New job figures reflect slight uptick to 7.8% & Update

Although the number of unemployed Americans now stands at 12.1 million, the U.S. Bureau of Labor reports that the unemployment rate dipped in September from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent. 

Skeptics pointed out that not only is 7.8 percent unemployment hardly a “real recovery,” but the report reflected an uptick in part-time jobs, the number of self-employed and those who have simply given up their job search and are no longer factored into the statistics. Further,  there appears to be a huge disconnect between the modest number of new jobs reported and the significant decrease in the unemployment rate.

The Labor Department said employers added 114,000 jobs in September. It also claims the economy created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than the department had initially estimated. The unemployment rate itself is based on a separate “household survey,” which showed 873,000 new jobs in September.

This must be an anomaly,” former Congressional Budget Office director Doug Holtz-Eakin said after an analysis of the numbers. “It is out of line with any of the other data.” He noted the household survey is smaller, suggesting it is not as reliable, and called the estimate of 873,000 new jobs “implausible.”

Mitt Romney responded to the report saying, “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… “

In the months after Obama’s inauguration, the rate rose sharply and had topped 8 percent for 43 straight months.

The October jobs report will be released only four days before Election Day.

This 2008 article Data Fudging 101. The History Of US Government Statistics Manipulation tells the rest of the story about data manipulation and the inaccuracy that prevails in the citing of economic statistics — honed to a fine art during Bill Clinton’s presidency.

Read it.  Don’t be conned.


11 Responses to New job figures reflect slight uptick to 7.8% & Update

  1. Hagar says:

    Uhhh… if it takes 120,000 new jobs created to keep the unemployment rate stable, how is that creating only 114,000 jobs reduces the unemployment rate by 0.3%. Looks like politically-motivated voodoo economics to me. Is this the October surprise we’ve been expecting?

  2. Villanova says:

    Hilda Solis the Dem running the Labor Department for Obama is cooking the books to coincide with his reelection bid.
    These numbers reflect the highest monthly job increase in 30 years!! Given the timing, they are damned hard to believe.

  3. Doc says:

    …th’ LIAR-IN-CHIEF had th’ numbers rigged in an attempt to scratch kitty litter over his oderiferous performance in Wed. nite’s debate…

    …NOT FLYIN’ LIAR!!! America knows yer full of BOOLSHEET!!!

  4. Dennis O'Brien says:

    Brings to mind the old saying “Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.” These numbers at this time are highy suspect.

  5. ZOO says:

    How about these numbers: Gas in Mexifornia is topping $5 per gallon, shortages are closing some stations. The cost of fuel has been crippling our economy and spiked the costs of goods and services throughout Obama’s first term. GWB lifted the executive ban on offshore drilling in July 2008, driving per gallon cost down over $2 six months later. Within days after taking office, Obama reactivated the ban and sent costs back to the $3.50+ range. Average&city2=&city3=&crude=n&tme=60&units=us

    • ZOO says:

      Link didn’t post correctly, copy the ENTIRE link and post in your browser to see the “5 Year” pricing.

  6. garvan says:

    No question that the Labor Department got a call from the Liar in Chief.

    No question these are BOGUS figures. Business reported only 114,000 new jobs, which, BTW, is lower than the number of workers dying.

    The 873,000 jobs figure we’re getting from the regime is ABSOLUTELY FAKE!

    What’s more, Romney got it wrong, too, when he said that adding in those who have stopped looking for work (U-6) makes the unemployment rate 11.1%.

    Adding in U-6, the real rate is about 16%.

    Tonight we’ll see this latest obama fraud exposed on ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN, won’t we? Yeah, right.

  7. Stanford says:

    “Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can’t debate so change numbers,” tweeted Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric.

    Americans for Limited Government released a statement saying, “Either the Federal Reserve, which has its fingers on the pulse of every element of the economy, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics manufacturing survey report are grievously wrong or the number used to calculate the unemployment rate are wrong, or worse manipulated. Given that these numbers conveniently meet Obama’s campaign promises one month before the election, the conclusions are obvious.”

    Economic journalist Stuart Varney told Fox News, “There is widespread distrust of this report.”


  8. patriotmom says:

    The report is wrong, period, and only the Nobama faithful, which includes the media, will buy it. Everyone in this country knows people who just got laid off or are still looking for work or are stuck in part-time and contract jobs with no benefits. For those undecideds, let this be another reason NOT to vote for the empty suit who is now proven without a shadow of a doubt to be the Liar in Chief.

    And the Dems have the nerve to say Romney was throwing around lies during the debate…

  9. Attila The Hunny says:

    In this case the letters BLS didn’t remind me of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but of pure and simple “BullSh*t.”

    This article, “Employment Report Reeks of Statistical Manipulation” is very on topic and well written. It answers a host of questions.

  10. garvan says:

    In the paper this morning it looks like the Dems have trotted out a “Republican” former bureaucrat at BLS to claim there is no way anyone at the top could have cooked the numbers without many underlings knowing about it.

    How come I don’t believe him?

%d bloggers like this: