655 76964 77550 76762
2006 78463 78077 77948 77990 77732 76114 75704 76702 77785 77278 77315 77537 77387
2007 78726 78955 78798 79423 79130 77460 77087 78717 79061 79200 78904 79451 78743
2008 79788 80306 79860 79990 79402 78045 77564 78719 79851 79601 80204 80686 79501
2009 81293 81109 81358 81437 81116 79734 79614 81190 82706 82915 83204 84231 81659
2010 83876 83804 83499 83418 83633 82923 82620 83421 84468 84878 85017 85733 83941
2011 86168 86216 85977 86248 85864 84951 84859 85528 86049 86181 86757 87212 86001
2012 88784 88322 88288

This is the numbers from the not in labor force
look at that jump from Nov 11 to Jan 2012
my god that 1,6 million people that are not in the available work force
Why is that? How can that be?

The next person that tells me zero hedge is a liar, well he is not

 

[JRK]

Growth is growth. If the assholes that you assholes put in office would make an honest attempt to do their jobs, we'd have stronger growth.

The trend is UP, bitch.

And I hope that Obama holds up the 119K and uses your words.

It would be a gift.

Oh please let it be so.

Look at theses numbers
how can you add 1.6 million people to the not in labor force number in 8 weeks?
and not add any to the available?

72707
2003 74596 74421 74516 74615 74701 72897 73430 74540 75612 75252 75310 76007 74658
2004 76093 76203 76025 76497 76308 74718 74204 75511 76755 76214 76176 76763 75956
2005 77712 77392 77492 77167 76792 75584 75031 75952 76855 76655 76964 77550 76762
2006 78463 78077 77948 77990 77732 76114 75704 76702 77785 77278 77315 77537 77387
2007 78726 78955 78798 79423 79130 77460 77087 78717 79061 79200 78904 79451 78743
2008 79788 80306 79860 79990 79402 78045 77564 78719 79851 79601 80204 80686 79501
2009 81293 81109 81358 81437 81116 79734 79614 81190 82706 82915 83204 84231 81659
2010 83876 83804 83499 83418 83633 82923 82620 83421 84468 84878 85017 85733 83941
2011 86168 86216 85977 86248 85864 84951 84859 85528 86049 86181 86757 87212 86001
2012 88784 88322 88288

 

[JRK]

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
link

 

[LoneLaugher]

Assholes are assholes.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Papa Obama's best unemployment numbers are still
from the day he took over from Bush

Yes comrades

chocolate ration went up to 25 grams per week

 

[JRK]

Papa Obama's best unemployment numbers are still
from the day he took over from Bush

Yes comrades

chocolate ration went up to 25 grams per week

and your point?
We had 40 years of 4-6 with probably 35 of 4-5%

I still do not understand how the not not in work force number can go from 87 million to close to 89 million in 8 weeks
2011 86168 86216 85977 86248 85864 84951 84859 85528 86049 86181 86757 87212 86001
2012 88784 88322 88288

 

[edthecynic]

You got a link proving them to be a liar?
Not sure I follow your logic.
I willl have to re read the thread
But numbers have been changed all-most every month and the one that gets me is the available work force number plummeting

I fixed the link, simply select the "total" check box in the "Persons who currently want a job" category under "not in the labor force." Then click on "retrieve data"

Table A-16. Persons not in the labor force and multiple jobholders by sex, not seasonally adjusted

The link you provided was the right one, it tells the true story
72707
2003 74596 74421 74516 74615 74701 72897 73430 74540 75612 75252 75310 76007 74658
2004 76093 76203 76025 76497 76308 74718 74204 75511 76755 76214 76176 76763 75956
2005 77712 77392 77492 77167 76792 75584 75031 75952 76855 76655 76964 77550 76762
2006 78463 78077 77948 77990 77732 76114 75704 76702 77785 77278 77315 77537 77387
2007 78726 78955 78798 79423 79130 77460 77087 78717 79061 79200 78904 79451 78743
2008 79788 80306 79860 79990 79402 78045 77564 78719 79851 79601 80204 80686 79501
2009 81293 81109 81358 81437 81116 79734 79614 81190 82706 82915 83204 84231 81659
2010 83876 83804 83499 83418 83633 82923 82620 83421 84468 84878 85017 85733 83941
2011 86168 86216 85977 86248 85864 84951 84859 85528 86049 86181 86757 87212 86001
2012 88784 88322 88288

This is the numbers from the not in labor force
look at that jump from Nov 11 to Jan 2012
my god that 1,6 million people that are not in the available work force
Why is that? How can that be?

The next person that tells me zero hedge is a liar, well he is not

Of course he's a liar, CON$ can only lie. Look how you've just moved the goal posts from people who want a job to all the people not in the labor force, like retirees, disabled, students, stay at home moms, etc.!!!!!!!!

I gave the numbers for the people out of the workforce who WANT a job, you gave nothing but typical CON$ervoFascist dishonesty.

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Series Id: LNU05026639
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Want a Job Now
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now

Download:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2002 4938 4491 4426 4554 5533 5128 4921 4811 4500 4192 4407 4227 4677
2003 4779 4495 4763 4373 5482 5085 4955 5030 4637 4561 4201 4355 4726
2004 4913 4622 4667 4598 5371 5000 4767 5145 4720 5065 4755 4607 4852
2005 5136 4844 4858 5022 5386 5645 5081 5017 4757 4796 4466 4808 4985
2006 5095 4800 4729 4648 5201 5126 5006 5131 4434 4661 4476 4121 4786
2007 4633 4635 4365 4729 5551 5288 4900 4965 4503 4131 4337 4398 4703
2008 4977 4689 4492 4677 5393 5374 5213 5024 4895 4800 5077 5180 4983
2009 5866 5588 5535 5868 6612 6454 6244 5728 5650 5621 5618 5939 5894
2010 6108 6086 5719 5865 6381 6461 6143 6083 5949 5867 5832 6212 6059
2011 6643 6405 6250 6482 6821 7124 6810 6493 5929 5969 6183 6135 6437
2012 6495 6376 6041

 

[JRK]

I fixed the link, simply select the "total" check box in the "Persons who currently want a job" category under "not in the labor force." Then click on "retrieve data"

Table A-16. Persons not in the labor force and multiple jobholders by sex, not seasonally adjusted

The link you provided was the right one, it tells the true story
72707
2003 74596 74421 74516 74615 74701 72897 73430 74540 75612 75252 75310 76007 74658
2004 76093 76203 76025 76497 76308 74718 74204 75511 76755 76214 76176 76763 75956
2005 77712 77392 77492 77167 76792 75584 75031 75952 76855 76655 76964 77550 76762
2006 78463 78077 77948 77990 77732 76114 75704 76702 77785 77278 77315 77537 77387
2007 78726 78955 78798 79423 79130 77460 77087 78717 79061 79200 78904 79451 78743
2008 79788 80306 79860 79990 79402 78045 77564 78719 79851 79601 80204 80686 79501
2009 81293 81109 81358 81437 81116 79734 79614 81190 82706 82915 83204 84231 81659
2010 83876 83804 83499 83418 83633 82923 82620 83421 84468 84878 85017 85733 83941
2011 86168 86216 85977 86248 85864 84951 84859 85528 86049 86181 86757 87212 86001
2012 88784 88322 88288

This is the numbers from the not in labor force
look at that jump from Nov 11 to Jan 2012
my god that 1,6 million people that are not in the available work force
Why is that? How can that be?

The next person that tells me zero hedge is a liar, well he is not

Of course he's a liar, CON$ can only lie. Look how you've just moved the goal posts from people who want a job to all the people not in the labor force, like retirees, disabled, students, stay at home moms, etc.!!!!!!!!

I gave the numbers for the people out of the workforce who WANT a job, you gave nothing but typical CON$ervoFascist dishonesty.

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Series Id: LNU05026639
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Want a Job Now
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now

Download:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2002 4938 4491 4426 4554 5533 5128 4921 4811 4500 4192 4407 4227 4677
2003 4779 4495 4763 4373 5482 5085 4955 5030 4637 4561 4201 4355 4726
2004 4913 4622 4667 4598 5371 5000 4767 5145 4720 5065 4755 4607 4852
2005 5136 4844 4858 5022 5386 5645 5081 5017 4757 4796 4466 4808 4985
2006 5095 4800 4729 4648 5201 5126 5006 5131 4434 4661 4476 4121 4786
2007 4633 4635 4365 4729 5551 5288 4900 4965 4503 4131 4337 4398 4703
2008 4977 4689 4492 4677 5393 5374 5213 5024 4895 4800 5077 5180 4983
2009 5866 5588 5535 5868 6612 6454 6244 5728 5650 5621 5618 5939 5894
2010 6108 6086 5719 5865 6381 6461 6143 6083 5949 5867 5832 6212 6059
2011 6643 6405 6250 6482 6821 7124 6810 6493 5929 5969 6183 6135 6437
2012 6495 6376 6041

are you fucking kidding me? I never get this fired up about anything but to have the not in work force number grow by 1.6 million in 8 weeks is what?
Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

2011 86168 86216 85977 86248 85864 84951 84859 85528 86049 86181 86757 87212 86001
2012 88784 88322 88288

 

[JRK]

My God people
we got people trying to convince us that the available work force number has nothing to do with the not in work force number
MY GOD THE NOT IN WORK FORCE NUMBER GREW 1.6 million in 8 weeks and the available work force number goes down

 

[edthecynic]

The link you provided was the right one, it tells the true story
72707
2003 74596 74421 74516 74615 74701 72897 73430 74540 75612 75252 75310 76007 74658
2004 76093 76203 76025 76497 76308 74718 74204 75511 76755 76214 76176 76763 75956
2005 77712 77392 77492 77167 76792 75584 75031 75952 76855 76655 76964 77550 76762
2006 78463 78077 77948 77990 77732 76114 75704 76702 77785 77278 77315 77537 77387
2007 78726 78955 78798 79423 79130 77460 77087 78717 79061 79200 78904 79451 78743
2008 79788 80306 79860 79990 79402 78045 77564 78719 79851 79601 80204 80686 79501
2009 81293 81109 81358 81437 81116 79734 79614 81190 82706 82915 83204 84231 81659
2010 83876 83804 83499 83418 83633 82923 82620 83421 84468 84878 85017 85733 83941
2011 86168 86216 85977 86248 85864 84951 84859 85528 86049 86181 86757 87212 86001
2012 88784 88322 88288

This is the numbers from the not in labor force
look at that jump from Nov 11 to Jan 2012
my god that 1,6 million people that are not in the available work force
Why is that? How can that be?

The next person that tells me zero hedge is a liar, well he is not

Of course he's a liar, CON$ can only lie. Look how you've just moved the goal posts from people who want a job to all the people not in the labor force, like retirees, disabled, students, stay at home moms, etc.!!!!!!!!

I gave the numbers for the people out of the workforce who WANT a job, you gave nothing but typical CON$ervoFascist dishonesty.

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Series Id: LNU05026639
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Want a Job Now
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now

Download:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2002 4938 4491 4426 4554 5533 5128 4921 4811 4500 4192 4407 4227 4677
2003 4779 4495 4763 4373 5482 5085 4955 5030 4637 4561 4201 4355 4726
2004 4913 4622 4667 4598 5371 5000 4767 5145 4720 5065 4755 4607 4852
2005 5136 4844 4858 5022 5386 5645 5081 5017 4757 4796 4466 4808 4985
2006 5095 4800 4729 4648 5201 5126 5006 5131 4434 4661 4476 4121 4786
2007 4633 4635 4365 4729 5551 5288 4900 4965 4503 4131 4337 4398 4703
2008 4977 4689 4492 4677 5393 5374 5213 5024 4895 4800 5077 5180 4983
2009 5866 5588 5535 5868 6612 6454 6244 5728 5650 5621 5618 5939 5894
2010 6108 6086 5719 5865 6381 6461 6143 6083 5949 5867 5832 6212 6059
2011 6643 6405 6250 6482 6821 7124 6810 6493 5929 5969 6183 6135 6437
2012 6495 6376 6041

are you fucking kidding me? I never get this fired up about anything but to have the not in work force number grow by 1.6 million in 8 weeks is what?
Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

2011 86168 86216 85977 86248 85864 84951 84859 85528 86049 86181 86757 87212 86001
2012 88784 88322 88288

They correct for population at the end of every year, as you dishonest CON$ know well.

Stop trying to deflect from FOX's obvious lie in the OP!!!!

 

[edthecynic]

My God people
we got people trying to convince us that the available work force number has nothing to do with the not in work force number
MY GOD THE NOT IN WORK FORCE NUMBER GREW 1.6 million in 8 weeks and the available work force number goes down

Yeah, each year you have a million Boomers retire of the over 3 million Boomers who reach retirement in each year. And you know that very well also, so stop deflecting from FOX's obvious lie in the OP!!!!!

So that means that about 100,000 leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retiring Boomers without creating a single NEW job!!!!!

 

[itfitzme]

However, the unemployment rate is the number of people out of work but who are actively looking. The government doesn’t count in that rate the now 6.3 million who have given up and stopped looking for work, but want jobs. That number has grown from 5.7 million in January 2009.
So, this "improvement" in the unemployment rate is artificial -- it was due to workers giving up and dropping out of the labor force.


Read more: Lies, Damned Lies and Government Jobs Data | Fox Business

I praise BHO visiting the troops no matter the politics
Job report according to ADP is no existent for April
News Headlines
If this continues BHO loses in a land slide. I have down 31-19 right now

Hey, duffus. Where do you suppose that FOX got all those other numbers from, like the 6.3 million in "The government doesn’t count in that rate the now 6.3 million who have given up and stopped looking for work, but want jobs."?

From the same agency that they are calling a liar. From the Bureau of Labor and Statistics Current Population Survey. The "proof" that the BLS is lying is by using the data from the BLS!!!

What, you think FOX did their own survey?

BLS CPS

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

14.5%

It's not a secret.

U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers

8.7%

 

[pinqy]

However, the unemployment rate is the number of people out of work but who are actively looking. The government doesn’t count in that rate the now 6.3 million who have given up and stopped looking for work, but want jobs.

You're mischaracterizing the Not in the Labor Force, want a job now number. It is NOT just people who have "given up."
And while Not in the Labor Force increased 1.6 million, Not in the Labor Force Want a Job Now only went up 360,000
Here's how it actually works:
In the survey people are asked if they worked in the previous week. If yes, they are employed.

If no, they are asked if they want to work, if they could have taken a job in the previous week if offered, and if they actively looked for work in the previous 4 weeks.

If yes to all three, they are Unemployed. If no to any of those three, they are Not in the Labor Force.

If they said they want a job, but either couldn't take one or didn't look, they are in the 6.3 million you mention. Note that this is hypothetical..."Do you want a job?" regardless of if they could actually work or ever looked or ever had a job. So certainly NOT all "given up."

If they want a job AND could have accepted work, AND looked in the last 12 months but not last 4 weeks, they are "Marginally Attached." That number was 2.35 million in March.

In other words, most of the people saying they "want a job now" either couldn't take a job if handed to them or hadn't looked in over a year, which makes their claim a little dubious.
But even this 2.35 million arent' people who have "given up," but rather "stopped." There's a difference. Common reasons for no longer looking are Family issues, illness, injury, transportation problems, school. None of those are "given up," but are non labor market reasons for no longer looking.

If the specific reason for no longer looking is Discouragement (the belief that they wouldn't find work) then those people are "Discouraged Workers" and that was 865,000

So of the 6 million not in the labor force who want a job now, only 14% "gave up."

So, this "improvement" in the unemployment rate is artificial -- it was due to workers giving up and dropping out of the labor force.

How is that artificial?

This is the numbers from the not in labor force
look at that jump from Nov 11 to Jan 2012
my god that 1,6 million people that are not in the available work force
Why is that? How can that be?

Because up until Dec 2011, the population figures used were based on the 2000 Census and adjusted each month based on estimates from the monthly household survey and adjusted again for the Jan figures based on Census recalculations. The Jan 2012 population data was based on the 2010 Census (and subsequent estimates) and the population was adjusted upwards by about 1.7 million. 1.5 million of that were for those Not in the Labor Force (over 65 and 16 to 24 age groups had been undercounted).

That's why the leap. But since that addition did not come from the Labor Force, it had no effect on the UE rate (despite zero hedge's claims). The Labor Force INCREASED from Dec to Jan.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This WH doesn't give a shit about these numbers.
By the time the Obama handlers get done with this
and the propaganda wing (MSNBC) get done they will
make these numbers look positive for the Pres...

Yep like you're saving money by not have to buy that evil gas and saving the world by not leaving a carbon foot print.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

My God people
we got people trying to convince us that the available work force number has nothing to do with the not in work force number
MY GOD THE NOT IN WORK FORCE NUMBER GREW 1.6 million in 8 weeks and the available work force number goes down

Yeah, each year you have a million Boomers retire of the over 3 million Boomers who reach retirement in each year. And you know that very well also, so stop deflecting from FOX's obvious lie in the OP!!!!!

So that means that about 100,000 leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retiring Boomers without creating a single NEW job!!!!!

Popular wisdom has been that, as they hit retirement age, baby boomers will leave the workforce in large numbers. Now a news report says that many baby boomers may defer retirement because of poor finances and too much debt. If true, that may be good news for clinical laboratories and pathology groups across the United States.

Read more: Why Many Baby Boomers May Not Likely Retire When They Hit 65 | Dark Daily Why Many Baby Boomers May Not Likely Retire When They Hit 65 | Dark Daily

 

[pinqy]

My God people
we got people trying to convince us that the available work force number has nothing to do with the not in work force number
MY GOD THE NOT IN WORK FORCE NUMBER GREW 1.6 million in 8 weeks and the available work force number goes down

First, there's no "available work force" number. I assume you just mean the Population (the adult civilian non institutional populaton)

Second, try this. List all the reasons someone would stop working and not look for a new job AND all the reasons someone who was looking for work would stop.

You're ignoring altogether that an increase in Not in the Labor Force can come from Employed, or Unemployed, or New entrants to the Population (someone turning 16 and not looking for work is a +1 to Not in the Labor Force).

 

[JRK]

By cutting education and refusing to invest in American infrastructure and supporting companies that move jobs to China, Republican vow to keep unemployment very, very high. It's part of their "economic policy". So right wingers should quit bitching about what your leaders are doing. If you don't like their policies, vote them out of office. You can't support their policies and then complain about those same policies. Makes you look unstable.

R dean except for the house the last 15 months the dems have had control of the legislation branch for the last 5+ years
Explain to us how they have influenced any-thing?

 

[JRK]

My God people
we got people trying to convince us that the available work force number has nothing to do with the not in work force number
MY GOD THE NOT IN WORK FORCE NUMBER GREW 1.6 million in 8 weeks and the available work force number goes down

First, there's no "available work force" number. I assume you just mean the Population (the adult civilian non institutional populaton)

Second, try this. List all the reasons someone would stop working and not look for a new job AND all the reasons someone who was looking for work would stop.

You're ignoring altogether that an increase in Not in the Labor Force can come from Employed, or Unemployed, or New entrants to the Population (someone turning 16 and not looking for work is a +1 to Not in the Labor Force).

Pingy you have no idea how the UE number works
There is a huge number of people who are no longer being counted in the available work force number, this is why UE has fell and job creation numbers went up

Its all smoke and mirrors right now. From Nov of 2011 thru Jan of 2012 the "not in work force" number grew close to 2 million people
Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

The UE rate is calculated by takin those "working" divided by those available, the difference from 100% is the UE rate. Those who are in the "Not in work force" are not counted

Do your DD on it, but there are many reasons as to why one would enter the "not in work force number" many are legitimate such as retiring, dis ability, etc...
The problem today is that number has exploded while the "in work force number" is falling, but not at the same pace

There is so many people who have fell off of the radar due to being UE for so long. Bottom line is this system is and has been corrupt for some time, but never like it os today

 

[edthecynic]

My God people
we got people trying to convince us that the available work force number has nothing to do with the not in work force number
MY GOD THE NOT IN WORK FORCE NUMBER GREW 1.6 million in 8 weeks and the available work force number goes down

Yeah, each year you have a million Boomers retire of the over 3 million Boomers who reach retirement in each year. And you know that very well also, so stop deflecting from FOX's obvious lie in the OP!!!!!

So that means that about 100,000 leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retiring Boomers without creating a single NEW job!!!!!

Popular wisdom has been that, as they hit retirement age, baby boomers will leave the workforce in large numbers. Now a news report says that many baby boomers may defer retirement because of poor finances and too much debt. If true, that may be good news for clinical laboratories and pathology groups across the United States.

Read more: Why Many Baby Boomers May Not Likely Retire When They Hit 65 | Dark Daily Why Many Baby Boomers May Not Likely Retire When They Hit 65 | Dark Daily

If you had read what I posted you would have seen that while over 3 million Boomers reach retirement age each year, only a million of them retire. Nowhere did I say that every Boomer that reaches retirement age retires immediately, that is just your Straw Man to distract from the fact that 100,000 Boomers a month actually do retire so 100,000 people leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retirees, without a single NEW job being created. So if 120,000 new jobs were created in a month, 220,000 workers move from the unemployed column to the employed column.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yeah, each year you have a million Boomers retire of the over 3 million Boomers who reach retirement in each year. And you know that very well also, so stop deflecting from FOX's obvious lie in the OP!!!!!

So that means that about 100,000 leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retiring Boomers without creating a single NEW job!!!!!

Popular wisdom has been that, as they hit retirement age, baby boomers will leave the workforce in large numbers. Now a news report says that many baby boomers may defer retirement because of poor finances and too much debt. If true, that may be good news for clinical laboratories and pathology groups across the United States.

Read more: Why Many Baby Boomers May Not Likely Retire When They Hit 65 | Dark Daily Why Many Baby Boomers May Not Likely Retire When They Hit 65 | Dark Daily

If you had read what I posted you would have seen that while over 3 million Boomers reach retirement age each year, only a million of them retire. Nowhere did I say that every Boomer that reaches retirement age retires immediately, that is just your Straw Man to distract from the fact that 100,000 Boomers a month actually do retire so 100,000 people leave the ranks of the unemployed every month to take the place of the retirees, without a single NEW job being created. So if 120,000 new jobs were created in a month, 220,000 workers move from the unemployed column to the employed column.

Blah blah blah numbers of baby boomers are retiring blah blah blah blah
that's what I read. I have asked you many times to post some information to support your claim that those baby boomers have chosen to retire at 65