Wow. Lies, damn lies, and statistics is right. Completely contradicting private sector unemployment estimates from earlier in the week (which showed little to no change in the unemployment rate), the BLS reported today that 873,000 people were hired in September and the
U-3 unemployment rate has plunged to 7.8%. The fact aside that U-6 is a far better indicator of unemployment than U-3 and the
methodology of the federal government's unemployment surveys is fundamentally flawed, it's simply impossible that 873,000 people were hired last month (even if the majority of hires were for part-time positions), given that the Philly Fed reported 3 weeks ago that
20 states are indicating recession. It doesn't matter how little they're paid. 873,000 people are not hired when nearly half the country is indicating recession. Period.
By the way, GDP
was growing at a 9.3% clip last time 873,000 jobs were added in a month. Today's GDP growth? 1.7% Nah, the books weren't cooked to favor Obama...
Where are your citations?
ReplyDeleteMy citation is common sense. 20% of the states are indicating recession. Recession means a contraction of the economy. A contraction of the economy means less business activity. Less business activity means less reason to hire and more reason to lay off. 873,000 hires is unlikely in an economy in which there is less reason to hire and more reason to lay off.
Delete40% of the states are indicating recession. It would be 50% of the states to obama, however, since he can't name 20% of the states.
ReplyDeleteYou're right: 40% of the states are indicating recession. Typo.
DeleteWhile I agree with the tone, I don't think you're coming to the right conclusion here.
ReplyDeleteForget the narrative driven media for a second. Consider what you infer in another article of yours: http://www.ecominoes.com/2012/09/income-actually-down-24-under-obama.html
I have no doubt that the jobs report is correct, but there is not much to cheer about here. The newly employed are generally fully employed and paid less or are severely underemployed. The jobs report could have shown a 5% U-3, but it would not have painted the full picture in terms of the impact on household incomes and eroding purchasing power.
Barking "conspiracy" on the jobs report is the wrong angle to take on this issue.