Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › OT: September 2012 Jobs Report “Very Suspicious”
- This topic has 117 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by
an.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 6, 2012 at 4:53 PM #752269October 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM #752272
SD Realtor
Participantocr as much as I would like to fall into the trap that yes someone in obama admin gave a call to the bls and said pump the numbers by a tenth of a point or two, I don’t think that is the case. Conversely the other sort of behavior such as asking defense contractors not to issue pink slips does indeed trouble me. Also what I dont think is out of the realm of possibility is that various govt entities were told to hold off hiring until the late summer or early fall. Again, impossible to prove but if the gains seen by the bls stats were primarly in the govt sector, it would not surprise me at all.
Is that an outlandish presumption by me? (it may be, I am just curious if you think it is)
Sorry for being so suspicious. Just my nature.
October 6, 2012 at 9:34 PM #752273ctr70
ParticipantI loved Jack Welch (former CEO of GE) tweet on Twitter: “…can’t debate so gotta fix the job numbers”.
Obama got his tail kicked in the debate no question. Romney made him look clueless. Romney sounded so much more knowledgeable on economics and business. Very refreshing vs. the same old same old tax the rich wealth re-distribution message from the Obama admin. And I’m a guy who voted for Obama in 2008. Obama can’t get away as much with the “soaring rhetoric” like he did in 2008, b/c now there are 4 years of a record to point to.
October 6, 2012 at 9:39 PM #752274scaredyclassic
Participantit is better to be the underdog/outsider in these situations.
October 6, 2012 at 10:42 PM #752275ocrenter
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]ocr as much as I would like to fall into the trap that yes someone in obama admin gave a call to the bls and said pump the numbers by a tenth of a point or two, I don’t think that is the case. Conversely the other sort of behavior such as asking defense contractors not to issue pink slips does indeed trouble me. Also what I dont think is out of the realm of possibility is that various govt entities were told to hold off hiring until the late summer or early fall. Again, impossible to prove but if the gains seen by the bls stats were primarly in the govt sector, it would not surprise me at all.
Is that an outlandish presumption by me? (it may be, I am just curious if you think it is)
Sorry for being so suspicious. Just my nature.[/quote]
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t17.htm
The federal government added total of 6800 jobs out of the 114k.
Total added by various state governments were 13000.
But local governments and the postal service shed basically just as many.
Durable manufactoring lost 13000 total, but doesn’t seem like transportation manufactoring is losing less than others in the same category.
October 6, 2012 at 10:50 PM #752276Participant[quote=ctr70]I loved Jack Welch (former CEO of GE) tweet on Twitter: “…can’t debate so gotta fix the job numbers”.
Obama got his tail kicked in the debate no question. Romney made him look clueless. Romney sounded so much more knowledgeable on economics and business. Very refreshing vs. the same old same old tax the rich wealth re-distribution message from the Obama admin. And I’m a guy who voted for Obama in 2008. Obama can’t get away as much with the “soaring rhetoric” like he did in 2008, b/c now there are 4 years of a record to point to.[/quote]
Here’s the thing, if the job numbers went down, Jack Welch’s quote would have been ‘”can’t debate AND can’t create jobs, just exactly what can this guy do???”
And if he won the debate and had low jobs numbers, the quote would have been “he’s all talk, what about doing something real like create some jobs”
And if he won the debate AND had the higher jobs numbers, the quote would have been “he cheated during the debate AND he is cheating on the jobs numbers”
and you would have probably cheered Jack Welch with each version of the quote…
October 7, 2012 at 9:47 AM #752279
Rich ToscanoKeymaster[quote=ctr70]I loved Jack Welch (former CEO of GE) tweet on Twitter: “…can’t debate so gotta fix the job numbers”.
Obama got his tail kicked in the debate no question. Romney made him look clueless. Romney sounded so much more knowledgeable on economics and business. Very refreshing vs. the same old same old tax the rich wealth re-distribution message from the Obama admin. And I’m a guy who voted for Obama in 2008. Obama can’t get away as much with the “soaring rhetoric” like he did in 2008, b/c now there are 4 years of a record to point to.[/quote]
Threadjack alert…
If you want to discuss the virtues of Romney vs. Obama, by all means feel free — but please don’t insert it into an existing discussion on a different topic… rather create a new thread. Thanks…
Rich
October 7, 2012 at 11:24 AM #752280Reality
Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]
Threadjack alert…If you want to discuss the virtues of Romney vs. Obama, by all means feel free — but please don’t insert it into an existing discussion on a different topic… rather create a new thread. Thanks…
Rich[/quote]
Wasn’t the point of the thread to question whether the numbers were faked in order to help with Obama’s re-election ?
Seems to me the presidential race is the real topic.
October 7, 2012 at 11:36 AM #752281Rich ToscanoKeymaster[quote=JohnAlt91941]
Wasn’t the point of the thread to question whether the numbers were faked in order to help with Obama’s re-election ?
[/quote]Exactly. This thread is about the job numbers and the veracity thereof. That’s a different topic from Ye Olde “[Romney or Obama] Is Better For All Of The Following Reasons” debate.
October 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM #752282Veritas
Participant“Real Unemployment Rate: For Millennials It Pushes 17 Percent, But Obama and Romney Prefer to Fight Over Big Bird. According to new data, the millennial voting bloc is still experiencing record rates of unemployment, pushing 12%. When ‘real unemployment’ is factored in, that number jumps to 16.6%.”
Instead of calling it the BLS report, why not just drop the L?
October 8, 2012 at 9:17 AM #752300livinincali
ParticipantIf the government actually wanted reliable statistics on employment they would use income tax receipts. I know the potential flaws with people working under the table and self employed people under reporting but would those people even spend the time to answer a BLS telephone survey in the first place. Obviously there was a time before fast computers and huge databases that make using a survey justified but in today’s era you could tabulate income tax receipts in a night.
November 1, 2012 at 8:47 PM #753634utcsox
ParticipantJob report tomorrow. Gallop projected 7.0% unadjusted unemployment rate. That’s right 7.0%!!
http://www.gallup.com/poll/158483/unadjusted-unemployment-down-october.aspx
It will be fun to see how accurate Gallop tracks official BLS number tomorrow. So far, Gallop has not track the official number very well.
November 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM #753635spdrun
Participant-0.8% monthly change in unemployment is pretty f’en unlikely. Sorry Obama, old boy — you’ll have to hope that Romney’s imbecilic blathering about FEMA followed by a hurricane will score you the election.
November 2, 2012 at 5:05 PM #753647Dukehorn
ParticipantConsidering Obama has nothing to do with the Gallup poll, your sentence makes no sense.
7.9 percent. What’s the new conspiracy theory among the creationists now?
November 2, 2012 at 5:18 PM #753648ParticipantOTOH, participation went up 0.3% in the last two months, which is a good sign.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.