Nah, The Bureau of Labor Statistics wouldn't fudge unemployment numbers would they

[Dissent]

Nah, The Bureau of Labor Standards Wouldn’t Fudge Unemployment Numbers Right Before a Presidential Election, Would They? by Bill Sardi

Good article.

 

[tyroneweaver]

gdp goes down .2 of a point and 800,000 jobs suddenly appear.

and then this new type of figuring jobs created in the home. where did that come from. All of a sudden it appears a month before the election.

 

[Dissent]

Some amazing stuff eh...

 

[kaz]

gdp goes down .2 of a point and 800,000 jobs suddenly appear

Worse then that, they said 873K found jobs, but only 114K jobs appeared. Sounds like "liberal math" to me...

 

[GuyPinestra]

It's MAGICK!!​

 

[AceRothstein]

If Republicans scrutinized the evidence in the run up to the Iraq invasion like they are with these jobs numbers maybe we wouldn't have gotten involved in that boondoggle.

 

[Dissent]

Nah. They were going to war with Iraq no matter what.1. Israel felt its existence was at risk 2. Bush's cronies wanted the oil.

 

[kaz]

If Republicans scrutinized the evidence in the run up to the Iraq invasion like they are with these jobs numbers maybe we wouldn't have gotten involved in that boondoggle.

Good point. Ditto the Democrats who were in the White House for 8 of 9 years leading up to the buildup, ran the Senate most of that time and were still all over the Senate Intelligence committee.

I always thought their claims the rookie W duped them in his first at bat to be hilarious. I mean what kind of a defense it is where if we believe you we think you're dumber then if we don't?

 

[WillowTree]

If Republicans scrutinized the evidence in the run up to the Iraq invasion like they are with these jobs numbers maybe we wouldn't have gotten involved in that boondoggle.

what about the democrats who voted for it? huh dude?

 

[tyroneweaver]

gdp goes down .2 of a point and 800,000 jobs suddenly appear

Worse then that, they said 873K found jobs, but only 114K jobs appeared. Sounds like "liberal math" to me...

then they should have said a million jobs were created Simple arithmetic

but that would be a lie cause we know that 1 million jobs weren't created

 

[Rozman]

We need to keep pressing the point that something strange happened here with these numbers and not
accept this crap...

 

[Vel]

We need to keep pressing the point that something strange happened here with these numbers and not
accept this crap...

The numbers will be "revised" in November. The accounting error will be "found". Count on it.

 

[g5000]

Nah, The Bureau of Labor Standards Wouldn’t Fudge Unemployment Numbers Right Before a Presidential Election, Would They? by Bill Sardi

Good article.

So, without a shred of evidence, the author is forced to resort to the "I wouldn't put it past 'em!" argument.

That's some world class journalism right there. Yeah skippy!



.

 

[Annie]

I'm unsure of the stats, but do know that I don't go to racists sites, like lewrockwell to get the facts.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Nah, The Bureau of Labor Statistics wouldn't fudge unemployment numbers would they

Nahhhhhhhhhhh.....that's why The DICK; Armey helped legitimize the Teabaggers/conspiracy-theorists.​

October 7, 2012

Teabaggers Crushed

"If anyone had doubts about the madness that has spread through a large part of the American political spectrum, the reaction to Friday’s better-than expected report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics should have settled the issue. For the immediate response of many on the right — and we’re not just talking fringe figures — was to cry conspiracy."

 

[Dissent]

I'm unsure of the stats, but do know that I don't go to racists sites, like lewrockwell to get the facts.

You are a fucking moron.

 

[Some Guy]

It's basically an opinion piece. The central theme is that no one outside of the conservative base is questioning it. Add 114k jobs yet the number reflects a 800+k job gain. At best, it questions the credibility and loyalty of the BLS.

 

[Inthemiddle]

I recently read an article about the massive protective measures that the BLS uses to protect the integrity of its reports. It's pretty thorough and makes is pretty much impossible to forge. Everything is highly compartmentalized, with multiple people working independently on the same portions of data for accuracy control, behind locked and guarded doors. All data is kept locked in a safes, themselves secured in locked and guarded rooms when not being worked on. And when everyone's done, it's compiled en committee, all at once. In short, fabricating the numbers would require such a massive conspiracy it would be worthy only of tin foil hat wearers like Dissent.

 

[g5000]

People who think the BLS fudged the numbers have no idea how the BLS works. To fudge the numbers would require a massive conspiracy across several departments by people who have worked there across several administrations.

If you dive into the U6 data, it turns out that the rise in employment for September was almost entirely due to part time jobs, which makes a lot of sense. The kids are going back to school, so mom goes out and gets a part time job.

The fact that the drop in unemployment was due to part time hiring is not a sign of a robust economy.

.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nah, The Bureau of Labor Standards Wouldn’t Fudge Unemployment Numbers Right Before a Presidential Election, Would They? by Bill Sardi

Good article.

"The Bureau of Labor Statistics wouldn't fudge unemployment numbers"

....not any more than the administration would cover up the cause of the attack on the Libyan consul.....