Cooking the unemployment numbers???

[beretta304]

Perhaps if it dropped .1 no one would have raised an eyebrow but to so be so brazen as to say it dropped .3 when the numbers don't bare that out makes is even more suspect. They can't even cheat in a "smart" fashion.

 

[Meister]

My god, you are an idiot. So you don't see why people who are career bureaucrats would be as biased towards the party of big government as political appointees? Dude, buy a clue...

The fudge is much larger. The real unemployment number has always been much larger than either party admits.

As I tell most talk radio partisans. The problem isn't with the party you don't trust - rather, it's with the party you do trust.

We know the Left expands government and fudges numbers because our news sources tell us every day.

What we never hear is how much Big Government Conservatism spends. And fudges. Reagan doubled Carter's deficits, spending, and size of Government. Same with Bush in relation to Clinton.

Reagan passed the largest amnesty bill in this country's history and the Bushies re-jiggered the unemployment calculation twice to add part-timers into the full employment numbers.

Be careful trusting government. Your problem isn't your justifiable fear over the Left, it's your deep trust of the Right. Be very careful with government son. Your inability to question your own party is killing us.

Couldn't this be said for the left, also? If so, why aren't they questioning their party? Or, is it just right thing?

 

[Vel]

If, by some chance these numbers wern't cooked, it still begs the question: How come it took Obama so f-ing long to get us back under 8%? His $800 billion pork-filled stimulus was suppose to get us here years ago (according to him). So technically, he's still a failure.

There is no way that the numbers aren't cooked given the data that's out there.

 

[mamooth]

Almost the entire GOP has turned into gibbering conspiracy clowns. It's not just a few of them. The whole party has hopped on a train to crazytown. It doesn't matter what the topic is. If they don't like the data, then it has to be a conspiracy against them.

The real explanation? That reality has a liberal bias. Perhaps reality is conspiring against them. That would explain the conservative hostility towards reality.

 

[Meister]

Almost the entire GOP has turned into gibbering conspiracy clowns. It's not just a few of them. The whole party has hopped on a train to crazytown. It doesn't matter what the topic is. If they don't like the data, then it has to be a conspiracy against them.

The real explanation? That reality has a liberal bias. Perhaps reality is conspiring against them. That would explain the conservative hostility towards reality.

It's called critical thinking, Mamooth. The numbers given just don't add up to the results given. That IS called reality

 

[NYcarbineer]

Almost the entire GOP has turned into gibbering conspiracy clowns. It's not just a few of them. The whole party has hopped on a train to crazytown. It doesn't matter what the topic is. If they don't like the data, then it has to be a conspiracy against them.

The real explanation? That reality has a liberal bias. Perhaps reality is conspiring against them. That would explain the conservative hostility towards reality.

Dying cultures often turn to various forms of mysticism and collective episodes of varying degrees of self-delusion.

Such is the current state of conservatism.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Almost the entire GOP has turned into gibbering conspiracy clowns. It's not just a few of them. The whole party has hopped on a train to crazytown. It doesn't matter what the topic is. If they don't like the data, then it has to be a conspiracy against them.

The real explanation? That reality has a liberal bias. Perhaps reality is conspiring against them. That would explain the conservative hostility towards reality.

It's called critical thinking, Mamooth. The numbers given just don't add up to the results given. That IS called reality

And how many times did we hear from the birthers that things just didn't 'add up'?

 

[blackhawk]

Just a thought about the new unemployment numbers no conspiracy theories or sinister plot theories just a question could they be the result of seasonal hiring for the holiday season?

 

[Toro]

The unemployment numbers come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The BLS is under the Department of Labor. The Department of Labor is run by the Secretary of Labor....an Obama Cabinet Appointee.

'nuff said right there.

No its not.

It's silly.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Morning Joe? He's the go-to authority? lol, Scarborough was pouty faced all morning like some poor kid who had his Snickers bar stolen out of his lunchbox.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So I guess the 3/10ths of a percent drop in the unemployment rate in October,

1992,

was the work of criminals in the Bush Sr. Labor Department?

Is that a reasonable speculation?

 

[ginscpy]

Obama can't debate but he can sure cook.

 

[Rozman]

Fact. 114,000 were created.

In order for a there to have been a drop from 8.1 to 7.8, over 800,000 jobs would have had to be created.

obama is depending on public stupidity.

I think that's how they did it.
I heard that this time around at least they counted around 800,000
part time employees...

1 ... I have to find out if true.
2 ... If they did is it the first time they did that....

If this is true then they cooked the books to help Obama out in this election.

 

[Meister]

Almost the entire GOP has turned into gibbering conspiracy clowns. It's not just a few of them. The whole party has hopped on a train to crazytown. It doesn't matter what the topic is. If they don't like the data, then it has to be a conspiracy against them.

The real explanation? That reality has a liberal bias. Perhaps reality is conspiring against them. That would explain the conservative hostility towards reality.

It's called critical thinking, Mamooth. The numbers given just don't add up to the results given. That IS called reality

And how many times did we hear from the birthers that things just didn't 'add up'?

I was never a birfer, so I hold as much credence with these numbers as I did with the birfer rhetoric.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Then tell us. You know it's not possible. The Obama administration is lying AND, they think people are so stupid that they will believe them. Tell us how those numbers add up, if you can.

It's easily possible because they revised July and August UPWARDS. More jobs created in those months than was previously estimated.

Is that so hard to understand?

Try this article. It might open your eyes.
*************************************************
Why Today’s BLS Jobs Numbers Make No Sense
By: Daniel Horowitz (Diary) | October 5th, 2012 at 11:45 AM

To begin with, we must recognize that we are coasting along near the bottom of the employment nadir – a steep trench that was created by the 2008-2009 recession. Unlike every other recession, including the one in the early 80s, this one was not followed by a steep climb out of the trench. We’re not even creating enough jobs per month to keep up with the population growth, much less recover the millions of jobs lost in the recession.

Yet, despite the fact that we’ve added less than 150k jobs during most months of the recovery, and less than 100k during many of them, the U3 rate has steadily declined. This all made sense because there was an unprecedented shrinkage of the labor force – a symptom of a permanently lethargic economy. Paradoxically, this led to a steady decline in the unemployment rate as the universe of the job market shrunk. It’s not that the BLS was purposely making Obama look better. You just needed to look beyond the U3 number to understand how the unemployment rate dropped.

This brings us to the September jobs report. According to the establishment survey, only 114k non-farm payroll jobs were added last month. That’s well below the 206k increase in the working-age population, according to the household survey. But once again, the U3 rate dropped, this time down to 7.8%. As always, I expected this to be the result of a dramatic shrinkage in labor force participation. Yet, shockingly enough, the labor force actually grew by 418K in September, even more than it shrunk the previous month.

So the labor force shrinks during a month of tepid job growth, and the U3 declines. Now the labor force grows during a month of tepid job growth, yet the U3 rate….still declines!

Why Today’s BLS Jobs Numbers Make No Sense | RedState

Your dopey article fails to take into account the upward revisions of July and August.

 

[courseofhistory]

So, I guess according to the republican meme they cooked the books when the numbers went up making Obama look bad since they use the exact same methodology and input, etc. each time with no variance. The analysists do their analyses in separate rooms, are not allowed to discuss their findings, information is locked in safes each night and all sorts of other safeguards but the books are cooked, eh? The people at the BLS are phd's and high level career economists with the utmost of integrity which is not possible to say for the republican party on most any issue, especially this one.

 

[Oddball]

I suppose the crew of Morning Schmoe on CCCPNBC are in on the VRWC too, huh?

 

[RoadVirus]

Almost the entire GOP has turned into gibbering conspiracy clowns. It's not just a few of them. The whole party has hopped on a train to crazytown. It doesn't matter what the topic is. If they don't like the data, then it has to be a conspiracy against them.

The real explanation? That reality has a liberal bias. Perhaps reality is conspiring against them. That would explain the conservative hostility towards reality.

Considering this administration's track record of lying, you can't blame us for becoming conspiracy theorists.

 

[Vel]

It's easily possible because they revised July and August UPWARDS. More jobs created in those months than was previously estimated.

Is that so hard to understand?

Try this article. It might open your eyes.
*************************************************
Why Today’s BLS Jobs Numbers Make No Sense
By: Daniel Horowitz (Diary) | October 5th, 2012 at 11:45 AM

To begin with, we must recognize that we are coasting along near the bottom of the employment nadir – a steep trench that was created by the 2008-2009 recession. Unlike every other recession, including the one in the early 80s, this one was not followed by a steep climb out of the trench. We’re not even creating enough jobs per month to keep up with the population growth, much less recover the millions of jobs lost in the recession.

Yet, despite the fact that we’ve added less than 150k jobs during most months of the recovery, and less than 100k during many of them, the U3 rate has steadily declined. This all made sense because there was an unprecedented shrinkage of the labor force – a symptom of a permanently lethargic economy. Paradoxically, this led to a steady decline in the unemployment rate as the universe of the job market shrunk. It’s not that the BLS was purposely making Obama look better. You just needed to look beyond the U3 number to understand how the unemployment rate dropped.

This brings us to the September jobs report. According to the establishment survey, only 114k non-farm payroll jobs were added last month. That’s well below the 206k increase in the working-age population, according to the household survey. But once again, the U3 rate dropped, this time down to 7.8%. As always, I expected this to be the result of a dramatic shrinkage in labor force participation. Yet, shockingly enough, the labor force actually grew by 418K in September, even more than it shrunk the previous month.

So the labor force shrinks during a month of tepid job growth, and the U3 declines. Now the labor force grows during a month of tepid job growth, yet the U3 rate….still declines!

Why Today’s BLS Jobs Numbers Make No Sense | RedState

Your dopey article fails to take into account the upward revisions of July and August.

Those upward revisions only amounted to 86,000 jobs. And even that revision is suspect because the increases are supposedly in government jobs. This is not that difficult. The numbers do not add up. Please tell us how there is such a disparity between the Establishment survey numbers and the household survey numbers. More from the article
********************************************************
So the labor force shrinks during a month of tepid job growth, and the U3 declines. Now the labor force grows during a month of tepid job growth, yet the U3 rate….still declines!

The culprit? Under the “employed” data point of the household survey, you will find that there was an increase of 873k among the ranks of the employed population! That’s the largest gain since the Reagan years when the economy was growing by 9.3%. ( current growth 1.5 ) We know that the household survey is a different measure of employment with a different methodology than the establishment survey (it’s a smaller survey), but when did we ever have such a divergence between the two surveys?

 

[Chris]

Why are Republicans so paranoid?

The good jobs numbers right before the election must be a Liberal conspiracy. Obama's lead in the polls must be a Liberal conspiracy. Michelle Bachmann and Republican Congressmen think there's a conspiracy between the Muslim Brotherhood and the administration. Rep. Alan West thinks there's a Communist conspiracy with Democrats in Congress.

Geez, take your meds and calm down.