Does anyone out there really believe this? All the pundits I heard this morning had the exact same initial reaction as I did. The only increased 114,000 jobs yet the unemployment dropped to 7.8%? And just two days after Obama bombed in the debate against Mitt Romney? How convenient!! Everyone with a brain knows that these numbers will be adjusted upwards again… like they are after every jobs report, but not until after the Election… HMMMM….
Another factor is that many of the 141,000 jobs are part-time or seasonal; jobs that normally would not even be counted in the report.
Hannity did a full segment on his show tonight on how the Obama administration created the unemployment # drop by using fuzzy math… hoping the average American won’t catch on…
Obama’s October surprise? Unemployment drops to 7.8%
Video: Here the Boys on the Blaze Discuss the Numbers
President Obama’s re-election chances just got a major boost with unemployment rate dipping under the 8% barrier for the first time since early 2009 when Obama took office. But is it all good news? Not exactly. Stu took a look at the numbers and explained why it’s not as great for Obama as he’d like you to think.
TheBlaze has been tracking the key updates of the report as well as some of the reactions. From their coverage:
- Unemployment drops to 44-month low to 7.8%
- However, many are questioning the numbers due to “contradictory data points” such as the total unemployment level soaring but the low net number
- Government says 873K people found work — but reports only 114K new jobs were added
- Former GE CEO alleged fraud, sending a tweet saying “these Chicago guys will do anything”
- Popular finance blog Zero Hedge even called it a “pre-election ‘massaging’ farce”
This report will likely have a huge impact on voters going into the final few weeks before the election, and on the surface the dip from 8.1% to 7.8% puts unemployment at its lowest point in four years.
Stu found some interesting figures that the Obama administration probably doesn’t want you to know.
“Basically what happened is one jobs measure said a gain of 114,000 jobs, which is basically exactly what economists had predicted. It’s a rate that would take until the year 2025 for us to get back to the jobs numbers that we had before the recession, the economic crisis that happened in late 2008. So it’s not like a good number, but it’s about what they predicted. Shockingly, though, they also predicted the unemployment rate would rise to 8.2%. Instead it fell to 7.8%. That’s a gap that almost you never, ever see,” Stu said.
“Now, to put that in perspective, one jobs report reported 114,000 new jobs. The other one where the unemployment rate is based reported 873,000 new jobs. 114,000 compared to 873,000. I’ve never seen a gap like that before in one of these reports. It’s gigantic.”
“One of the reasons for that is 582,000 brand new spanking part time jobs for people who want full time jobs. So you want to work full time but all you can find is part time; or, you were working full time before and they’ve cut your hours back and now you’re only part time,” Stu explained. “One of the reasons for that is 582,000 brand new spanking part time jobs for people who want full time jobs. So you want to work full time but all you can find is part time; or you were working full time before and they’ve cut your hours back and now you’re only part time.”
Obama to defense contractors: Wait until after election for the layoffs, will ya?
Video: Is the White House asking private companies to break the law?
Unemployment numbers were released this morning, and they were actually good.
Or were they?
Last month, unemployment was reported at 8.4%. This month the number has fallen to 7.8%. The questing is: How did it get there?
- Unemployment drops to 44-month low to 7.8%
- However, many are questioning the numbers due to “contradictory data points” such as the total unemployment level soaring but the low net number
- Government says 873K people found work — but reports only 114K new jobs were added
- Former GE CEO alleged fraud, sending a tweet saying “these Chicago guys will do anything”
- Popular finance blog Zero Hedge even called it a “pre-election ‘massaging’ farce”
“We all want Americans to be employed. We all want that. Nobody roots against the economy. Nobody roots against Americans, umm, but it’s just all spin,” Pat told listeners this morning. ”What happened was the employment force has gone down so much. If we had the same level of the workforce that we started the year out with, what would the employment rate be today?”
“8.4%,” Stu replied.
Despite the obvious spin of the numbers, Pat pointed out that the administration will trumpet this and use it to slow down the momentum of the Romney campaign following the debate earlier this week.
“It’s going to be agonizing,” Pat said.
Advertisement
Stu, who is not one to jump on the “their manipulating the numbers” bandwagon, pointed out that economists expected to add 115,000 jobs — 114,000 were actually added. The economists also predicted unemployment to rise from 8.1% to 8.2%.
“Instead it went all the way down to 7.8%. Now, they got the jobs number right, but they somehow missed the unemployment rate by .4. I can’t remember that ever happening,” he said. “I’m sure it has in the past, but it’s pretty rare, and it’s shockingly convenient for this administration.”
The fact of the matter is, that if the administration wasn’t worried about unemployment numbers, they wouldn’t be making deals with contractors behind closed doors regarding layoff notices. Stu brought up a story that broke earlier this we regarding defense contractor Lockheed-Martin.
“Lockheed‑Martin heeded a request from the White House ‑‑ this is from a couple of days ago ‑‑ one with political overtones and announced it will not issue layoff notices to thousands of employees just days before the November presidential election.”
TheBlaze.com describes the move from the White House:
“The White House has told defense contractors not to issue layoff notices in November (four days before the election) in preparation for possible budget cuts on Jan 2, which even ABC News calls a move with “political overtones”.
According to the WARN (Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification) Act, contractors are required to give workers a 60 day notice if they are about to be laid off. The across-the-board budget cuts that could happen in January apparently fall under the requirement. But the White House disagrees, and is begging contractors not to do it. In fact, the administration is even promising to pay legal costs if the cuts happen and the companies are sued for not following the law.
In short, Republicans feel the White House is buying off companies to avoid bad press in the 11th hour before the election.”
“So now, you might say, as Lockheed‑Martin said, ‘Wait a minute, though, because it’s a law. So if we don’t give them these pink slips, they could sue us. They can ‑‑ all these workers can say, hey, you didn’t give us any warning and you have to by law and they could sue us.’ So what does the government say? ‘Don’t worry about that; we’ll cover it if they sue you’,” Stu explained.
Basically, the Obama Administration went to a private company and told them that they could break the law, and if they get sued because of it they’ll cover the fees
“And we don’t think they would manipulate a freakin’ unemployment number?” Stu asked.
It’s hard to imagine why the White House would feel the need to go to such lengths if they were having such “success” at boosting alleged job creation.
**GE Boss Jack Welch: Obama Cooking the Books on Jobs
MoneyNews: The U.S. economy added a net 114,000 jobs in September, while the unemployment rate fell to a surprisingly low 7.8 percent, a number former GE boss Jack Welch described as cooked up by the Obama administration.
The September jobs number brought the unemployment rate below 8 percent for the first time in about four years.
Total employment rose by 873,000 in September, following three months of little change, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Unbelievable jobs numbers … these Chicago guys will do anything … can’t debate so change numbers," Welch said on his Twitter page, referring to President Barack Obama’s performance in the first presidential debate earlier this week.
Other experts expressed similar surprise.
"It’s a little confusing, to be honest with you. The number of jobs created wasn’t that high but the unemployment rate came down and the participation rate went up a little bit, so it’s confusing," said Ron Florance, managing director of investment strategy for Wells Fargo Private Bank in Scottsdale, Arizona, according to Reuters.
"All in all, it doesn’t change the trajectory of what the jobs environment has been really for the last year. We continue to increase jobs but not at a rate that is fast enough to significantly change the unemployment picture for American workers."
Revisions to previous data showed hefty improvements as well.
August figures were revised up to 142,000 from 96,000, while July’s figures were revised up to 181,000 jobs created from 141,000.
"The unemployment rate is lower than when Obama took office while Romney will likely say the pace is still lackluster. Conspiracy theorists will go wild on these numbers," said Omer Esiner, chief market analyst at Commonwealth Foreign Exchange, Reuters added.
"Overall, it is a decent report, but nothing to write home about. It does not shed much light on the real state of the economy."
askmarion 
Good day very nice web site!! Excellent .. Wonderful .. I’ll bookmark your site and take the feeds additionally…I’m happy to search out so many useful info here within the post, we need work out more techniques in this regard, thank you for sharing.
just wanted to comment and say that it is a very interesting post.
Pingback: Picking a U.S. President… in 2012… Now Just One Day Away From a New Start | askmarion