Refuting the "Unemployment Conspiracy" Nonsense

[Sallow]

No one said they are lying... They are being dishonest. When the UE number goes down due to people falling off the ass end for months and months and months because of the way you count UE, that's a dishonest, it misrepresents the reality that we actually live under. People, the number who are UE’ed is more around 14-18% and going up.

Except that's not what has been happening.

People are finding jobs.

 

[percysunshine]

Obviously, businesses are anticipating a Romney win.

 

[mudwhistle]

No one said they are lying... They are being dishonest. When the UE number goes down due to people falling off the ass end for months and months and months because of the way you count UE, that's a dishonest, it misrepresents the reality that we actually live under. People, the number who are UE’ed is more around 14-18% and going up.

Except that's not what has been happening.

People are finding jobs.

In almost every case it's at a reduced income.

Seeing as how Obama and friends are helping raise the cost of living so much with their Quantitative Easing a job is only a temporary answer. The next problem is paying for the huge boost in energy costs this Winter or the cost of food going up astronomically.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Or, rather than a massive coverup by thousands of employees - which is what you're implying since the numbers are known by many people within the agency - highly biased partisans engage in confirmation bias and refuse to accept numbers which contradict their own beliefs and make things up regardless of the data, which they don't understand anyways.

I'll choose the latter.

Not true not every BLS personal is in the loop. They would only have information on their data they collected.

No, not everyone is in the loop. But the data is being complied and assessed by MAs and PhDs along the way, and if the input being compiled by highly intelligent professionals does not jive with the output, you'll hear about it soon enough.

So I'll believe the MAs and PhDs over extremely partisan people who don't understand the process and have a political axe to grind.

But the data is being complied and assessed by MAs and PhDs along the way

Toro do you realize how ignorant you sound right now? because someone has a MA or a PHD makes them honest and non agenda motivated?
obama has a degree doesn't he?

 

[uscitizen]

Republicans who know WTF they are talking about are in bold red.

A good conspiracy theory is irrefutable. A bad one usually collapses when confronted by reality.

The claim by some supporters of Republican challenger Mitt Romney that President Barack Obama’s Chicago-based campaign doctored September’s unemployment figures for political gain fall into the second category, according to members of both parties who have served in the government’s economic data system.

Jack Welch, the former chief executive officer of General Electric Co. (GE), touched off an Internet-based frenzy yesterday when he suggested on Twitter that Obama’s team lowered the country’s unemployment rate to 7.8 percent to give the president a boost. “Unbelievable jobs numbers. . . these Chicago guys will do anything. . . can’t debate so change numbers,” he wrote. ...

During a television interview last night, when CNBC host Larry Kudlow said it was unrealistic to allege the White House tampered with the data, Welch tempered his words. ...

Economists, including one who worked for McCain, dismissed the very suggestion that U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics would, or even could, manipulate the data.

The people who compile the numbers “are professionals” and “do this as a career,” said Doug Holtz-Eakin, economist for the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush and the policy director for McCain’s 2008 campaign. “I have a lot of respect for them.” ...

Each month, federal agencies, staffed by career civil servants, compile the raw data that eventually become two jobs- day numbers: the unemployment rate and the total number of jobs added to the economy.

It begins on the Sunday of the week that has the 19th in it, with 2,000 Census Bureau workers knocking on 60,000 doors, asking residents if they were employed, or if they were seeking employment, in the last week, said Nancy Potok, the bureau’s associate director, in an interview on July 30.

The bureau has 20 days to complete the survey and send it to the BLS, which then has two or three days to provide the numbers to the Council of Economic Advisers, said Gary Steinberg, a BLS spokesman, in an Aug. 1 interview. Before transmitting the numbers to the CEA, the Census Bureau weights the data to adjust for non-answers and unresponsive households.

At the same time, the BLS is conducting the so-called establishment survey, by sending and receiving questionnaires to 486,000 work sites. The main question that separate survey seeks to answer: how many jobs the work sites had on their payrolls on the 12th of the month.

On the Thursday afternoon before Labor Department’s Friday release of the numbers, the BLS transmits both data sets to the Council of Economic Advisers, over a secure system. It then becomes the CEA chairman’s responsibility to provide the president with the numbers. All the data is transmitted over secure systems and it is often walked to the West Wing by the CEA chairman, Austan Goolsbee, Obama’s previous CEA chairman said in a Sept. 5 interview. ...

“There’s no politics that goes into these numbers at all,” [Bernard Baumohl, chief global economist at Economic Outlook Group LLC] said. “The way the U.S. collects economic statistics is viewed around the world as the gold standard.”

“For sure, some conspiracy theorist will contend that the BLS is cooking the data for political reasons. Such theories are absolutely garbage,” said Ray Stone, managing director of Stone & McCarthy Research Associates in Princeton, New Jersey, in a note to clients. “The BLS never lets politics enter the data.” ...

“I don’t think they could manipulate it,” said [Keith] Hennessey, [Bush’s last director of the National Economic Council], who received the jobs reports on Thursday nights before their release when he was in government. “Too many people would have to be involved and they couldn’t coordinate that many people lying about the data.”

“It would be very difficult,” to manipulate numbers at the BLS, said Elaine Chao, U.S. Labor Secretary from 2001 to 2009.

Welch Conspiracy Theory on Jobs Data Not Tied to Reality - Bloomberg

And people thought Colin Powell was a republican. I really don't care what party a person says they belong too. If what they say doesn't add up too reality, what they say is total bullshit.

I am glad you are seeing reality about Romney at last.

 

[PredFan]

Look, there are a lot of people who work at the BLS. One person could not all all of those households. One person could not call all of those businesses. The people who collect the data do not have to be dishonest. It's the person responsible for reporting the data, for pulling it together and making the determination what the number is.

Obama's cabinet member. The secretary of Labor.

The OP is quite naive if he believes what he posted.

Or, rather than a massive coverup by thousands of employees - which is what you're implying since the numbers are known by many people within the agency - highly biased partisans engage in confirmation bias and refuse to accept numbers which contradict their own beliefs and make things up regardless of the data, which they don't understand anyways.

I'll choose the latter.

No, think about it. If I'm in charge of calling the businesses on 4 counties is the sate of Florida. All I have is that data. I don't know what the results were from the person who called the businesses in those counties, nor do I know the results of the person who call say, the residences of any of the other counties.

I does not have to be a massive coverup. It's quite simple.

 

[PredFan]

Look, there are a lot of people who work at the BLS. One person could not all all of those households. One person could not call all of those businesses. The people who collect the data do not have to be dishonest. It's the person responsible for reporting the data, for pulling it together and making the determination what the number is.

Obama's cabinet member. The secretary of Labor.

The OP is quite naive if he believes what he posted.

All you need is a funnel to manipulate the numbers
A 1000 BLS workers are split up into 4 or 5 different groups to gather the information, you put people in charge of those groups to collect the information, that is where the funnel comes int to play, less people you can start manipulating the numbers, Then those people report the information to even less people. I doubt everybody that collects the numbers are in the loop all the way to where the labor department receives those numbers.

Exactly.

 

[kiwiman127]

Well this little topic sure shows us who in the hell drinks the Kool-aid. As a matter of fact just about everyone whining about the unemployment numbers are the same folks who are constantly basing their entire lives on talking points. Ah,,the easily manipulated.

 

[PredFan]

And of course had he UE rate gone up, republicans would perceive BLS staff as being beyond reproach.

Nope.

It had been in our favor for most of obama's presidency, where was the discussion.

You fail.......again.

 

[Toro]

Not true not every BLS personal is in the loop. They would only have information on their data they collected.

No, not everyone is in the loop. But the data is being complied and assessed by MAs and PhDs along the way, and if the input being compiled by highly intelligent professionals does not jive with the output, you'll hear about it soon enough.

So I'll believe the MAs and PhDs over extremely partisan people who don't understand the process and have a political axe to grind.

But the data is being complied and assessed by MAs and PhDs along the way

Toro do you realize how ignorant you sound right now? because someone has a MA or a PHD makes them honest and non agenda motivated?
obama has a degree doesn't he?

Having worked and been around economists with MAs and PhDs, and having been around highly partisan people like yourself, the MAs and PhDs are much more knowledgeable and intellectually honest about their own profession. They might be more boring, but they are certainly more intellectually honest than extremely partisan people with a political axe to grind.

 

[PredFan]

Or, rather than a massive coverup by thousands of employees - which is what you're implying since the numbers are known by many people within the agency - highly biased partisans engage in confirmation bias and refuse to accept numbers which contradict their own beliefs and make things up regardless of the data, which they don't understand anyways.

I'll choose the latter.

Not true not every BLS personal is in the loop. They would only have information on their data they collected.

No, not everyone is in the loop. But the data is being complied and assessed by MAs and PhDs along the way, and if the input being compiled by highly intelligent professionals does not jive with the output, you'll hear about it soon enough.

So I'll believe the MAs and PhDs over extremely partisan people who don't understand the process and have a political axe to grind.

Not necessarily. It is you who doesn't seem to understand the process.

 

[PredFan]

No one said they are lying... They are being dishonest. When the UE number goes down due to people falling off the ass end for months and months and months because of the way you count UE, that's a dishonest, it misrepresents the reality that we actually live under. People, the number who are UE’ed is more around 14-18% and going up.

Except that's not what has been happening.

People are finding jobs.

Of course they are, but not in enough numbers to make the UE rate drop by 0.3%

 

[Toro]

Look, there are a lot of people who work at the BLS. One person could not all all of those households. One person could not call all of those businesses. The people who collect the data do not have to be dishonest. It's the person responsible for reporting the data, for pulling it together and making the determination what the number is.

Obama's cabinet member. The secretary of Labor.

The OP is quite naive if he believes what he posted.

Or, rather than a massive coverup by thousands of employees - which is what you're implying since the numbers are known by many people within the agency - highly biased partisans engage in confirmation bias and refuse to accept numbers which contradict their own beliefs and make things up regardless of the data, which they don't understand anyways.

I'll choose the latter.

No, think about it. If I'm in charge of calling the businesses on 4 counties is the sate of Florida. All I have is that data. I don't know what the results were from the person who called the businesses in those counties, nor do I know the results of the person who call say, the residences of any of the other counties.

I does not have to be a massive coverup. It's quite simple.

Or, highly partisan people with little knowledge will make stuff up to rationalize their beliefs. That is much more probable.

 

[PredFan]

Or, rather than a massive coverup by thousands of employees - which is what you're implying since the numbers are known by many people within the agency - highly biased partisans engage in confirmation bias and refuse to accept numbers which contradict their own beliefs and make things up regardless of the data, which they don't understand anyways.

I'll choose the latter.

No, think about it. If I'm in charge of calling the businesses on 4 counties is the sate of Florida. All I have is that data. I don't know what the results were from the person who called the businesses in those counties, nor do I know the results of the person who call say, the residences of any of the other counties.

I does not have to be a massive coverup. It's quite simple.

Or, highly partisan people with little knowledge will make stuff up to rationalize their beliefs. That is much more probable.

Or highly partisan people who will ignore logic and say any idiotic thing to avoid admitting they were wrong.

 

[Toro]

Not true not every BLS personal is in the loop. They would only have information on their data they collected.

No, not everyone is in the loop. But the data is being complied and assessed by MAs and PhDs along the way, and if the input being compiled by highly intelligent professionals does not jive with the output, you'll hear about it soon enough.

So I'll believe the MAs and PhDs over extremely partisan people who don't understand the process and have a political axe to grind.

Not necessarily. It is you who doesn't seem to understand the process.

I understand that you are extremely biased and don't know the difference between homoscedasticity and homosexuality.

 

[Toro]

No, think about it. If I'm in charge of calling the businesses on 4 counties is the sate of Florida. All I have is that data. I don't know what the results were from the person who called the businesses in those counties, nor do I know the results of the person who call say, the residences of any of the other counties.

I does not have to be a massive coverup. It's quite simple.

Or, highly partisan people with little knowledge will make stuff up to rationalize their beliefs. That is much more probable.

Or highly partisan people who will ignore logic and say any idiotic thing to avoid admitting they were wrong.

Yes, that's you. I'm voting for Romney. But that doesn't mean I'm suspending all my critical faculties and engaging in anti-intellectual tribalism by arguing about a subject I know little about.

 

[mudwhistle]

They counted part-time jobs as full-time.

They also don't consider the underemployed.

In almost every case where somebody found a job it's at a reduced income.

Seeing as how Obama and friends are helping raise the cost of living so much with their Quantitative Easing a job is only a temporary answer. The next problem is paying for the huge boost in energy costs this Winter or the cost of food going up astronomically.

 

[Wiseacre]

I remember back in 2009 when they were telling us about jobs created or saved, millions of 'em. Andd then we found out some companies reported 50 or 100 jobs when they only had 5, some companies didn't even exist and still got counted. So my trust in what the BLS or anyone else in gov't says is somewhat curbed.

Then there's the question of 873,000 jobs created in September. That ain't going down too well, you know. Just ain't believing it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, not everyone is in the loop. But the data is being complied and assessed by MAs and PhDs along the way, and if the input being compiled by highly intelligent professionals does not jive with the output, you'll hear about it soon enough.

So I'll believe the MAs and PhDs over extremely partisan people who don't understand the process and have a political axe to grind.

But the data is being complied and assessed by MAs and PhDs along the way

Toro do you realize how ignorant you sound right now? because someone has a MA or a PHD makes them honest and non agenda motivated?
obama has a degree doesn't he?

Having worked and been around economists with MAs and PhDs, and having been around highly partisan people like yourself, the MAs and PhDs are much more knowledgeable and intellectually honest about their own profession. They might be more boring, but they are certainly more intellectually honest than extremely partisan people with a political axe to grind.

I'm sorry just because someone has a piece of paper doesn't make them non agenda, or honest.
If what they say doesn't match reality It's all bull shit.

 

[oldfart]

No one said they are lying... They are being dishonest. When the UE number goes down due to people falling off the ass end for months and months and months because of the way you count UE, that's a dishonest, it misrepresents the reality that we actually live under. People, the number who are UE’ed is more around 14-18% and going up.

OK, you have started a different discusson. Most economists reply on two other figures in the report as less volatile and more valid. One is called U-6 (which held steady at 14.7%) in Table A-15 and is a broader measure which includes part-time workers who want full time jobs, discouraged workers, and marginally attached workers. The second is the ratio of emloyment to non-institutional civilian age 25--64 population. It's in Table A-1.

The report itself does not have statistics going back more than a year, but there is an easy link that allows you to generate historical series going back as far as the data collection allows (often the thirties). There is a huge amount of data there. I haven't found the unemployment rate for left-handed Spanish-speaking Eskimos yet, but I bet it's in there somewhere. Anybody can slice and dice the numbers to build models, test theories, or even use for polemics.

Which brings me to my point. The data is voluminous and easily avallable at U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Just because pundits run with the two headline numbers doesn't mean everyone has to stop there. Why nt take a few minutes, look at the report, see what's there, and figure out what is going on?