Because they're not. The methodology has not changed. If you have evidence of manipulation, please present it. But there is none. The Obama administration has made no changes that would effect the UE rate or levels etc. More data has been added, and collection of duration of unemployment has improved, but the methodology hasn't changed.Ummm, there has been only one definitional change for Labor Force between Reagan and Obama: Under Reagan, people who had been hired but had not yet started work were considered Unemployed regardless of whether or not they had looked for work in the previous 4 weeks. Since 1994, that exception was dropped and even if someone had been hired (but not yet employed), they were still required to have looked for work in the previous 4 weeks to be considered Unemployed. This change did not have a significant effect on the Unemployment numbers.
No one in the Labor Force has been "ignored."
I know it's difficult for you to admit that numbers are being manipulated under this administration.
The administration doesn't even have access to the data until the night before release, when the report has already been written.
I have. I've looked at the unbiased sources, and there is no manipulation. Stop reading bloggers who have never studied labor statistics and read the actual methodolgy yourself.But please TRY to look at unbiased sources, that don't support your preconceived conclusion, for some honest information.
With all due respect, Pinqy...you don't invent a new statistic "jobs saved" unless the existing statistics were god awful which is exactly what this Administration did. If that's not an attempt to manipulate numbers, I don't know what is.