When the numbers are obviously blatantly false, what are you supposed to believe?
Perhaps if you learned anything at all about how the numbers are calculated you'd actually understand it.
Compare the numbers as I have pointed out. Obama's stooges say that unemployment only increased by 345,000 in May.
No, not "Obama's stooges," but the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Neither the President nor any of his advisors have access to the numbers until the night before release...he has no clue what they will be until the report is finished.
The 345,000 loss is the seasonally adjusted figure from the non-farm payroll survey. This is a survey of approx 160,000 businesses (approx 400,000 worksites). It does not include agriculture, the self-employed, domestic workers, unpaid family workers. In April, the number of employed (excluding those mentioned) was 132,496,000 workers. In May it was 132,151,000: a total loss of 345,000. 345,000 more people left work than gained work.
The Department of Labor said that Unemployment increased 0.5% in May, or 700,000 (Twice what Obama said)
The Employment loss of 345,000 and the Unemployment figures come from the same report (but different surveys) by the same agency (BLS). And it did not increase by .5%, it increased by 5.7%...from 13,724,000 to 14,511,000. You can't even do simple math and you expect people to listen to you?
But in any case the Unemployment rate comes from the Household Survey..a survey of approx 60,000 households. It includes everyone 16 and over, not in prison, not in the military, not in a mental institute. That adult civilian population is currently 235,452,000. That's the population. Of those 235,452,000 people, in May approx 140,570,000 had worked (or were on vacation or sick) the previous week (down 437,000 from April), 14,511,000 had not worked, but were available to work and had looked for work in the previous week (up 787,000 from April). And 80,371,000 didn't look for work in the previous 4 weeks, most of them didn't want jobs (down 170,000).
I can hear you screaming that even those numbers don't add up. Re-read the definitions...they don't have to add up, they're not static. The 14,511,000 include people who never had a job and just started looking, people coming back into the workforce and don't have a job yet, people who hadn't looked the previous month but started looking again, etc. Plus, people who were not in the labor force in the previous month but got jobs are included in the employed level. The total Labor Force (the sum of employed and unemployed) went up by 350,000 people. That means in May 350,000 more people who in April weren't employed or looking for work either got a job or started looking for one (people leaving the military, prison, graduating from high school or college, turned 16 and started looking for work, spouses and/or children of someone who became unemployed trying to bring some income in, etc).
In April, there were 154,731,000 people in the Labor Force (Employed + Unemployed). In May there were 155,081,000. Some people left the Labor Force altogether and some people joined....350,000 more people joined than left. Some of those additional got jobs, some just started looking, and then too some people went from employed to unemployed and some went from unemployed to employed. It's entirely possible for both Employment and Unemployment to go up or both go down.
And yet the number of people who filed for Unemployment Benefits in May were over two million 500 thousand (2,500,000)!!! That is a hell of a lot of people who were employed for the past year and are not working now.
If they hadn't looked for work in the previous 4 weeks, they weren't counted as unemployed for the Household Survey. And the Household survey is calculated based on the levels of 1 week in the month...anyone who became unemployed after May 16th wouldn't show up as unemployed until the June figures (unless they either got a job or didn't look for work).
Add in that the unemployment insurance claims are the full admin numbers while the non farm payroll survey and the Household Survey are surveys. There is a range of error for each.
In short you've displayed zero understanding of what the numbers are actually saying, so how on earth can you think you're talking intelligently about them????
Oh, and BLS, who does all the Employment and Unemployment numbers, as well as the Consumer Price Index, the Employment Cost Index, Productivity indexes etc, has ONE and ONLY ONE position appointed by the President of the United States, and that's the position of Commissioner, currently held by Keith Hall, who was appointed last year by President BUSH. So how on earth is an agency which has a few people who started when Reagan was President and headed by a Bush appointee "Obama stooges????"
Weird.