I predict unemployment will drop in the next BLS report

[bigrebnc1775]

Listen, dummy. You have made a claim that the BLS is doctoring the numbers in an effort to assist President Obama's re-election bid.

This is, I believe, an idea that you have culled, still wet and steaming, from your ass.

You certainly know by now that you are not one of the brightest folks posting on this site. You have been put in your place at least a dozen times since I have been here. Yet...you return....day after day.....and act like you were never shown how dumb you are. You are like a puppy on a slick kitchen floor......never getting your footing but never figuring it out.

Will you take a step forward today? Will you make an attempt to prove your allegations?

Look stupid I am not going to hold your hand with and guide you through those simple questions you ask. You think I am not the brightest poster here but you asked a stupid question. How does that make you feel dummy?

You fail. Again.

Dummy you asked a stupid question now you're trolling

 

[edthecynic]

Have you ever thought Gallop might do daily polls you stupid son of a bitch?

Ans BLS does NOT do daily polls, so only the most dishonest of deceivers would compare a Gallup February daily poll to a BLS January monthly poll to make the case that the BLS numbers are manipulated!!!

Comparing the SAME month's data, Gallup's numbers are LOWER than the BLS numbers!!! So apparently GOP CON$ervative Christian Gallup is manipulating the numbers more than BLS to cover for Obama!

Gallup unadjusted Jan 2012 rate 8.6%

U.S. Unemployment Up, to 8.6% in January

BLS unadjusted Jan 2012 rate 8.8%

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

The CBO said the numbers were shit.

Now what?

CON$ say the CBO is shit.

Now What?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Look stupid I am not going to hold your hand with and guide you through those simple questions you ask. You think I am not the brightest poster here but you asked a stupid question. How does that make you feel dummy?

You fail. Again.

Dummy you asked a stupid question now you're trolling

I'll bite. Maybe I missed it. What stupid question did I ask?

 

[pinqy]

The CBO said the numbers were shit.

Now what?

No, they didn't. They said the UE rate by itself, doesn't give the full picture, and especially with this recession and crappy recovery, there are other aspects to look at.

All of which is true, but is NOT the same as saying the numbers are rigged or inaccurate, etc

They said add 1.6% to the number.

Meaning the numbers were shit....................

If you wish semantics I can play,..

No, they didn't. They pointed out that the labor force participation is lower than they believe can be explained by baby boomer retirement or the business cycle and that their estimate of what the rate would be if more people were trying to work would be 10 something %

Note the conditionals. They never said the numbers were wrong, just not the full picture, which no one denies.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You fail. Again.

Dummy you asked a stupid question now you're trolling

I'll bite. Maybe I missed it. What stupid question did I ask?

As I said you're trolling. Truth don't matter can ask some really dumb questions but your question topped the most stupidest question she could ever dream to ask.


You want me to give proof that the government( obama's labor department and census bureau) control's the collection and release of the numbers. Really dumb ass who does collect and release the BLS numbers?

 

[edthecynic]

Dummy you asked a stupid question now you're trolling

I'll bite. Maybe I missed it. What stupid question did I ask?

As I said you're trolling. Truth don't matter can ask some really dumb questions but your question topped the most stupidest question she could ever dream to ask.


You want me to give proof that the government( obama's labor department and census bureau) control's the collection and release of the numbers. Really dumb ass who does collect and release the BLS numbers?

No, you need to prove the government MANIPULATES the BLS numbers to favor Obama, and Gallup's numbers to favor Obama even more.

 

[editec]

The BIG LIE technique in action right here on this very board, folks.

ADvance the lie, and never ever stop advancing it no matter how many times that lie is shown for what it is.

Its a technique the NAZIs have been using since the early 30s.

And they're using it right here on this very board.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I'll bite. Maybe I missed it. What stupid question did I ask?

As I said you're trolling. Truth don't matter can ask some really dumb questions but your question topped the most stupidest question she could ever dream to ask.


You want me to give proof that the government( obama's labor department and census bureau) control's the collection and release of the numbers. Really dumb ass who does collect and release the BLS numbers?

No, you need to prove the government MANIPULATES the BLS numbers to favor Obama, and Gallup's numbers to favor Obama even more.

Well, when dealing with someone who, intentionally, writes something like "your question topped the most stupidest question she could ever dream to ask", it is probably too much to ask that they actually understand the question.

Thanks for having the patience to explain the question to him, ed. Have you been trained in working with barely functioning adults?

 

[Mac1958]

.

Ya gotta admit, pretty funny when the two ends can't even agree on empirical evidence.

One can only laugh at this point.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

.

Ya gotta admit, pretty funny when the two ends can't even agree on empirical evidence.

One can only laugh at this point.

.

Funny? Not so much. Worthy of a kind of laughter.....sure.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Ya gotta admit, pretty funny when the two ends can't even agree on empirical evidence.

One can only laugh at this point.

.

Funny? Not so much. Worthy of a kind of laughter.....sure.

Yup, fair point. When it comes to what passes for contemporary political "discourse", I fully admit - after watching and listening to this stuff for many years, I've pretty much been reduced to being the guy sitting on the floor, looking at his shoes, giggling to himself. I don't know what or whom to take seriously, what's real, what isn't. So, I try to laugh.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

When the mere act of asking a question assumes greater weight in a discussion than the act of establishing fact, the discussion will, without exception, die.

 

[JoeB131]

What horrifies me is that you guys who support Barry all think that 8.3% unemployment is wonderful.

Never got that high the whole time Bush was president.

The key thing about this figure is that it's an artificial one. It's the percentage of people who are looking for jobs who can't find them.

Not the percentage of people who aren't actually working who could.

 

[LoneLaugher]

What horrifies me is that you guys who support Barry all think that 8.3% unemployment is wonderful.

Never got that high the whole time Bush was president.

The key thing about this figure is that it's an artificial one. It's the percentage of people who are looking for jobs who can't find them.

Not the percentage of people who aren't actually working who could.

Like the bogeyman......what horrifies you is a figment of your imagination.

Nobody....save nutter partisan hacks seeking Obama's ouster....is happy about an unemployment number anywhere near this high.

The idea that this is an artificial number is not relevant. The same formula is used as has always been used. It provides a reference point. The unemployment rate HAS GONE DOWN over the last few months. Period.

 

[JoeB131]

Like the bogeyman......what horrifies you is a figment of your imagination.

Nobody....save nutter partisan hacks seeking Obama's ouster....is happy about an unemployment number anywhere near this high.

The idea that this is an artificial number is not relevant. The same formula is used as has always been used. It provides a reference point. The unemployment rate HAS GONE DOWN over the last few months. Period.

BUt the problem is, the measure is NOT an objective reference point, is it?

Right now, the Unemployment rate is 8.3% The same it was in February 2009, Obama's first full month. It's never been lower in his whole presidency.

But in Feb 2009, the full effect of layoffs and downsizing hadn't hit yet, and there were people who were at the beginning of their unemployment benefits who hadn't given up hope yet.

By now, it is just as much about people giving up as finding jobs. That's what people should be DAMNED mad at Obama about.

But you are willing to have a party about 8.3% because it might just fool enough people into voting him in for a second term.

The GOP hasn't helped matters much by putting up awful candidates to oppose him, to be fair.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Like the bogeyman......what horrifies you is a figment of your imagination.

Nobody....save nutter partisan hacks seeking Obama's ouster....is happy about an unemployment number anywhere near this high.

The idea that this is an artificial number is not relevant. The same formula is used as has always been used. It provides a reference point. The unemployment rate HAS GONE DOWN over the last few months. Period.

BUt the problem is, the measure is NOT an objective reference point, is it?

Right now, the Unemployment rate is 8.3% The same it was in February 2009, Obama's first full month. It's never been lower in his whole presidency.

But in Feb 2009, the full effect of layoffs and downsizing hadn't hit yet, and there were people who were at the beginning of their unemployment benefits who hadn't given up hope yet.

By now, it is just as much about people giving up as finding jobs. That's what people should be DAMNED mad at Obama about.

But you are willing to have a party about 8.3% because it might just fool enough people into voting him in for a second term.

The GOP hasn't helped matters much by putting up awful candidates to oppose him, to be fair.

Please do me a favor. Select a period of time over the last 30 years that you consider to have been an economic boom period in this country. Then, check and see how many people were leaving the job market during that period of time. Then, consider the importance of this number when it comes to understanding the current economy and the unemployment number.

 

[pinqy]

The key thing about this figure is that it's an artificial one. It's the percentage of people who are looking for jobs who can't find them.

How is that artificial? And isn't that what we want to measure: how difficult it is to actually get a job?

Not the percentage of people who aren't actually working who could.

Why is that a good measure? How do you define it? If someone doesn't want to work, or isn't willing to work, what does it matter that they theoretically could? That doesn't tell us a thing about the labor market.

Now, the data is available for people who say they want to work and those who have a good chance of starting to look again, but that's not and should not be the main focus of the UE rate. It's good additional data to look at to get a full picture, but it shouldn't be the official numbers...it's too subjective.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I'll bite. Maybe I missed it. What stupid question did I ask?

As I said you're trolling. Truth don't matter can ask some really dumb questions but your question topped the most stupidest question she could ever dream to ask.


You want me to give proof that the government( obama's labor department and census bureau) control's the collection and release of the numbers. Really dumb ass who does collect and release the BLS numbers?

No, you need to prove the government MANIPULATES the BLS numbers to favor Obama, and Gallup's numbers to favor Obama even more.

Unemployment statistics shamelessly munipulated
Unemployment statistics shamelessly munipulated - San Francisco Bay Area Moderate Conservative | Examiner.com

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Unemployment is 9.04%
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Unemployment is 9.04% | NCRenegade

Obama Administration Pulls Unemployment Numbers out of their Collective Asses « The Liberal Lie In Color

The Unemployment Lie – Election Year Manipulation | Steve Bussey

The writing's on the wall! The massive decline of new entrants to the civilian labor force, which is shown graphically in the chart above, directly impacts the unemployment rate, making the employment situation appear far better than it actually is. If the 9.3 million workers who have effectively dropped out of the labor force, since the end of 2008, were instead of being excluded, counted as unemployed, the real unemployment rate would be 13.5% instead of yesterday’s published rate of 8.3%. Even if only half of those who have been incontestably and wrongfully removed from the labor force were counted, the unemployment rate would be 10.9%, not 8.3%. Never before in history has there been a more blatant manipulation of official labor statistics.

Those focusing all their attention on the number of jobs created in recent months are focusing on the wrong data. Lest we forget, the Bureau of Labor Statistics includes in its definition of the word employed – “persons 16 years and over in the civilian non-institutional population who, during the reference week, did any work at all (at least 1 hour) as paid employees.” So for all we know, a huge portion of those 200K and some odd jobs, allegedly created last month, were people hired for one hour, paid with taxpayer subsidized grants or loans, and working to register democratic voters in an effort to guarantee another round of Obamanomics. You laugh!

Manipulation 201: Playing With Unemployment

Along with many others, I am pondering the latest employment numbers. Strong opinions are the norm.

Many are steadfast in their interpretations, some critically so, especially Bondad who blasted Zero Hedge in a scathing attack "No Rick Santelli and Zero Hedge, One Million People Did Not Drop Out of the Labor Force Last Month."

Does Bondad Have a Point?

The short answer is yes. I wonder if I escaped attack because of a statement in my post Nonfarm Payroll +243,000 ; Unemployment Rate 8.3%; Those Not in Labor Force Rose an Amazing 1,177,000 as follows:

Some of those labor force numbers are due to annual revisions. However, the point remains: People are dropping out of the labor force at an astounding, almost unbelievable rate, holding the unemployment rate artificially low.
Pondering the Latest Employment Numbers

Last week, the White House claimed that unemployment dropped for the fifth consecutive month to 8.3 percent — the lowest it has been in nearly three years — after adding 243,000 jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But financial experts are saying the figures may have been manipulated — and that the significant drop in employment was because of the fact that the federal agency charged with computing key economic data has significantly decreased the number of Americans in the workforce.

Unemployment Tricks: Jobs Claim Made by 'Shrinking' Workforce

However, those who quit looking for work aren't counted as part of the total labor force, which also isn't accurately reflecting population growth, which basically allowed the government to yank 1.2 million out of the labor force in January.

Labor Market Contracts by 1.2 Million People, Zero Hedge Reports

I keep repeating that the BLS refuses to use the data embedded in income tax collections to be able to report real time jobs and wages. Why does it refuse? Could the reason it refuses to use real time data on jobs and incomes be because perhaps this jobs number is politically motivated? The entire world is looking at US job creation as a proxy on how well Obama is doing? Could the Obama administration be pressuring its economist employees to create the best possible new jobs number?
Biderman’s Daily Edge 2/3/2012: Is BLS Data Skewed? - TrimTabs Money Blog | TrimTabs Money Blog

I am not the only one who thinks it.

 

[pinqy]

As I said you're trolling. Truth don't matter can ask some really dumb questions but your question topped the most stupidest question she could ever dream to ask.


You want me to give proof that the government( obama's labor department and census bureau) control's the collection and release of the numbers. Really dumb ass who does collect and release the BLS numbers?

No, you need to prove the government MANIPULATES the BLS numbers to favor Obama, and Gallup's numbers to favor Obama even more.

However, those who quit looking for work aren't counted as part of the total labor force, which also isn't accurately reflecting population growth, which basically allowed the government to yank 1.2 million out of the labor force in January.

Labor Market Contracts by 1.2 Million People, Zero Hedge Reports

I keep repeating that the BLS refuses to use the data embedded in income tax collections to be able to report real time jobs and wages. Why does it refuse? Could the reason it refuses to use real time data on jobs and incomes be because perhaps this jobs number is politically motivated? The entire world is looking at US job creation as a proxy on how well Obama is doing? Could the Obama administration be pressuring its economist employees to create the best possible new jobs number?
Biderman’s Daily Edge 2/3/2012: Is BLS Data Skewed? - TrimTabs Money Blog | TrimTabs Money Blog

I am not the only one who thinks it.

A lot of people believe in alien abduction as well. Note that none of the criticisms show actual manipulation, but boil down to either misinterpretation of the data (assuming that an increase in Not in the Labor Force means decrease in the labor force) or insistance that other defitnitions would be better. No one has shown any actual manipulation...using the same definitions for decades is hardly manipulation.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, you need to prove the government MANIPULATES the BLS numbers to favor Obama, and Gallup's numbers to favor Obama even more.

I keep repeating that the BLS refuses to use the data embedded in income tax collections to be able to report real time jobs and wages. Why does it refuse? Could the reason it refuses to use real time data on jobs and incomes be because perhaps this jobs number is politically motivated? The entire world is looking at US job creation as a proxy on how well Obama is doing? Could the Obama administration be pressuring its economist employees to create the best possible new jobs number?
Biderman’s Daily Edge 2/3/2012: Is BLS Data Skewed? - TrimTabs Money Blog | TrimTabs Money Blog

I am not the only one who thinks it.

A lot of people believe in alien abduction as well. Note that none of the criticisms show actual manipulation, but boil down to either misinterpretation of the data (assuming that an increase in Not in the Labor Force means decrease in the labor force) or insistance that other defitnitions would be better. No one has shown any actual manipulation...using the same definitions for decades is hardly manipulation.

Economist you dumb shit that's who's saying the samething I am saying.