The economic news for last month (September of 2013) was
delayed by order of Obama for two weeks,
giving him another opportunity to stick it to the GOP with regards to
the “shutdown.” Yes, “the shutdown” forced this delay, as if anyone cares, while the Department of Labor continued its
duties with a full staff and data collection already “in the bank” before the
effects of any feigned “shutdown” could become a scheduled propaganda
event.
Perhaps the real reason is the sad state of affairs in which
we find ourselves. The total number of “jobs
created” (whatever happened to “created
or saved”?) was 148,000, just enough to
keep up with the monthly increase in the nation’s working age population (16
years and older).
Understand that “148,000” is a bare minimum, yet the unemployment rate went down a tic to
7.2%. After years of keeping track of
such information, I have decided that a
fairly consistent number of jobs either lost or created is 256,000, and that translates into a 1% move in the
employment numbers, either up or
down. Assuming that to be true, “148,000” really does not move the needle at
all.
The really bad news of this day, is the fact that the Administration decided to play games with the full-time/part-time numbers in the month of September.
Keep in mind that the 148,000 jobs created in September is a "net jobs" number and is the work of the Department of Labor, not the conservative blogosphere.
Inexplicably, this same department ran a "home survey" and discovered that full-time jobs grew by nearly 700,000 in the month of September.
Take a look at the chart below, and you will see this survey result. Clearly and for some unstated reason, the home survey numbers are an anomaly and should be disregarded for that reason, and that reason alone. There is nothing taking place in this economy that merits this sudden and ridiculous report.
This blog will go with the D o L's own official report. Understand that this "home survey" (done by phone) pretends the notion that 691,000 full-time jobs were added, replacing 594,000 part-time positions -- or did "we" simply lose those 594,000 part-time jobs?
Conclusion: when this Administration needs a way out, statistically, it simply makes up a number, that gets reported as fact, and, presto-chango, they have their opinion while the Truth has its own.
And, the truth of the matter is this: more than 6 million Americans working in 2008 have drop out of the workforce altogether, and are no longer counted into the negative data that is our unemployment number. The unemployment percentage, 7.2% for September, is only a measurement of those people being counted as members of the workforce. It is not a reflection of the actual number of Americans out of work. Again, 6 million members of the 2009 workforce are gone, no longer included in any statistical reporting. If we added them into the mix, the official unemployment number would not be 7.2% but 14.3%.
In the end, the number that makes all of the Obama crap reporting on unemployment, just that . . . crap, are numbers such as the Food Stamp population. It has grown form 28 million in 2009 to more than 47 million today - hardly a sign of a robust economy or a shockingly good jobs report for September.
As the election season heats up, expect to see more and more of this type of bogus reporting.
________________
Updated additional notes:
Bloomberg.com , the Progressive/Socialist/Keynesian financial rag, saw this same chart and decided to discount its over-all significance, as well, with a simply observation that read: "Private employment, which excludes government agencies, rose
126,000 after a revised gain of 161,000. Private payrolls were also projected
to rise by 180,000, the survey showed. Full-time employment climbed by 691,000 in September while
part-time hiring dropped by 594,000."
In its article, Bloomberg pays much more attention to the fact that job growth was disappointingly low, missing expectations by nearly 40,000 jobs. In effect, this progressive rag confirms the "148,000" number and is generally supportive of the conclusions in this posting.
