October 05, 2012

Unemployment Rate Plummets to 4.3%... For Government Workers
— Ace

Yes, that sounds about right.

The best news anywhere in the U.S. economy over the past three months has been in the government sector, where unemployment has dropped dramatically from 5.7 percent in July to 5.1 percent in August to 4.3 percent in September, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Both the federal and state governments increased their employees in July, August and September.

Romney, meanwhile, has issued a statement on the still-awful unemployment (at a level which no incumbent president has been reelected with):

“This is not what a real recovery looks like. We created fewer jobs in September than in August, and fewer jobs in August than in July, and we’ve lost over 600,000 manufacturing jobs since President Obama took office. If not for all the people who have simply dropped out of the labor force, the real unemployment rate would be closer to 11%. The results of President Obama's failed policies are staggering – 23 million Americans struggling for work, nearly one in six living in poverty and 47 million people dependent on food stamps to feed themselves and their families. The choice in this election is clear. Under President Obama, we’ll get another four years like the last four years. If I’m elected, we will have a real recovery with pro-growth policies that will create 12 million new jobs and rising incomes for everyone.”

Hmmm... Has the Labor Department changed its methodology without telling anyone?

The Real Jobs Report. As Pethokoukis explains, it's still awful.

Among his points:

3. The broader U-6 rate — which takes into account part-time workers who want full-time work and lots of discouraged workers who’ve given up looking — stayed unchanged at 14.7%. That’s a better gauge of the true unemployment rate and state of the American labor market.

4. The shrunken workforce remains shrunken. If the labor force participation rate was the same as when President Obama took office, the unemployment rate would be 10.7%. If the participation rate had just stayed steady since the start of the year, the unemployment rate would be 8.4% vs. 8.3%. WhereÂ’s the progress? Here is RDQ Economics:


Such a rapid decline in the unemployment rate would be consistent with 4%–5% real economic growth historically but much of the decline is accounted for by people dropping out of the labor force (over the last year the employment-population ratio has risen to only 58.7% from 58.4%). We believe part of the drop in the unemployment rate over the last two months is a statistical quirk (the household data show an increase in employment of 873,000 in September, which is completely implausible and likely a result of sampling volatility). Moreover, declining labor force participation over the last year (resulting in 1.1 million people disappearing from the labor force) accounts for much of the rest of the decline.

...

6. The 114,000 jobs created would have been a good number Â… but for 1962, not 2012. The U.S. economy needs 2-3 times that number every month to close the jobs gap (which is the number of jobs that the U.S. economy needs to create in order to return to pre-recession employment levels while also absorbing the people who enter the labor force each month.) At 114,000 jobs a month, the jobs gap would not close until after 2025, according to the Hamilton Project.

7. We are still on pace to create fewer jobs this year than last year. In 2012, employment growth has averaged 146,000 per month, compared with an average monthly gain of 153,000 in 2011.

Posted by: Ace at 06:17 AM | Comments (159)
Post contains 607 words, total size 4 kb.

1 I'm scanning the media right now.

Noon will bring the attenuation edition of the media narrative.

Posted by: General Woundwort at October 05, 2012 06:19 AM (06lNq)

2 Question.....if we created fewer jobs in September than in August and fewer jobs in August than in July....How does the unemployment rate go down ?????

Posted by: Billy Jack at October 05, 2012 06:20 AM (tIilm)

3 Ohio 49%-48% O this AM on Rasmussen. R up 52-48 in those who have already made up their mind. Game on baby. Game on. Was it Jim Messina who said: "if R is tied in Ohio aftert the debates, it was a success for him?" Game f-ing on.

Posted by: Interested Party at October 05, 2012 06:21 AM (m1NGX)

4 Both the federal and state governments increased their employees in July, August and September. But but but Matt Ygadfal;dfalsdf said that government positions were down 67,000!* You must be lying! *Yes, yes, I'm pretty sure he meant in the first quarter but I will not let petty facts get in the way of snark. The fake QB conversation in the sidebar is hilarious.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD the revelator at October 05, 2012 06:21 AM (VtjlW)

5 It goes down when they say it goes down.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:21 AM (rzSn3)

6 Query what the stats would be if the administration wasn't pressuring defense firms and other government contractors to delay layoff notices?

Posted by: R. at October 05, 2012 06:21 AM (rwcvo)

7 I think it's easy to see why obama blew off his debate prep to go to Hoover Dam. He got wind of these numbers and knew it would trump whatever the debate result was. And he's right. Does anyone believe the news tonight or the weekend news shows will focus on the debate instead of the unbelievably good jobs report?

Posted by: wolf at October 05, 2012 06:21 AM (/zlEe)

8 From the earlier report: "But the government said the total number of jobs employed surged by 873,000, the highest one-month jump in 29 years. " Hahahahahahah!!!!!!They did it, they really did it. Unbelievable. Nothing is real anymore.

Posted by: Max Power at October 05, 2012 06:21 AM (+wxCD)

9 all of us ( and some libs like Chris Koomoe) know its bullshit. But will it sell with the undecided? will it knock Romney's debate victory off the airwaves?

Posted by: Avi at October 05, 2012 06:22 AM (51xVX)

10 What's the overall rate? I skimmed the article but didn't see it.

Posted by: Y-not at October 05, 2012 06:22 AM (5H6zj)

11 Does that include the Military? Wait till sequestration goes into effect

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 05, 2012 06:22 AM (oSFWF)

12 "But the government said the total number of jobs employed surged by 873,000, the highest one-month jump in 29 years. "


The government is printing jobs like they are printing money.

Posted by: EC at October 05, 2012 06:22 AM (GQ8sn)

13 OK, got it. HotAir says 7.8% but U-6 is still at 14.7%.

Posted by: Y-not at October 05, 2012 06:23 AM (5H6zj)

14 Weird difference between Household survey (upon which drop to 7.8% is based) and Establishment survey (upon which +114K new jobs number is based): Household survey shows increase of 187,000 in government employees since August. Establishment survey shows increase of 10,000 in government employees.

Posted by: kteemac at October 05, 2012 06:24 AM (pLTLS)

15 I wipe back to front. Barry likes the taint

Posted by: Reggie at October 05, 2012 06:24 AM (/YJYi)

16 "will it knock Romney's debate victory off the airwaves?" 100%. It already has. Just like that, the debate is just a faint memory. Heck, all the conservative blogs/twitter, etc are talking about the jobs report and the debate is forgotten. It's easy to see now why Obama was so unprepared.

Posted by: wolf at October 05, 2012 06:24 AM (Jk+oU)

17 Oh man, the government should just hire everybody, then there would be no unemployment. It's not like you need an economy to fund this **** or anything.

Posted by: JDTAY at October 05, 2012 06:26 AM (a0nis)

18 7 I think it's easy to see why obama blew off his debate prep to go to Hoover Dam. He got wind of these numbers and knew it would trump whatever the debate result was. And he's right. Does anyone believe the news tonight or the weekend news shows will focus on the debate instead of the unbelievably good jobs report?

Posted by: wolf at October 05, 2012 10:21 AM (/zlEe)



So your argument is that TFG got some good news and because of that blew off what most people consider something that is important and that he had committed to?


Boy that's some fine presidentin right there.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at October 05, 2012 06:26 AM (da5Wo)

19 http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/05/septembers-confusing-unemployment-report/ The Bureau of Labor Statistics released unemployment numbers for September on Friday. Sure to dominate the headlines is the modest reduction in the commonly-cited U-3 unemployment rate, which dropped from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent. That’s the best number of the Obama era, and while nowhere near the 5.6 percent Obama promised we would be enjoying right now, it’s below 8 percent, so it will get a lot of attention. For those unfamiliar with the parameters of the New Normal, it used to be said that no President could get re-elected with unemployment higher than 7 percent, but now anything less than 8 percent is the best America can expect. 8 percent unemployment has become the threshold at which champagne And yet… the actual job creation figure for September was a horrifyingly weak 114,000 jobs. That’s at least 40,000 less than would be needed merely to keep up with population growth. The more comprehensive U-6 unemployment number, which counts the long-term unemployed, remained fixed at a horrendous 14.7 percent. So how did the U-3 “marquee” rate come down a few tenths of a percentage point? Well, part of the “thanks” goes to that perennial feature of Obamanomics, the collapsing U.S. workforce. 211,000 people left the workforce entirely over the past month. They no longer count for compiling the U-3 statistic. So, twice as many people stopped looking for jobs as found jobs, and that’s supposed to be good news... More at the link.

Posted by: Y-not at October 05, 2012 06:26 AM (5H6zj)

20 To be honest, I don't even understand the meaning of "unemployment [in the] government sector". What the hell could this possibly mean? People who can only be employed in government jobs?

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at October 05, 2012 06:26 AM (X3lox)

21 So hiring goes down...and somehow takes unemployment with it? The only way that happens is if we had a massive population die off since they're claiming that workforce participation has gone up. Surely we'd have heard about such an event, no?

Posted by: Lauren at October 05, 2012 06:26 AM (wsGWu)

22 It's easy to see now why Obama was so unprepared.

Yes. Because he's a moron. And not the good kind.

Posted by: Al at October 05, 2012 06:26 AM (MzQOZ)

23 16 "will it knock Romney's debate victory off the airwaves?" 100%. It already has. Just like that, the debate is just a faint memory. Heck, all the conservative blogs/twitter, etc are talking about the jobs report and the debate is forgotten. It's easy to see now why Obama was so unprepared. Posted by: wolf at October 05, 2012 10:24 AM (Jk+oU) You seem "concerned"

Posted by: The Robot Devil at October 05, 2012 06:27 AM (+hB3s)

24 How do they calculate that? It's not like a worker can't switch between gov't and private industry.

Posted by: Waterhouse at October 05, 2012 06:27 AM (POGCP)

25 CNN, CNBC, and other outlets are openly calling bullshit on these numbers. Bloomberg, ABC, and elsewhere were openly predicting a rise to about 8.2% or 8.3% based on the information they had available to them.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:27 AM (e0xKF)

26

Why not.

Print up worthless money and throw it at worthless people in worthless jobs.

Its a plan, right?

Posted by: uterus cannon at October 05, 2012 06:27 AM (3ZtZW)

27 Thar's GOOOLD in them thar turds!

http://wapo.st/T6Kgtp

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 05, 2012 06:28 AM (piMMO)

28 CNN, CNBC, and other outlets are openly calling bullshit on these numbers.

Bloomberg, ABC, and elsewhere were openly predicting a rise to about 8.2% or 8.3% based on the information they had available to them.


****

This is going to bite TFG in the ass.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 05, 2012 06:29 AM (piMMO)

29

How is the government unemployment rate above zero?  Are there people who have gotten government work who somehow do not have it anymore?

 

Is it possible 4.3% of government hires are actually not good enough to do government work?

Posted by: Truman North at October 05, 2012 06:29 AM (I2LwF)

30

To be honest, I don't even understand the meaning of "unemployment [in the] government sector". What the hell could this possibly mean? People who can only be employed in government jobs?

 

Exactly my thought.  How does one calculate a 'government unemployment rate'?

Posted by: Lurking Canuck at October 05, 2012 06:29 AM (NF2Bf)

31 Wow. That actually makes sense. They messed with the reporting methology. That's a reeeeaally dumb idea! So, like my mom who takes care of her mom is working now, anyone who watches kids, Neilson audience, occasional EBay-er, whatever that would account for the non-credible rise in PT jobs

Posted by: BlackOrchid-StillMissingDagny at October 05, 2012 06:29 AM (J6kXj)

32 Yes. Because he's a moron. And not the good kind.

****

little 'm' moron.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 05, 2012 06:29 AM (piMMO)

33 unbelievably good jobs report

Unbelievable, but not in the way you mean.

Posted by: Waterhouse at October 05, 2012 06:29 AM (POGCP)

34 Obama deliberately did a shitty job at the debates because he knew a jobs report that shows a minor improvement at best will erase the memory of the debate. The Chicken gets no rest.

Posted by: eman at October 05, 2012 06:29 AM (Wp4rQ)

35 If this was a cake baked in a school cafeteria, Michelle would be screaming about the lethal shortcuts used to make it.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at October 05, 2012 06:30 AM (fLln5)

36 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable tyrant.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at October 05, 2012 06:30 AM (8y9MW)

37 Is having sex with a vacuum hose really such a bad thing? I mean, the suction! It's amazing!

Posted by: wolf at October 05, 2012 06:30 AM (/YJYi)

38 I have some ramblings on this over at my blog.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at October 05, 2012 06:30 AM (8y9MW)

39

Saw a woman holding a "Redistribute Obama" sign at a major intersection on the way into work this morning.  An empty chair sat on the other side of the street.  Nice touch.

Even in 2008 I don't recall seeing Obamabots on corners a month out.

Posted by: rockhead at October 05, 2012 06:30 AM (jtTKf)

40 If all it takes is a couple of a fraction of points on a faux employment meter for people to pull the lever for this fraud after all we know about him, then America will get what it deserves. I'm confident, however, that the 70 million people who watched the debate realize that there is much more to this choice than .03 points on a confusing government index subject to political manipulation. And oh yeah, YEA for the government sector. I guess that explains how the overall number went down. What I'd like to know is how many federal government jobs were created this year? I mean, new job positions.

Posted by: TD at October 05, 2012 06:30 AM (+uFux)

41 "To be honest, I don't even understand the meaning of "unemployment [in the] government sector". What the hell could this possibly mean? People who can only be employed in government jobs?" Ummm -- would you employ Latreisha from the DMV anywhere else?

Posted by: Racist at October 05, 2012 06:30 AM (N6l/o)

42
Former GE CEO Jack Welch on Twitter:

: Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can't debate so change numbers

Posted by: Miss Marple at October 05, 2012 06:31 AM (GoIUi)

43 7 I think it's easy to see why obama blew off his debate prep to go to Hoover Dam. He got wind of these numbers and knew it would trump whatever the debate result was. And he's right. Does anyone believe the news tonight or the weekend news shows will focus on the debate instead of the unbelievably good jobs report?

Posted by: wolf at October 05, 2012 10:21 AM (/zlEe)

 

 

Emphasis on unbelieveably

Posted by: Truman North at October 05, 2012 06:31 AM (I2LwF)

44 Is it possible 4.3% of government hires are actually not good enough to do government work? --- Far more than 4.3% of government hires are too incompetent to do their jobs, typically creating problems for the rest of the agency they work for to fix. I speak from personal experience on that one, having cleaned up the messes created by several of these people.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:31 AM (e0xKF)

45 Wait, are you saying they are counting stay at home moms as employed, BlackOrchid? If so, that's brilliant. There's one segment that can't be laid off. Full employment, baby!

Posted by: Lauren at October 05, 2012 06:31 AM (wsGWu)

46 look at the recently added link - pretty interesting analysis - they switched the reporting method!!!

Posted by: BlackOrchid-StillMissingDagny at October 05, 2012 06:32 AM (J6kXj)

47 Another thing on Twitter:

We are supposed to believe the guy who manipulated Lockheed Martin on layoff notices would not manipulate the job numbers.

Posted by: Miss Marple at October 05, 2012 06:32 AM (GoIUi)

48 Bold and Spicy!

Posted by: Count de Monet at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (BAS5M)

49 Unemployment blogs have been boiling down the numbers from this report. 114K jobs would make this the worst September in at least 3 years. That means the entire drop, and then some, is solely due to the new modeling.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (e0xKF)

50 Suddenly.....I feel bold

Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (MrzcL)

51 To be honest, I don't even understand the meaning of "unemployment [in the] government sector". What the hell could this possibly mean? People who can only be employed in government jobs?

You don't know what it's like out there! I've *worked* in the private sector. They expect *results*!

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ braucht ein Bier at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (/kI1Q)

52

I think most people will only feel better about the economy when they and their family and friends have jobs, not when some bullshit survey number is floated.

 

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (rzSn3)

53 A bold move ...

Posted by: Kerrigan at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (POGCP)

54 Dammit, Ace, close your fucking tags.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (e0xKF)

55 UE for government workers AND their hires.  Dodd Frank bill is putting 10,000's of people to work in consulting jobs trying to figure out WTF the bill means.


I know, my son is one of them.

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectual at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (wR+pz)

56 Apparently, getting up in the morning to blog is counted as a full-time job.  Glad to see Ace help out on the numbers.

Posted by: EC at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (GQ8sn)

57 What the fuck? Am I the only one seeing all comments in bold?

Posted by: BCochran1981 at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (da5Wo)

58 I've never felt so STRONG!

Posted by: BlackOrchid-StillMissingDagny at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (J6kXj)

59 Posted by: wolf at October 05, 2012 10:21 AM (/zlEe) --------------------------------------------------------- I'll beg to differ with you on that one. Obama blew it two nights ago for this reason: he allowed Romney to demonstrate to 70MM viewers that not only could he stand on the same stage with O and his halo, but whip is butt to boot. not to mention that he shattered the meme that Obama's spend millions and many months trying to build on Romney as the evil capitalist. Don't underestimate the damage done by Obama's poor performance - even Minitrue had to admit that his performance sucked. It was so bad that Michelle rushed the stage and basically dragged him to the back (look at the tape and her face - she was pissed). All while Romney stands up there with his family savoring his victory while posing with his picture perfect family. If Obama blew off this debate b/c he knew what UE would come in at then he's stupid beyond belief - if he'd won on Wednesday night then he would have taken an important step to his second term. As it is, the best he can hope for is a draw and if he stinks it up in the last two then he's as good as done. Just my 2 cents.

Posted by: volfan at October 05, 2012 06:33 AM (RTb48)

60 That's a bold statement in the post

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (rzSn3)

61 BOLDLY going where many comment threads have gone before.

Posted by: Wm. Shatner at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (N6l/o)

62 That's a bold statement!

Posted by: Jay in Ames at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (i2Lsf)

63

September and October are harvest months.  Lots of guys working that won't be employed come November  and December.

Posted by: garrett at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (cakeU)

64 OK off bold!

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectual at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (wR+pz)

65 Someone left a tag open

Posted by: General Woundwort at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (06lNq)

66 So...if I am considered as employed, as a stay at home dad, where is my check?

Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (MrzcL)

67 Dodd Frank bill is putting 10,000's of people to work in consulting jobs trying to figure out WTF the bill means. --- It's also putting a ton of real estate appraisers like my father-in-law out of business because of the new regulations imposed on them as the scapegoats for the real estate bubble.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (e0xKF)

68 Apparently, getting up in the morning to blog is counted as a full-time job. Glad to see Ace help out on the numbers.

Posted by: EC at October 05, 2012 10:33 AM (GQ8sn)

 

BLS is counting sockpuppets in hte comments as jobholders.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:34 AM (rzSn3)

69

I know a way to make that 7.8% UE rate sound absolutely horrible - like, Armageddon bad. SMOD stuff.

Just elect Romney.

Posted by: Roy at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (VndSC)

70 well fuck that didn't work, me thinks the ewok is responsible.

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectual at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (wR+pz)

71 Seriously, this is the most patently faked number from Hilda BS Solis and the BLS Band since the USSR first claimed 100% employment.

The biggest one month number since 1983!  Really?  I am super cynical with these bastards and this manipulation even shocked me.  Even thought I knew they would get it below 8% before election day.

Just happens to be after Ocluster blows the debate.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (PHb2k)

72 I knew they would fuck with the numbers.

Posted by: Nostradamus at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (Wp4rQ)

73 LOL, they changed the methodology and assumed the stupid masses wouldn't figure it out. I have always said that Barack Obama relies on the "folks" to be ignorant. Not this time Barry, because guess what happens next week? Paul Ryan gets an hour of prime time TV with an audience of 50 million FOLKS who can't wait to hear what he says about MATH.

Posted by: TD at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (+uFux)

74 It thought that this was going to be the Bold blog.

Posted by: Bart who lurks with SMOD 2012, master of his domain at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (he2LC)

75 IOW, they lyings bastards are lying.

who could have predicted that?

Posted by: redc1c4 at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (8MasJ)

76 @64

Well all day, Pixy certified.

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectual at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (wR+pz)

77 I'm sorry to hear that Brandon. RE Appraisers have a really hard, underappreciated job. That stinks. God I hate that bill SO FECKING MUCH

Posted by: BlackOrchid-StillMissingDagny at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (J6kXj)

78 ...emboldened by his restful nights sleep and fresh from his meager morning  repast, Ace gets down to business.

Posted by: garrett at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (cakeU)

79 Posted by: volfan at October 05, 2012 10:33 AM (RTb4

Don't bother. It's a troll dropping copy pasta.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at October 05, 2012 06:35 AM (vY2x+)

80 So, like my mom who takes care of her mom is working now, anyone who watches kids, Neilson audience, occasional EBay-er, whatever

Was it Michigan where the SEIU wanted to force "anyone who watches kids" to pay union dues? 

There was also a plan to take dues out of SSDI checks, on grounds that caring for a disabled family member was under their purview.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ braucht ein Bier at October 05, 2012 06:36 AM (/kI1Q)

81 #7 Does anyone believe the news tonight or the weekend news shows will focus on the debate instead of the unbelievably good jobs report?

Highlighted the point you were really trying to make.  No, you don't have to thank me.

Posted by: 56 and loving RR at October 05, 2012 06:36 AM (9zugO)

82 September and October are harvest months. Lots of guys working that won't be employed come November and December.

Posted by: garrett at October 05, 2012 10:34 AM (cakeU)

 

If that were it, the monthy normalization should have compensated for it, as it would happen every year.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:36 AM (rzSn3)

83 Billy Bob takes away the punchbowl...

Posted by: Count de Monet at October 05, 2012 06:36 AM (BAS5M)

84 his meager morning repast,

What exactly is in Purina Ewok Chow?

Posted by: Waterhouse at October 05, 2012 06:36 AM (POGCP)

85 Ace.  That's 1 internetz and a turn in the barrel.

I'm sorry, but the rules are the rules, and no one can be above the rules.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at October 05, 2012 06:36 AM (8y9MW)

86

The funny thing is that quite a lot of people  (not just conservatives)   think that the administration deliberately fucked with these numbers.

 

What does that say?

Posted by: Roy at October 05, 2012 06:37 AM (VndSC)

87 AllenG, Ewok in the a barrel?  Wow you are bold this morning.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at October 05, 2012 06:37 AM (fLln5)

88
I think the BLS was defining "full time" as working 35 hours per week. 

Perhaps they recently redefined that down to the new 30 hour per week Obamacare standard?

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at October 05, 2012 06:37 AM (kdS6q)

89 This administration is the most transparent in history. The audacity of their bullshit will foment revolution.

Posted by: john at October 05, 2012 06:37 AM (ZrcV/)

90 Hey Obama, I like to be wined and dined before I am ****ed.

Posted by: The Numbers at October 05, 2012 06:38 AM (a0nis)

91 I'm sorry to hear that Brandon.

RE Appraisers have a really hard, underappreciated job. That stinks.

God I hate that bill SO FECKING MUCH

Posted by: BlackOrchid-StillMissingDagny at October 05, 2012 10:35 AM (J6kXj)

 

Still waiting for that bill that cracks down hard on crooked Senators and Representatives.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:38 AM (rzSn3)

92 Even I can see that they were playing with the numbers

Posted by: Zombie Hellen Keller at October 05, 2012 06:38 AM (MrzcL)

93 77 I'm sorry to hear that Brandon. RE Appraisers have a really hard, underappreciated job. That stinks. God I hate that bill SO FECKING MUCH --- Unfortunately, it's a cyclical thing even without Dodd-Frank. Whenever real estate takes off, he has more business than he can handle. When it crashes again, he goes a long time between appraisal jobs.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:38 AM (e0xKF)

94 Nobody puts ace-y in the barrel!

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ hated that movie, actually at October 05, 2012 06:38 AM (/kI1Q)

95 haha carl quintilla confronted the labor sec hilda solis about the number.....she's insulted.....ms. solis...we the people are insulted

Posted by: phoenixgirl what did huma abedin know? team dagny at October 05, 2012 06:38 AM (Ho2rs)

96 He...just...put Ace in the barrel. I'm kind of scared.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at October 05, 2012 06:38 AM (da5Wo)

97 3 points?  They cooked the books too much. Nobody will believe it.  Even the Left will embarrassingly stare at their feet when citing this.

Is it simply the incredibly shrinking labor pool?  Is that the extent of it?

BTW, for all the lefties who are excusing the debate performance because they think Obama "got wind" of the report. Isn't that really, really illegal?

Posted by: AmishDude at October 05, 2012 06:39 AM (b65cm)

98 I am going to repost this note from ZH just to make sure everybody catches it:

Here's a peculiar statistical aberration:

Household Survey people employed: +873,000
Part-time jobs for economic reasons: +582,000

-> 582,000 divided by 873,000 = 0.666666666666*

Aka: precisely two thirds. Whatever are the odds... Goalseeking much


Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 05, 2012 06:39 AM (PHb2k)

99 I think the BLS was defining "full time" as working 35 hours per week.

Perhaps they recently redefined that down to the new 30 hour per week Obamacare standard?

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at October 05, 2012 10:37 AM (kdS6q)

 

I'll just go with the "making shit up" explanation.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:39 AM (rzSn3)

100 Preach it sister

Posted by: Stevie Wonder at October 05, 2012 06:39 AM (MrzcL)

101 Whenever real estate takes off, he has more business than he can handle. When it crashes again, he goes a long time between appraisal jobs. That doesn't make sense, Brandon - I thought RE was on the upswing? Happy days are here again and all that? hmm unless - hey what's that blowing up my ass?

Posted by: BlackOrchid-StillMissingDagny at October 05, 2012 06:39 AM (J6kXj)

102 Hey Obama, I like to be wined and dined before I am ****ed. Posted by: The Numbers at October 05, 2012 10:38 AM (a0nis) Hey it's wine and dine, or KY Jelly, BUT NOT BOTH.

Posted by: The Government at October 05, 2012 06:40 AM (oSFWF)

103 Ewok in the a barrel? Wow you are bold this morning.

I'm sorry, but no one can be above the law.  We don't want Ace to turn into mini-scoamt do we?

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at October 05, 2012 06:40 AM (8y9MW)

104 86 The funny thing is that quite a lot of people (not just conservatives) think that the administration deliberately fucked with these numbers. What does that say? --- That he got greedy and tried to cheat WAY too much. You can cheat by a small amount and probably go unnoticed. When something big changes, people start looking closely to figure out WTF happened.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:40 AM (e0xKF)

105 What does that say?Posted by: Roy

The Republic is shaky ground?

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at October 05, 2012 06:40 AM (vY2x+)

106

>>>hmm unless - hey what's that blowing up my ass?

Hello!

Posted by: Mr. Sunshine at October 05, 2012 06:40 AM (VndSC)

107 hmm unless - hey what's that blowing up my ass?



Population yogurt?

Posted by: BCochran1981 at October 05, 2012 06:40 AM (da5Wo)

108 Its not the labor pool this time AD.  They magically found 400k or 800k jobs (hard to tell) in the last 2 months revisions.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 05, 2012 06:41 AM (PHb2k)

109 BLS, racing to beat the Soviet economic forecasts as being the least reliable.  Or trying to beat Argentina's cooked numbers? 

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at October 05, 2012 06:41 AM (fLln5)

110 With high gas prices (and according to economic models, gas prices should increase with more people "working"; of course, high gas prices are the result of insufficient supply), it will actually reinforce higher employment. When it costs $75 to fill up the tank, people will rely on rickshaws and Conestoga wagons to get to work, and these are all labor-intensive modes of travel (and good for the environment!).

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at October 05, 2012 06:41 AM (Ec6wH)

111 I'm sorry, but no one can be above the law. We don't want Ace to turn into mini-scoamt do we?

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at October 05, 2012 10:40 AM (8y9MW)



You're new here aren't you?

Posted by: BCochran1981 at October 05, 2012 06:41 AM (da5Wo)

112 What exactly is in Purina Ewok Chow?


Reconstituted hobos.

Posted by: EC at October 05, 2012 06:41 AM (GQ8sn)

113 106 >>>hmm unless - hey what's that blowing up my ass? Hello! --- Where are my hip-waders? That ain't rain on my leg.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:42 AM (e0xKF)

114 Fucking with the numbers will do Ebola no good. The help he gets from the fake numbers will be balanced out by the hurt from finding out they were faked. Plus, it's too late and too small a change, even if real.

Posted by: eman at October 05, 2012 06:42 AM (Wp4rQ)

115 That he got greedy and tried to cheat WAY too much.

You can cheat by a small amount and probably go unnoticed. When something big changes, people start looking closely to figure out WTF happened.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 10:40 AM (e0xKF)

 

Plus he's been cheating every month for about a year or so already...the constant after the fact corrections all in the same direction, and the left the labor force numbers are clues to that.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:42 AM (rzSn3)

116
.... I have never cared for the way the Labor Dept calculates the unemployment rate.   Out of a job.... but not looking????  Well hells bells... we aint gonna count you.   Work Force Participation Rate is a much more accurate way to guage the health of national employment.

Kinda like how the Fed calculates the inflation rate.   Toss out food, energy, fuel, commodities, health care and higher education rates, well.... there aint no frickin inflation...

Posted by: fixerupper at October 05, 2012 06:42 AM (C8hzL)

117
I'll just go with the "making shit up" explanation.
Posted by: Oldcat





The monkey/butt theory would be consistent with prior behavior...

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at October 05, 2012 06:42 AM (kdS6q)

118 Its not the labor pool this time AD. They magically found 400k or 800k jobs (hard to tell) in the last 2 months revisions.

I think it's both.  Labor Participation (that is: % of the "Labor Force" trying to find work) went up, but I'm pretty sure that's actually because the Labor Force has actually dropped again.

And .3% is a huge swing.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at October 05, 2012 06:43 AM (8y9MW)

119 Idiot.  What does unemployment mean for a government worker?  Definitively, government workers have jobs.  Presumably you mean people who were fired, quit, or retired - 4.9% is too low to include retirees, so you are just blowing smoke.

Government worker isn't a profession - if 4.9% of nurses are unemployed, that has meaning. 

Posted by: dustydog at October 05, 2012 06:43 AM (UqrJb)

120 Yeah, this smells like a Soviet Ministry of Labour release, circa 1986. And boy, the Soviets did have a strong aroma.

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at October 05, 2012 06:43 AM (Ec6wH)

121 You're new here aren't you? Posted by: BCochran1981 at October 05, 2012 10:41 AM (da5Wo) Believe it or not that AllenG has a blog. Or so I'm told.

Posted by: cajun carrot at October 05, 2012 06:43 AM (UZQM8)

122 There is going to be a monster revision in December when they say nevermind, we made a mistake and revise the previous 6 months.  Or not.  Doesn't matter, they have made the numbers untrustworthy no matter what they do.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 05, 2012 06:43 AM (PHb2k)

123 The help he gets from the fake numbers will be balanced out by the hurt from finding out they were faked.

Plus, it's too late and too small a change, even if real.

Posted by: eman at October 05, 2012 10:42 AM (Wp4rQ)

 

Remember, its only a recovery when you get a job.

This is where the self absorption of Americans works in our favor.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:43 AM (rzSn3)

124 Oh look. Another new post.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at October 05, 2012 06:44 AM (da5Wo)

125 BTW, for all the lefties who are excusing the debate performance because they think Obama "got wind" of the report. Isn't that really, really illegal?
Posted by: AmishDude at October 05, 2012 10:39 AM

It's not illegal when you're the one making up the numbers of the BLS to hand out. I'm surprised we haven't seen official photos of Choom Boy, tongue sticking out between lips as he cogitates on which numbers to write down.

Wouldn't surprise me if the BLS actually vetted the regime's "suggested" numbers: "no, Mr President, claiming unemployment is now 2.3% is a little too much for people to believe. Even Democrats and Chris Matthews won't buy that."

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 05, 2012 06:46 AM (ZgX/g)

126 And .3% is a huge swing. --- The standard deviation on these reports is about .16%. Getting a swing of nearly twice the standard deviation is statistically unlikely. Even moreso when you consider that the raw data doesn't support their conclusions.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:46 AM (e0xKF)

127 So someone actually believes that these numbers are legit?
And the recovery posted better numbers than the beginning of the dot.com rush,and every other major improvement in the economy in the last 25+ years?

Damn, this is easy.
"No, really, don't suck it.Just  hold it there till it gets soft"

Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at October 05, 2012 06:46 AM (MrzcL)

128 Its not the labor pool this time AD. They magically found 400k or 800k jobs (hard to tell) in the last 2 months revisions.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 05, 2012 10:41 AM (PHb2k)

Part of it was they were hiding a rise in government hires over the last few months and jusr revised them in to get a bump.

 

The rest is made up.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 05, 2012 06:46 AM (rzSn3)

129 Did you teabaggers think my unicorns could only shit skittles?

Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama at October 05, 2012 06:47 AM (ggRof)

130 Imagine it's 2004 again, and a Bush supporter has announced a movie release, a movie that depicts assault and victory over the jihadi-infested Falujah, Iraq by the US mil.

The movie is set to be released several days before the election.

Is there any doubt in your mind that the Left would file lawsuits against the release in addition to turning the newspapers, TV, and cable channels into rivers of rage?

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at October 05, 2012 06:47 AM (vY2x+)

131 At least the Soviets liked to drill for oil.

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at October 05, 2012 06:47 AM (Ec6wH)

132 Meanwhile, the USPS can't make it's loan payments and I saw a huge banner at the local postoffice this week saying they are hiring.

Posted by: Infidel at October 05, 2012 06:48 AM (9tjlm)

133 The Obama administration is making a big mistake.  Correlation does not indicate causation.

The lowering unemployment numbers correlate with presidential support when they are an accurate reflection of conditions on the ground.   Peopel vote based on the personal situations of themselves, relatives, friends and neighbors.  So when more people are actually being hired and the numbers match this,  then a president gets more support.

HOWEVER,  just changing the numbers is not going to get him support (except in the also-cooked polls).   Unemployed people are still unemployed and unhappy.  They aren't going to vote for him because of a number on a web site or a front page.  


Posted by: Miss Marple at October 05, 2012 06:49 AM (GoIUi)

134 So let me get this straight, you create less jobs than the month before which was less jobs created than the month before that, and somehow the Unemployment numbers fall despite population growth not being kept up with?

If Ryan doesn't point out this nonsense next week at the debate i will be shocked.

Romney and Ryan need to beat this drum of bullshit numerology hard all day long in front of the media every chance they get.

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at October 05, 2012 06:50 AM (ovpNn)

135 133 I'm assuming this is either some kind of an anomaly or a welcomed glitch, but it couldn't have come as a worse time for TFG. I mean, do you know how this looks on the surface? And it's not like the TFG boosters will be able to stop for a second and think about the optics here. They're going to start wearing flappers and singing Happy Days Are Hear Again. --- This is solely due to a modeling change that added about 400K new jobs to the economy over the past year. If not for the modeling change, the unemployment numbers would have gone up by .1% or .2%.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at October 05, 2012 06:51 AM (e0xKF)

136

Aka: precisely two thirds. Whatever are the odds... Goalseeking much


Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 05, 2012 10:39 AM (PHb2k)


Niiiice catch.   

Posted by: Is what JQ Public is thinking... at October 05, 2012 06:51 AM (NBj0d)

137 Isn't that really, really illegal?

The history of the present King of Great Britain SCOAMF is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ chants the obvious at October 05, 2012 06:52 AM (/kI1Q)

138 "But the government said the total number of jobs employed surged by 873,000, the highest one-month jump in 29 years. " Here's the thing: If that were actually true, I would be thrilled. I wouldn't even care (okay I would care a little) that Obama would get credit. It would be wonderful if people were actually getting jobs. It's just that I don't believe it at all.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD the revelator at October 05, 2012 06:53 AM (VtjlW)

139 129 Did you teabaggers think my unicorns could only shit skittles?

Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama at October 05, 2012 10:47 AM (ggRof)


hahahah....oh well...look we knew this was going to happen.

Now all we can do is make sure everyone knows its not skittles.

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at October 05, 2012 06:54 AM (ovpNn)

140

This is just another scandal that the MFM will enthusiastically spin in favor of Obama and the spin will last for days, if not weeks, whereas the negligence that led to the murder of the 4 in Libya was not worth the ink.

There is no way to make the numbers work without skewing them, which is exactly what they did by changing the benchmark data.  F--king magic.

 

Posted by: HtP at October 05, 2012 06:56 AM (jx2j9)

141 yep

guy on CNN already trying to lower expectations re UE.

Percentage rate is too volatile. Should be using the whole jobs gain number instead, i.e., 114k...(pp)

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 05, 2012 07:05 AM (piMMO)

142 Over in the twitosphere, @SWeasel wonders "why are unemployed gov't workers counted as gov't workers? Don't they join the rest of us when they lose the gig?"

Seems like a valid point. Am I missing something?

Posted by: jwpaine (@PirateBallerina) at October 05, 2012 07:06 AM (FUozQ)

143 You can access the Dept of Labor's U-6 stats here for yourself by checking the box marked "Alternative measure of labor underutilization U-6 - LNS13327709" (fifth from the bottom) and clicking the "retrieve data" button. (Hot linked in my sock too.)
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ln

BTW, if the U.S. counted unemployment the same way Canada does that's similar to the U-6, the basic U.S. unemployment rate would be about 10.5%.

Also, have "fun" with the other stats too like "Unemployment Rate - Black or African American"

Posted by: andycanuck at October 05, 2012 07:07 AM (vDl/w)

144 MONICA CROWLEY IS SPOT ON!!! Romney camp needs Monica Crowley as their spokesperson. She just NAILED the jobs number reaction on Fox Business Report... THIS IS YOUR TALKING POINTS FOR THE NEXT WEEK ROMNEY TEAM. TRANSCRIBE IT AND BEGING PREACHING IT!!!!

Posted by: Marsellus Wallace at October 05, 2012 07:09 AM (PnC0I)

145 What does this "4.3%" number even mean? How exactly does one measure "Government Worker" unemployment?

Posted by: Some guy in IL at October 05, 2012 07:12 AM (UAK0i)

146 Was it Michigan where the SEIU wanted to force "anyone who watches kids" to pay union dues?

There was also a plan to take dues out of SSDI checks, on grounds that caring for a disabled family member was under their purview.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ braucht ein Bier at October 05, 2012 10:36 AM (/kI1Q)


Not wanted, wants- as in its a ballot proposal..lot of union protection proposals up this year...HOLD FIRM Michigan, we are on the right track.

Posted by: Red Shirt at October 05, 2012 07:12 AM (FIDMq)

147 The government unemployment rate going down like Billy Clinton with a cheap cigar is not indicative of anything but the incestuous relationship the Obama Administration has with public sector unions.

Posted by: Fritz at October 05, 2012 07:13 AM (/ZZCn)

148

I smell a Rat.... Two days after Obama gets hammered, Magical Jobs Appear which do NOT make sense if you can do MATH?

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 05, 2012 07:17 AM (lZBBB)

149

Posted by: andycanuck at October 05, 2012 11:07 AM (vDl/w)

 

don't use the U-6.... you can also pull up how many Americans are WORKING... and its a much better chart...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 05, 2012 07:18 AM (lZBBB)

150

The bogus unemployment number will not be the last October surprise, me thinks.

My bet is that the SCOAMF team will attempt to "flood the market" with surprises to overwhelm attempts to check veracity or validity of each.

A home run performance by SCOAMF in the next debate will also be highly suspect.

Posted by: HtP at October 05, 2012 07:20 AM (jx2j9)

151 MONICA CROWLEY GOT IT RIGHT >>> If I'm Governor Romney, I got out to the American people and say: "Look, President Reagan inherited a huge recession. He did the EXACT OPPOSITE of what President Obama did, in terms of cutting taxes, reducing government, deregulating. And you know what HIS recovery looked like? He had month after month of 500, 600, 900 thousand, over a million jobs in one month in September of 1983. That's what we should be looking at today."

Posted by: Marsellus Wallace at October 05, 2012 07:21 AM (PnC0I)

152 I actually think this data cooking works against Obama long term. It reeks of desperation and dishonesty especially after his debate self immolation. Interest in the election is up among low info voters. The debate they know because its everywhere. The unemployment numbers not so much but many are learning how shitty it actually is for the first time.

Posted by: Wonkish Rogue at October 05, 2012 07:26 AM (CNwvS)

153

Posted by: Wonkish Rogue at October 05, 2012 11:26 AM (CNwvS)

 

Yeah.... its really hard to not smell the shit, when its piled high enough to cover your nostrils...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 05, 2012 07:31 AM (lZBBB)

154

Funny.... Romney in the debate "Four years of unemployment higher than 8%"!!!

 

Next Week, unemployment magicly falls below 8%...

 

Either cooked numbers... or Obamas deal with Satan kicked in....

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 05, 2012 07:33 AM (lZBBB)

155 Not to worry!  The VP debates are scheduled for next Thursday. I am SURE Ryan will bitch-slap Biden completely out of the arena the very fist time the topic of unemployment  is brought up.

Obviously Biden, being the total clown he is,  will "crow" about today's cooked numbers........THEN Ryan will introduce him and the American electorate to reality

Posted by: alwyr at October 05, 2012 07:56 AM (Oh5R1)

156 Looks like the BLS needs a new office and some new counting tools, a small village east of Nome without power and occasional mail service, and a stack of nice slide rules, abaci (?), and 48" double column accounting books.

Posted by: Jean at October 05, 2012 08:03 AM (ytax8)

157 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: steevy at October 05, 2012 11:15 AM (6o4Fb)

158 Poll workers,Poll takers,sign makers and hangers,Campaign staffers, new early voteing in some states is responsable for a temporary drop in  unemployment and is a favorite trick for incumbants

Posted by: Joe C at October 05, 2012 01:52 PM (qCAGC)

159 Does this mean we can say:  "The Public Sector is doing fine."?

Posted by: SaveFarris at October 05, 2012 04:16 PM (j3G+9)

Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
154kb generated in CPU 0.5927, elapsed 0.7026 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.6238 seconds, 287 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Support





Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact

Change the At to "@" and the DOT to "."




Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Search Thingy



Archives

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 50494
  • Files: 418
  • Bytes: 1447.4M
  • CPU Time: 72:06
  • Queries: 1617255

Content

  • Posts: 22824
  • Comments: 5953260

Feeds


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0