OT: September 2012 Jobs Report “Very Suspicious”

[paramount]

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis is under increasing fire today concerning the suspicious September jobs report showing that unemployment fell from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent — the largest drop in 30 years.

Solis appeared on CNBC this morning, where she was pressed by reporters to explain the sharp drop that no one, not even government economists, had predicted.

CNBC reports that today they were bombarded with calls, faxes, and emails from viewers across the country from people claiming that the government is lying about the figures just prior to the election and that the dramatic drop in unemployment defies all reasonable explanation.

In response to CNBC’s rather sharp questioning, Solis claimed that she was “insulted” by the claims that a public service organization such as the Labor Department would fudge the figures.

But certain key conservative commentators, pundits, and analysts predicted that this very thing would happen just prior to the November presidential election. Rush Limbaugh stated earlier in the year that citizens could expect the Obama administration to change the manner in which certain data is calculated, leading to the appearance of a sharp decrease in joblessness just in time for the election.

Market analyst Karl Denninger provides the statistics that make the government’s claims today not only suspicious but ludicrous.

Further, a look at some basic facts concerning the economy lends credence to Denninger’s skepticism. Businesses have been reporting for several months that they are not hiring due to uncertainty about the coming tax increases precipitated by the ObamaCare tax and the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Manufacturing orders are down. Average spendable income for most Americans continues to edge downward. Prices in gasoline, food, and over the counter and prescription drugs have increased so dramatically that were they included in the inflation figures, the annual inflation rate would be over 10 percent at the very least.

In short, the figures do not add up.

http://www.examiner.com/article/labor-secretary-pressed-on-suspicious-jobs-report

[spdrun]

Seems Mr. Market agrees with that sceptical assessment — Dow rose a bit, NASDAQ and SPX fell. I will say that the participation rate rising by 0.1% this month is good news.

[SD Realtor]

The hub bub is understandable. However has anyone ever believed bls stats?

[Coronita]

Is this really a surprise?

Don’t worry. I’m sure the numbers will get “revised” after no one cares…after elections…

But…..

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=212379

The number of people that stopped looking for work also increased.

This is rather amusing; +114,000 is fewer than the working-age population growth in the household survey (206,000) and yet unemployment decreased.

Huh?

The household survey’s unadjusted numbers, however, show some rather interesting figures, none of which make sense. “Not in labor force” increased by 386,000 while “employed” increased by 775,000 a net change off “unemployed and looking” of well north of a million people!

Once a cheater, always a cheater. And government has been less than honest….always…..

But hey, who cares if people quit looking for work….They don’t count….

Interesting point too in the link….

Another interesting factoid is found in the unemployment duration distribution — it improved on an annualized basis but the shift in the last month is not good at all, with nearly three weeks of duration being added in just the last month to average duration, which strongly implies that those who went to work this month were all recent lay-offs and not those who have been unemployed. This, incidentally, argues directly against Bernanke’s assertion that the unemployment problem has not become structural.

[ocrenter]

the charge of the doctored data is a serious one.

one that should be backed by evidence as well as arrest of the suspects, which would involve the arrest of secretary solis and obama.

so who here have the evidence on hand and is ready to go up to obama during a campaign stop and cuff the guy. if you have the evidence, the time to arrest him is now. anything less is just trash talk and biased viewpoints.

if you look at the jobs numbers over the last few months, the initial figures that were released were actually a lot lower than the actual that came out few weeks after. there was one month when the jobs number was ZERO and obama was labeled as president ZERO. remember? and then it turned out the real number later released showed growth of 100k jobs.

how come FOX and friends didn’t go after secretary solis and obama for giving false data of ZERO growth when there was really 100k of new jobs????

[SD Realtor]

Why would the govt and associated reporting agencies ever not present accurate data to the public?

[ocrenter]

[quote=SD Realtor]Why would the govt and associated reporting agencies ever not present accurate data to the public?[/quote]

that’s an excellent point. why bother releasing premature data in the first place.

if we can wait 3 months for case-shiller, we can certainly wait 3 months for more accurate jobs numbers.

[SD Realtor]

That is the point. However also consider the source. Case-Shiller data collection and presentation has no vested interest in the results of the data.

Furthermore BLS data presentation is not something I have ever believed, EVER, regardless of who is in office. Do you honestly believe our unemployment data peaked at 11 or 12% or whatever the BLS said it was a few years ago? Isn’t it important to distinguish between govt and private jobs? Isn’t it important to identify how many dropped from the workforce? Shouldn’t temp verses non temp jobs be identified?

What is troubling is that the reports are orthogonal to other events in the overall economy. Furthermore events that happen such as the administration “asking” defense contractors not to issue rif notices (even though they are required to do so by law) is quite troubling as well.

Personally I am troubled by this sort of behavior from the government. So in your eyes if I question it I am labelled as some sort of partisan hack?

The problem is when there is only one monolithic entity in charge of presenting the data, to me it is problematic. (See rating agencies telling us about AAA rated bonds that were backed by valuable real estate) Other examples include Barney frank telling us how strong the GSE’s were a few years back.

I don’t like and don’t believe any of the crap we are told by the govt or any of the associated entities. Didn’t under Bush and don’t under Obama.

Finally, I see nothing wrong with waiting a few months to release data if it proves to be more accurate.

[ocrenter]

[quote=SD Realtor]That is the point. However also consider the source. Case-Shiller data collection and presentation has no vested interest in the results of the data.

Furthermore BLS data presentation is not something I have ever believed, EVER, regardless of who is in office. Do you honestly believe our unemployment data peaked at 11 or 12% or whatever the BLS said it was a few years ago? Isn’t it important to distinguish between govt and private jobs? Isn’t it important to identify how many dropped from the workforce? Shouldn’t temp verses non temp jobs be identified?

What is troubling is that the reports are orthogonal to other events in the overall economy. Furthermore events that happen such as the administration “asking” defense contractors not to issue rif notices (even though they are required to do so by law) is quite troubling as well.

Personally I am troubled by this sort of behavior from the government. So in your eyes if I question it I am labelled as some sort of partisan hack?

The problem is when there is only one monolithic entity in charge of presenting the data, to me it is problematic. (See rating agencies telling us about AAA rated bonds that were backed by valuable real estate) Other examples include Barney frank telling us how strong the GSE’s were a few years back.

I don’t like and don’t believe any of the crap we are told by the govt or any of the associated entities. Didn’t under Bush and don’t under Obama.

Finally, I see nothing wrong with waiting a few months to release data if it proves to be more accurate.[/quote]

if your position is BLS data has always been wrong, then I have no problems with that.

but if the position is this month’s numbers are wrong because of deliberate attempt to mislead the public, then specific evidence of wrongdoing is needed and solis and obama need to be arrested as criminals.

it really is as simple as that.

[spdrun]

Is “misleading the public” listed as an offense anywhere in the criminal code? Unless the statistics were given or supported under oath, I’m not sure what the charge could be. And if it were a crime, 99% of politicians would be rotting in jail as I write this.

The only outcomes would possibly be Presidential impeachment (no point, a few weeks before the election) or Solis’ regisnation in disgrace.

[ocrenter]

[quote=spdrun]Is “misleading the public” listed as an offense anywhere in the criminal code? Unless the statistics were given or supported under oath, I’m not sure what the charge could be. And if it were a crime, 99% of politicians would be rotting in jail as I write this.

The only outcomes would possibly be Presidential impeachment (no point, a few weeks before the election) or Solis’ regisnation in disgrace.[/quote]

if the numbers mislead because it is preliminary, that would be one thing. just like the one month when new jobs numbers were ZERO, but the real data was 100k.

if the numbers are purposely falsified, for example, BLS employee are directed to add a few zeros to pat the figures, now you are looking at fraud and conspiracy. fraud and conspiracy are criminal, are they not?

you would have to have a conspiracy to falsify data at multiple levels in BLS. this type of conspiracy would be very difficult to keep under wraps, especially if there was a directive from Obama to Solis then down to the number crunchers.

evidence should be fairly easy to come by if we are truly working on there’s a top-down conspiracy to falsify and mislead.

we all have rights to question. but if the claim is this month’s numbers were purposely falsified by the obama campaign, that is a very serious charge.

[SK in CV]

“Sasquatch might as well have traipsed across the White House lawn Friday with a lost Warren Commission file on his way to the studio where NASA staged the moon landing.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/happy-hour-roundup/2012/10/05/1f6e9564-0f2b-11e2-bb5e-492c0d30bff6_blog.html

[Butleroftwo]

The numbers are always wrong!
As of June ’12 the initial weekly jobless claims had the 64th upward revision in 65 week for their report of new claims. 98% is a no brainer for the “books are cooked always”. This report of the unemployment rate reducing when the number of jobs created is the lowest it has been all year is silly stupid.
To argue that this or any administration is honest and sincere with this is like saying the NAR really is honest with it’s administration of the real estate #’s.

[scaredyclassic]

How will this ultimately connect to body fat?

[ocrenter]

looked into examiner.com a bit more, nothing more but UT on steroid.

a fatter version of the UT.

there you go, squat250!

[Author]

Posts