…is “implausible,” and a “statistical quirk.” From that right-wing rag, The Economist.
19 thoughts on “The Unemployment Drop”
Comments are closed.
…is “implausible,” and a “statistical quirk.” From that right-wing rag, The Economist.
Comments are closed.
New republican advertisement…
“People, the current administration is trying to manipulate you. This new October [Surprise] jobs report would be the largest one month increase in the household survey since 1983.
Largest increase since 1983.
Do you really believe that?
We need to fix this economy, not lie about it. Vote for the guy that can actually fix it. Vote Mitt Romney.”
Fade with picture of Obama laughing.
It’s not surprising considering this is after the greatest slump in the economy since the Oil Crisis or even the Great Depression. It could be that this crisis bottomed out like some people have been saying for a couple of months. There are worker strikes at Foxconn in China, salaries in China keep increasing, Lenovo (a Chinese company) is expanding their manufacturing in the US, transportation costs keep getting higher. These are indicators of a change in trends.
Waiting for Baghdad Jim to arrive with the Obamist party line of the week.
Does anyone seriously think that the BLS is distorting its data for political purposes? That’s a 9/11 truther level of nuttiness.
Why is the U6 still at 14.7% Jim? How does an increase of only 114,000 jobs in a job market the size of the US’s bring the unemployment rate from 8.1% to 7.8%?
Exactly the same way 114,000 jobs would drop the unemployment rate from 8.1% to 7.8% in a European country with a fifth our population.
Does anyone really believe that Kathleen Sebelius would really violate the Hatch Act, and campaign for the B-Ho on government time?
Oh, wait, she did just that, didn’t she?
I personally would be in jail if I made a positive remark about Romney in my workplace. My employers take the Hatch Act very, very seriously. At least when it’s applied in one direction…
The actual survey is not done by BLS because they don’t have the manpower. The Census Bureau does the actual survey. Robert Martin Groves, one of Obama’s lefty cronies, is his appointee that heads that organization.
Do I think the numbers are cooked? Probably not after some consideration. But we could both easily be wrong Jim. Fraud is rampant among these ‘ends justifies means’ people.
Actually, it would be very simple to skew the data. Simply count some part time jobs as full time.
Jim writes:
“Does anyone seriously think that the BLS is distorting its data for political purposes? That’s a 9/11 truther level of nuttiness.”
Same sort of nuttiness as the Justice Department not prosecuting voter intimidation…
ohh wait they didn’t…..
ok ok same sort of nuttiness as Sebelius breaking law in campaigning for Obama and not being called to task for that?
ohh wait…she wasn’t.
ok, ok I got it now, same way as Obama telling Lockmart to not lay off employees now and the government will pay the fines that the government levies on them for not laying off the people?
ohh….he did that….
ok this one for sure…not like Obama violating Federal Law and unilaterally ordering the work fare requirement waived?
Darn he did that too.
No, Jim the government would NEVER violate the proprieties….
Well, Jim when is the Department of Justice going to look into those many cases of accessory to murder arising from Fast and Furious. When big crimes are allowed to fester, lesser crimes become trivial to commit.
Jim gathers hay….
“Does anyone seriously think that the BLS is distorting its data for political purposes? ”
Nice straw man you have there. The article didn’t say that.
For the last 3 1/2 years there has been a consistent record of unemployment figures being revised up, unreported by the dinosaur media. The labor participation rate is down, unreported by the same suspects. Average income in down. How do you say the figures aren’t manipulated?
It’s all of a piece. You have the ATF being used to force gun store owners to violate the law in an effort to create headlines to be used to fight for more restrictive gun laws. You have high officials in the justice department working hand in hand with media matters in order to coordinate media attacks against administration critics. You have the CIA running cover for outright deception from the administration as to whether the assassination of our ambassador to Libya was an organized terrorist attack or not. You have the administration telling Lockheed Martin point blank to violate the law and delay telling its employees about layoffs until after the election.
If one didn’t know better they might suspect that our president was a figure dredged up out of some dirty, corrupt big-city political machine.
The link does not connect to the Economist magazine.
No, but it links to another site that does.
No, it links to *an* economist.
Oh, I see. Yes, I didn’t read it carefully (I took my cue from someone else who linked it).
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fact-check-most-new-jobs-are-full-time-ones-2012-10-05
Contrary to what most reports have been saying, this report says almost all of the 873,000 new jobs were full time! Many experts explained the discrepancy between the BLS household survey and the employer survey as due to the part-time numbers. But if in fact the household survey is also measuring full-time jobs, is close to 1 million new FULL-TIME jobs in one month really believable? Why is the household survey new jobs count 8 times higher than the employer survey if they both are measuring full-time jobs?
For statistical studies, when they most come under question is when they are INTERNALLY inconsistent.
At the rate the BLS is claiming our economy is now “booming” we can match the Romney claim of 12 million new jobs over 4 years in just one year!
I think you agree this number is not believable but that is indeed what the BLS data seems to be saying near the bottom of this table:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t09.htm