US jobless down to 5 percent as 271,000 jobs created in October

[Neurath]

It is really quite simple to determine what lies beneath this decrease in the participation rate. Quite obviously it is a reflection of the very high number of very successful people who have retired, and retired wealthy, at the age of 50 and below. There must be very many of these people currently in the US because there are so very many from the US in Thailand.

[MZurf]

Heads are exploding in Wingnuttia! How could there possibly be good news coming from the American economy? Fox News is completely clueless how to spin this after they've been telling people the end is near and Obama is the devil.

You can see it here on TV in the comments above. They're all going crazy trying to spin these numbers. How is this possible? The statistics are all bad! They're from the "Libural" media!!!

The election of a Republican candidate (scary, I know), is all based on the economy being in the dumpster and the world being the edge of collapse, with the strong Republican hero the only one who can save us.

Sorry boys, it ain't happening.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/videos/a39520/fox-anchors-jobs-report/

[arjunadawn]

94 Million out of the work force does not seem to affect the figures

I have seen independant % and they say it's closer to 34% unemployment

Please provide links. That type of figure is absolutely ludicrous. Can you imagine how many people would be on the street begging if 34% of the population were unemployed?

Considering I travel back to the USA often, traveling between rural Oklahoma and Arkansas, New York City, San Francisco & Seattle, I'm calling BS on your claims. I have seen no such issues, in fact many that I knew that had employment issues are currently gainfully employed. Please spread your fear mongering elsewhere unless you have facts to back it up.

34% seems preposterous. Perhaps this number was fantaszied from the number of americans out of the labor force being deducted from the imagined entire population. Otherwise, I cant guess where this comes from. However, no one can prove that 34% is anymore fictitious than 5%. Most people with any sense realize the Unemployment Rate is sheer nonsense. I think the numbers from Shadow Stats are more likely accurate.

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandimicco/2015/02/13/jobs-the-real-unemployment-rate-please-anyone/

http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-08-27/whats-the-unemployment-rate-new-research-suggests-we-have-no-idea

Regardless of the source % #s its obvious the Gov announced Unemployment Reports have become a wholly owned farce of politics. It is like Star Wars mind trick: "These are the numbers your looking for!"

Two opposing previous posts- that there is plenty of employment in the US and that Americans have become dependent on the 'dole' and are not trying to work- are both correct. Degrading career tracks, fields, benefits, and hollowing out the value of the dollar while increasing access to public assistance easily conspire to sever a generation from the opportunities of those previously. There is signigicant evidence to suggest that there is definitely an irrevocable injury to the endemic US workforce.

http://cis.org/all-employment-growth-since-2000-went-to-immigrants

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/dec/02/peter-morici/economist-immigrants-have-taken-all-new-jobs-creat/

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/08/most-net-job-gains-went-to-immigrants-since-recession/

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/01/06/do-immigrants-take-jobs-from-american-born-workers/unskilled-workers-lose-out-to-immigrants

[JeffreyO]

94 Million out of the work force does not seem to affect the figures

I have seen independant % and they say it's closer to 34% unemployment

Please provide links. That type of figure is absolutely ludicrous. Can you imagine how many people would be on the street begging if 34% of the population were unemployed?

Considering I travel back to the USA often, traveling between rural Oklahoma and Arkansas, New York City, San Francisco & Seattle, I'm calling BS on your claims. I have seen no such issues, in fact many that I knew that had employment issues are currently gainfully employed. Please spread your fear mongering elsewhere unless you have facts to back it up.

By Ali Meyer | April 3, 2015 | 8:58 AM EDT

(CNSNews.com) - The number of Americans 16 years and older who did not participate in the labor force--meaning they neither had a job nor actively sought one in the last four weeks--rose from 92,898,000 in February to 93,175,000 in March, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That is the first time the number of Americans out of the labor force has exceeded 93 million.

Also from February to March, the labor force participation rate dropped from 62.8 percent to 62.7 percent, matching a 37-year low.

Plain matters of fact are terrible stubborn things.

CNS News, a hardline, right wing, conservative mouthpiece lays claims that say Obama has destroyed jobs and I am to believe it? I'm sorry, please show me data from a neutral source.

[up2u2]

Star Wars Mind Trick? Do you mean Jedi Mind Trick?

The Jedi Mind Trick wouldn't be an appropriate metaphor in this instance. I would go with Jedi Meld in that you would be looking for the collective Jedi conscience to probably favour the published Government statistical data rather than right wing political media propaganda and 'Shadow stats' (whatever they are lol). Maybe a question for Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jinn.

[chuckd]

94 Million out of the work force does not seem to affect the figures

I have seen independant % and they say it's closer to 34% unemployment

Please provide links. That type of figure is absolutely ludicrous. Can you imagine how many people would be on the street begging if 34% of the population were unemployed?

Considering I travel back to the USA often, traveling between rural Oklahoma and Arkansas, New York City, San Francisco & Seattle, I'm calling BS on your claims. I have seen no such issues, in fact many that I knew that had employment issues are currently gainfully employed. Please spread your fear mongering elsewhere unless you have facts to back it up.

By Ali Meyer | April 3, 2015 | 8:58 AM EDT

(CNSNews.com) - The number of Americans 16 years and older who did not participate in the labor force--meaning they neither had a job nor actively sought one in the last four weeks--rose from 92,898,000 in February to 93,175,000 in March, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That is the first time the number of Americans out of the labor force has exceeded 93 million.

Also from February to March, the labor force participation rate dropped from 62.8 percent to 62.7 percent, matching a 37-year low.

Plain matters of fact are terrible stubborn things.

CNS News, a hardline, right wing, conservative mouthpiece lays claims that say Obama has destroyed jobs and I am to believe it? I'm sorry, please show me data from a neutral source.

Following is a link to the Bureau of Labor Statistics site detailing the 94 million.

Draw your own conclusions.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm

[samran]

^^

My conclusion is I see lots of unemployment figures with a 4 or a 5 in front of them. Which is a remarkable feat given where we were even 4 years ago.

This thread is funny though, the 'don't tread on me crowd' having great difficuly coping with 93m people deciding to do their own thing.

[Pinot]

Bush left with 10% unemployment. It's now 5%. The black man in the Whitehouse cut the official unemployment rate in half. I know it's painful but try and accept it. Everyone else that doesn't watch Fox News does.

Republicans...fighting the battles that only they can see.

[Dumbastheycome]

- snip- The truth is that the United States is printing money at an alarming rate...

Bullshit. The US doesn't "print money" other than to replace damaged money and to keep pace with ordinary inflation. There aren't more actual USD in this world than there were 30 years ago other than for the above reasons. ATM there are about 1.4 trillion USD in the entire world.

If the US could just "print money" it wouldn't need to increase its debt every year. Think about that. When it needs money it borrows it.

I have had the opportunity to spend several weeks traveling through a number of US states. One thing that struck me was the number of 'help wanted' signs in store windows. These were in a lot of fast food places, restaurants, gas stations etc. Some places listed a starting salary higher than the usual entry level, minimum wage.

This is so true. It's hard to read the bullshit from some posters when you drive around the country and see so many help wanted signs on businesses. Many who aren't in the workforce don't want to work and many are collecting benefits because they are lazy.

There are tons of jobs listed even on Craigslist and many are very good jobs.

Then there's always that segment that failed to get an education or learn a good trade and they often blame everyone else when all that's available for them is flipping burgers for people who did get an education.

The US is doing fine, thank you, despite those who refuse to make the effort to participate.

Cheers.

"Bullshit. The US doesn't "print money" other than to replace damaged money"

So it really is toilet tissue ?.

[Dumbastheycome]

Plenty of employment? Gas stations and fast food outlets........................? At 10 cents above minimum what? Wiggle your assets for tips ..ok!

[OMGImInPattaya]

I blame this low jobless rate to Obama's economic mismanagement as well as the Obamacare "socialized" medical insurance program, both of which have ruined the economy.

[jjJJ1133]

Guess you didn't comprehend the part where they used the Bureau of Labor (BLS) statistics in they're article.

By the way Bureau of Labor statistics is part of the United States Federal government - United States bureau of Labor to be specific.

[Dumbastheycome]

Official stats are easy to manipulate. None easier than unemployment.

" You are required to eliminate those applicants who are so un-qualified for any employment ( thus unemployable) !" That will include any persons with un -insured disability, females with infants, disabled dependants, etc. These will be moved to a new classification.

Wow ! Unemployment stats just went down ! See how good we are.

[jjJJ1133]

94 Million out of the work force does not seem to affect the figures

I have seen independant % and they say it's closer to 34% unemployment

Please provide links. That type of figure is absolutely ludicrous. Can you imagine how many people would be on the street begging if 34% of the population were unemployed?

Considering I travel back to the USA often, traveling between rural Oklahoma and Arkansas, New York City, San Francisco & Seattle, I'm calling BS on your claims. I have seen no such issues, in fact many that I knew that had employment issues are currently gainfully employed. Please spread your fear mongering elsewhere unless you have facts to back it up.

By Ali Meyer | April 3, 2015 | 8:58 AM EDT

(CNSNews.com) - The number of Americans 16 years and older who did not participate in the labor force--meaning they neither had a job nor actively sought one in the last four weeks--rose from 92,898,000 in February to 93,175,000 in March, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That is the first time the number of Americans out of the labor force has exceeded 93 million.

Also from February to March, the labor force participation rate dropped from 62.8 percent to 62.7 percent, matching a 37-year low.

Plain matters of fact are terrible stubborn things.

CNS News, a hardline, right wing, conservative mouthpiece lays claims that say Obama has destroyed jobs and I am to believe it? I'm sorry, please show me data from a neutral source.

Guess you didn't comprehend the part where they used the Bureau of Labor (BLS) statistics in they're article.

By the way Bureau of Labor statistics is part of the United States Federal government - United States bureau of Labor to be specific.

[craigt3365]

Interesting article:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/07/news/economy/part-time-workers-find-full-time-work/index.html?iid=hp-stack-intl

The number of part-time workers who would rather have full-time jobs has fallen by more than 1 million to 5.7 million in the past 12 months. It's the lowest number since 2008.

"It's a real sign that the labor market is healing," says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the think tank American Action Forum.

Another comment:

And when more people get full-time work, wages go up. That's exactly what happened Friday --wages for everyone grew 2.5% in October -- the best one-month gain in years.

[gazzasore]

[lostboy]

94 Million out of the work force does not seem to affect the figures

I have seen independent % and they say it's closer to 34% unemployment

I am not sure people actually translate what you are saying but you are dead right! This is how Unemployment numbers from the US Gov are able to successfully dupe most Americans. Few understand that the these numbers only count people who are actually out looking, registered as looking, collecting benefits, etc. These do not include Farm numbers, etc. These numbers are arrived at totally by fiat- what they choose to count.

The real issue is the near 100 million out of the work force, as you note. These people are people who could be working, should be working, but are no longer counted because they cannot get unemployment, and are otherwise out of work for x amount of time. What this does is artificially create the sample numbers you then derive the Unemployment percentage- why? Because it only counts a certain, select group of people. Meanwhile, nearly 100,000,000 who could be working are not.

Thus it is not simply a matter of difference of opinion of meaning it is a matter of great subterfuge and deceit. America is actually hollowing out, cannibalizing money from one pocket to float the appearance of money in another pocket, while Rome rots. 271,000 jobs created does not even roughly touch the near 100 million. Why? The calculation of these jobs is based on those in the sample population. Those people went to work. Those newer unemployed went to work.

America is in a long agonal sigh.

The Unemployment Rate is merely a statistic. What makes a statistic worse than 'lies & damn lies' is when the metrics used to produce that statistic are changed or altered. As far as I am aware, the method of calculating the Unemployment Rate is open to all who wish to study it and the method hasn't changed in quite some time.

So what happens when you don't like the statistic? You provide one that better fits your position even if it has absolutely no bearing on the topic. I guess all this is outlined in the memo from the right-wing think tanks on 'How to Deflect Away from Positive Unemployment Data'.

Workplace Participation rates are calculated on an entirely different basis than the Unemployment Rate. There is nothing sinister about the Workplace Participation Rate calculation. What is sinister is using that to attach unemployment statistics. Others in this thread have pointed to challenges in the assumptions that underly the Workplace Participation Rate and I believe that a more intellectually honest approach would be to resolve those discrepancies in the methodology before using some number, that you arbitrarily round up to make it more frightening.

There are a score of reasons for people not participating in the traditional workplace i.e. the workplace based on an industrial and manufacturing economy. One of the key reasons is the way the economy has changed and so the types of jobs are different. Consequently, it is not surprising if the numbers of people participating in a traditional workplace environment is diminishing. This is a positive move showing the dynamics of new economies.

You are gifted with eloquence and have often attacked posters for intellectual dishonesty. It would seem that your advocacy of the tea bag play book is a dishonest use of your gifts. The Unemployment Rate which has been calculated the same way for decades show that there is statistically full employment in the United States. Congratulations to the President for this achievement. It will add to his legacy alongside the Affordable Care Act, removing troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, closing Guantamano and his support for marriage equality. The list continues.

[up2u2]

You will find the methodology of producing employment statistics will be consistent throughout major Trading Nations and consistent from one set of numbers to the next. So this right wing attempt to undermine the good numbers the Obama administration has achieved is just sour grapes. Even in defeat right wing Republicans cannot show any strength of character.

So some have argued that the 'true' unemployment number is not 5% but 35% so that would mean when GWB left office the unemployment rate was 10% so that would be 70% unemployment. It is as obvious as gumboots on a duck that some are just running a flawed political ideology that has nothing to do with facts.

[Dumbastheycome]

All the spin doctoring in the world does not alter the defensive need of it to deny that the US is not as economically healthy as it used to be. Globally Corporates have raped the world to financial standstill. Now a last effort to squeeze out the last coins is what TTP is about. When the people,employed or not, cannot provide an ever expanding profit then take it directly from Governments!

[arjunadawn]

94 Million out of the work force does not seem to affect the figures

I have seen independent % and they say it's closer to 34% unemployment

I am not sure people actually translate what you are saying but you are dead right! This is how Unemployment numbers from the US Gov are able to successfully dupe most Americans. Few understand that the these numbers only count people who are actually out looking, registered as looking, collecting benefits, etc. These do not include Farm numbers, etc. These numbers are arrived at totally by fiat- what they choose to count.

The real issue is the near 100 million out of the work force, as you note. These people are people who could be working, should be working, but are no longer counted because they cannot get unemployment, and are otherwise out of work for x amount of time. What this does is artificially create the sample numbers you then derive the Unemployment percentage- why? Because it only counts a certain, select group of people. Meanwhile, nearly 100,000,000 who could be working are not.

Thus it is not simply a matter of difference of opinion of meaning it is a matter of great subterfuge and deceit. America is actually hollowing out, cannibalizing money from one pocket to float the appearance of money in another pocket, while Rome rots. 271,000 jobs created does not even roughly touch the near 100 million. Why? The calculation of these jobs is based on those in the sample population. Those people went to work. Those newer unemployed went to work.

America is in a long agonal sigh.

The Unemployment Rate is merely a statistic. What makes a statistic worse than 'lies & damn lies' is when the metrics used to produce that statistic are changed or altered. As far as I am aware, the method of calculating the Unemployment Rate is open to all who wish to study it and the method hasn't changed in quite some time.

So what happens when you don't like the statistic? You provide one that better fits your position even if it has absolutely no bearing on the topic. I guess all this is outlined in the memo from the right-wing think tanks on 'How to Deflect Away from Positive Unemployment Data'.

Workplace Participation rates are calculated on an entirely different basis than the Unemployment Rate. There is nothing sinister about the Workplace Participation Rate calculation. What is sinister is using that to attach unemployment statistics. Others in this thread have pointed to challenges in the assumptions that underly the Workplace Participation Rate and I believe that a more intellectually honest approach would be to resolve those discrepancies in the methodology before using some number, that you arbitrarily round up to make it more frightening.

There are a score of reasons for people not participating in the traditional workplace i.e. the workplace based on an industrial and manufacturing economy. One of the key reasons is the way the economy has changed and so the types of jobs are different. Consequently, it is not surprising if the numbers of people participating in a traditional workplace environment is diminishing. This is a positive move showing the dynamics of new economies.

You are gifted with eloquence and have often attacked posters for intellectual dishonesty. It would seem that your advocacy of the tea bag play book is a dishonest use of your gifts. The Unemployment Rate which has been calculated the same way for decades show that there is statistically full employment in the United States. Congratulations to the President for this achievement. It will add to his legacy alongside the Affordable Care Act, removing troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, closing Guantamano and his support for marriage equality. The list continues.

I have rarely attacked posters for "intellectual dishonesty:" it is either honesty or intellect (reasoning). When most provide faulty logic it does not follow they are being dishonest. Example, I presume[d]*** your post is honest, but it is intellectually flawed. When your third sentence is wrong all the water you pull from that well will be unpalatable.

Whether or not to "like" statistics is the purview of the emotional crowd- the left. Most data can be objectively interpreted and a shared observation common to all, except with those who can only "like" and feel the world. The BLS scam is no more than the reliance on a process that differs little from yarrow sticks and chicken blood divination. Its the modern of equivalent of an old man, a pointed hat, soma, and a full moon- utter rubbish. The left always appeal to the emotive because they lack the ability to self ascertain the origin of their emotions, erroneously granting feeling/liking the same legitimacy as rationale faculties. "Like" and feel have little value in numbers.

While I do not know where 34% came from its hardly a stretch to "round up" to 100,000,000 out of work from an estimated 92,000,000+.

("...arbitrarily round up to make it more frightening:" 92,000,000+ is hardly less frightening than 100,000,000. When 92x is terrifying as to be spellbinding rounding up to 100x is hardly worthy of comment). That you would pivot on this point reveals a marked absence of strength. Your linkage of this issue with Afghanistan, Healthcare, and war suggests the wobbly legs of your position. Why not simply provide the merit of your strength? How about some references to abuse our fantasies? Its easy to appear informed from your pajamas. Basically, you have soundly rebutted your own post as you progressed; thanks!

***I took your entire post seriously until I read "tea bag." This simple phrase outs you as a intellectual poser. You did such a good job of emotionally rebuking another but then the Fruedian voice could not help but sign the post with your real motivation. "Intellectual honesty?" Your kidding, right?***

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/unemployment-rate-wrong_n_3619152.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2012/10/16/why-jack-welch-has-a-point-about-unemployment-numbers/

"...the method hasn't changed in quite some time."

BLS changes- http://www.bls.gov/mlr/1995/10/art3full.pdf

BLS changes- http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-12-28-1Ajobless28_ST_N.htm

Edited November 9, 2015 by arjunadawn

[Asiantravel]

94 Million out of the work force does not seem to affect the figures

I have seen independant % and they say it's closer to 34% unemployment

Please provide links. That type of figure is absolutely ludicrous. Can you imagine how many people would be on the street begging if 34% of the population were unemployed?

Considering I travel back to the USA often, traveling between rural Oklahoma and Arkansas, New York City, San Francisco & Seattle, I'm calling BS on your claims. I have seen no such issues, in fact many that I knew that had employment issues are currently gainfully employed. Please spread your fear mongering elsewhere unless you have facts to back it up.

" Today, too few are paying for too many. Only 32% of our population financially supports the rest of our population "

http://jobenomicsblog.com/tag/bureau-of-labor-statistics/

[Asiantravel]

Agreed. But still better than a few years ago. And better than the prostignations of many who said the US was doomed! LOL

well the former chief United States accountant says the US debt is 3 times more than people think

" In a shocking admission for most of mainstream America, the former U.S. comptroller general says the real U.S. debt is closer to about $65 trillion than the oft-cited figure of $18 trillion, thanks to unfunded liabilities which simply cannot be ignored. Unless economic growth accelerates, he warns, "you’re not going to be able to provide the kind of social safety net that we need in this country," adding unequivocially that Americans have "lost touch with reality" when it comes to spending."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/259476-ex-gao-head-us-debt-is-three-times-more-than-you-think

[MaxYakov]

Absolutely correct. The American government manipulates everything to keep its populace in the dark and uniformed. The current administration has done nothing to help the poor or middle class and I doubt the next President will do anything either unless a miracle happened and Bernie Sanders was elected. The truth is that the United States is printing money at an alarming rate and while the markets are reacting they do so because they know that if the US goes under so will they. Politicians, Lawyers and Accountants. Only they will be left along with the cockroaches if a nuclear war erupts. You can't tell the difference.

Sorry, but BS. The government is one of the most open in the world. Journalists are free to peruse non-sensitive data at will. It's out there for the public to view. Some don't like how the unemployment numbers are calculated, but not matter how it's done, some will always be unhappy. You can please some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.

My brother is in the healthcare industry. And has no health insurance. He says Obama's new policy is a dream for him, and many others. He's living with it and knows better than us over here.

I find it amazing that many on here who complain have never been to the US. And get most of their info from "fringe" websites. Don't believe everything you read on zerohedge.com or RT times.

The US is doing very well right now. Some areas need addressing. Just like in every country. But overall, the US has come a long way since the 2nd biggest depression in history a few years ago.

Agree. People can complain all they want about the unemployment rate, but it's always been calculated that way. What is indisputable is that the unemployment rate has been steadily going down under this administration. The GOP has to preach doom and gloom because that's the only way they can win back the Presidency. It's really quite amazing what President Obama has been able to accomplish after inheriting such as mess. But the Republicans will never admit it because frankly, they can't.

Yeah, sure He's accomplished a lot, alright:

Of course we won't discuss the 10 trillion additional debt that occurred under Obama, will we?

Or the miserable US GDP growth rate for the last four years (World Bank - GDP Growth Data):

2011 - 1.6

2012 - 2.3

2013 - 2.2

2014 - 2.4

2015 - 2.76 (Average of first 3 quarters - Trading Economics

The US Department 0f Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis visuals indicate a country suffering from economic delirium tremens:

Then there is the Food Stamp Situation: Up 70% Under Obama - Washington Times - March 28, 2013

(Gee, I wonder if it's gotten any better).

I would go on a the risk of confusing you even more with facts.

[chuckd]

You will find the methodology of producing employment statistics will be consistent throughout major Trading Nations and consistent from one set of numbers to the next. So this right wing attempt to undermine the good numbers the Obama administration has achieved is just sour grapes. Even in defeat right wing Republicans cannot show any strength of character.

So some have argued that the 'true' unemployment number is not 5% but 35% so that would mean when GWB left office the unemployment rate was 10% so that would be 70% unemployment. It is as obvious as gumboots on a duck that some are just running a flawed political ideology that has nothing to do with facts.

I presume you will consider my response as proof of a lack of strength of character. Too bad.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Many consider the real unemployment rate as being the U-6 rate, which is described as follows:

"U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force"

With the further explanation:

"NOTE: Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​The U-6 unemployment rate for October 2015 stands at 9.8%, nearly doubling the announced 5% figure.

The main stream media seldom points out the U-6 rate.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

[lostboy]

94 Million out of the work force does not seem to affect the figures

I have seen independent % and they say it's closer to 34% unemployment

I am not sure people actually translate what you are saying but you are dead right! This is how Unemployment numbers from the US Gov are able to successfully dupe most Americans. Few understand that the these numbers only count people who are actually out looking, registered as looking, collecting benefits, etc. These do not include Farm numbers, etc. These numbers are arrived at totally by fiat- what they choose to count.

The real issue is the near 100 million out of the work force, as you note. These people are people who could be working, should be working, but are no longer counted because they cannot get unemployment, and are otherwise out of work for x amount of time. What this does is artificially create the sample numbers you then derive the Unemployment percentage- why? Because it only counts a certain, select group of people. Meanwhile, nearly 100,000,000 who could be working are not.

Thus it is not simply a matter of difference of opinion of meaning it is a matter of great subterfuge and deceit. America is actually hollowing out, cannibalizing money from one pocket to float the appearance of money in another pocket, while Rome rots. 271,000 jobs created does not even roughly touch the near 100 million. Why? The calculation of these jobs is based on those in the sample population. Those people went to work. Those newer unemployed went to work.

America is in a long agonal sigh.

The Unemployment Rate is merely a statistic. What makes a statistic worse than 'lies & damn lies' is when the metrics used to produce that statistic are changed or altered. As far as I am aware, the method of calculating the Unemployment Rate is open to all who wish to study it and the method hasn't changed in quite some time.

So what happens when you don't like the statistic? You provide one that better fits your position even if it has absolutely no bearing on the topic. I guess all this is outlined in the memo from the right-wing think tanks on 'How to Deflect Away from Positive Unemployment Data'.

Workplace Participation rates are calculated on an entirely different basis than the Unemployment Rate. There is nothing sinister about the Workplace Participation Rate calculation. What is sinister is using that to attach unemployment statistics. Others in this thread have pointed to challenges in the assumptions that underly the Workplace Participation Rate and I believe that a more intellectually honest approach would be to resolve those discrepancies in the methodology before using some number, that you arbitrarily round up to make it more frightening.

There are a score of reasons for people not participating in the traditional workplace i.e. the workplace based on an industrial and manufacturing economy. One of the key reasons is the way the economy has changed and so the types of jobs are different. Consequently, it is not surprising if the numbers of people participating in a traditional workplace environment is diminishing. This is a positive move showing the dynamics of new economies.

You are gifted with eloquence and have often attacked posters for intellectual dishonesty. It would seem that your advocacy of the tea bag play book is a dishonest use of your gifts. The Unemployment Rate which has been calculated the same way for decades show that there is statistically full employment in the United States. Congratulations to the President for this achievement. It will add to his legacy alongside the Affordable Care Act, removing troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, closing Guantamano and his support for marriage equality. The list continues.

I have rarely attacked posters for "intellectual dishonesty:" it is either honesty or intellect (reasoning). When most provide faulty logic it does not follow they are being dishonest. Example, I presume[d]*** your post is honest, but it is intellectually flawed. When your third sentence is wrong all the water you pull from that well will be unpalatable.

Whether or not to "like" statistics is the purview of the emotional crowd- the left. Most data can be objectively interpreted and a shared observation common to all, except with those who can only "like" and feel the world. The BLS scam is no more than the reliance on a process that differs little from yarrow sticks and chicken blood divination. Its the modern of equivalent of an old man, a pointed hat, soma, and a full moon- utter rubbish. The left always appeal to the emotive because they lack the ability to self ascertain the origin of their emotions, erroneously granting feeling/liking the same legitimacy as rationale faculties. "Like" and feel have little value in numbers.

While I do not know where 34% came from its hardly a stretch to "round up" to 100,000,000 out of work from an estimated 92,000,000+.

("...arbitrarily round up to make it more frightening:" 92,000,000+ is hardly less frightening than 100,000,000. When 92x is terrifying as to be spellbinding rounding up to 100x is hardly worthy of comment). That you would pivot on this point reveals a marked absence of strength. Your linkage of this issue with Afghanistan, Healthcare, and war suggests the wobbly legs of your position. Why not simply provide the merit of your strength? How about some references to abuse our fantasies? Its easy to appear informed from your pajamas. Basically, you have soundly rebutted your own post as you progressed; thanks!

***I took your entire post seriously until I read "tea bag." This simple phrase outs you as a intellectual poser. You did such a good job of emotionally rebuking another but then the Fruedian voice could not help but sign the post with your real motivation. "Intellectual honesty?" Your kidding, right?***

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/unemployment-rate-wrong_n_3619152.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2012/10/16/why-jack-welch-has-a-point-about-unemployment-numbers/

"...the method hasn't changed in quite some time."

BLS changes- http://www.bls.gov/mlr/1995/10/art3full.pdf

BLS changes- http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-12-28-1Ajobless28_ST_N.htm

Well, I did expect better but once you start down the road of intellectual dishonesty, it is hard to claw back. The thing about logic is that it can be demonstrated. Merely claiming flawed logic without such demonstration is therefore logically flawed. QED, you might say. I will ignore your perpetuation of some fantastical view of emotional responses to data. It is a frivolous diversion and you know it.

Since you are deliberately missing the point, I will reiterate. Using workplace participation rates to counter unemployment rate figures is intellectually dishonest. I am happy for people to continuously argue the assumptions, metrics and methodologies behind such data and the way such data is used in budgeting, policy and planning. I am happy for arguments to take place about which data sets are more appropriate and revealing. But you cannot argue that the unemployment rate does not use a methodology the is understood and the basic underlying principles haven't changed for some time, even though some details may have changed - just as other indices change over time. But such changes are quite transparent.

Governments, businesses and all sorts of organisations rely on indices. They refer to indices with the full knowledge and understanding o the methodologies used to create the figures and how that impacts on their usage of the figures. That you have a political objection to the agency that produces these figures is irrelevant. They are intended to be used in various models to assist policy and decision makes, both public and private.

You are the one to conflate Afghanistan with the unemployment rate in a quite desperate attempt to go ad hominem. My words are clear and can be seen by all. I congratulate the President and refer to his legacy.

If you can demonstrate that the US is not currently at a level of statistical full employment, as measured by the standards used by the agency that calculates those figures, then please do so. Doing otherwise is certainly intellectually dishonest.

Edited November 9, 2015 by lostboy

[jjJJ1133]

Absolutely correct. The American government manipulates everything to keep its populace in the dark and uniformed. The current administration has done nothing to help the poor or middle class and I doubt the next President will do anything either unless a miracle happened and Bernie Sanders was elected. The truth is that the United States is printing money at an alarming rate and while the markets are reacting they do so because they know that if the US goes under so will they. Politicians, Lawyers and Accountants. Only they will be left along with the cockroaches if a nuclear war erupts. You can't tell the difference.

Sorry, but BS. The government is one of the most open in the world. Journalists are free to peruse non-sensitive data at will. It's out there for the public to view. Some don't like how the unemployment numbers are calculated, but not matter how it's done, some will always be unhappy. You can please some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.

My brother is in the healthcare industry. And has no health insurance. He says Obama's new policy is a dream for him, and many others. He's living with it and knows better than us over here.

I find it amazing that many on here who complain have never been to the US. And get most of their info from "fringe" websites. Don't believe everything you read on zerohedge.com or RT times.

The US is doing very well right now. Some areas need addressing. Just like in every country. But overall, the US has come a long way since the 2nd biggest depression in history a few years ago.

Agree. People can complain all they want about the unemployment rate, but it's always been calculated that way. What is indisputable is that the unemployment rate has been steadily going down under this administration. The GOP has to preach doom and gloom because that's the only way they can win back the Presidency. It's really quite amazing what President Obama has been able to accomplish after inheriting such as mess. But the Republicans will never admit it because frankly, they can't.

Yeah, sure He's accomplished a lot, alright:

Of course we won't discuss the 10 trillion additional debt that occurred under Obama, will we?

Or the miserable US GDP growth rate for the last four years (World Bank - GDP Growth Data):

2011 - 1.6

2012 - 2.3

2013 - 2.2

2014 - 2.4

2015 - 2.76 (Average of first 3 quarters - Trading Economics

The US Department 0f Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis visuals indicate a country suffering from economic delirium tremens:

BEA_GDP_Growth_Rate.jpeg

Then there is the Food Stamp Situation: Up 70% Under Obama - Washington Times - March 28, 2013

(Gee, I wonder if it's gotten any better).

I would go on a the risk of confusing you even more with facts.

Liberals hate facts because facts reflect the truth, and the truth wrecks all of their arguments.

[arjunadawn]

The Unemployment Rate is merely a statistic. What makes a statistic worse than 'lies & damn lies' is when the metrics used to produce that statistic are changed or altered. As far as I am aware, the method of calculating the Unemployment Rate is open to all who wish to study it and the method hasn't changed in quite some time.

So what happens when you don't like the statistic? You provide one that better fits your position even if it has absolutely no bearing on the topic. I guess all this is outlined in the memo from the right-wing think tanks on 'How to Deflect Away from Positive Unemployment Data'.

Workplace Participation rates are calculated on an entirely different basis than the Unemployment Rate. There is nothing sinister about the Workplace Participation Rate calculation. What is sinister is using that to attach unemployment statistics. Others in this thread have pointed to challenges in the assumptions that underly the Workplace Participation Rate and I believe that a more intellectually honest approach would be to resolve those discrepancies in the methodology before using some number, that you arbitrarily round up to make it more frightening.

There are a score of reasons for people not participating in the traditional workplace i.e. the workplace based on an industrial and manufacturing economy. One of the key reasons is the way the economy has changed and so the types of jobs are different. Consequently, it is not surprising if the numbers of people participating in a traditional workplace environment is diminishing. This is a positive move showing the dynamics of new economies.

You are gifted with eloquence and have often attacked posters for intellectual dishonesty. It would seem that your advocacy of the tea bag play book is a dishonest use of your gifts. The Unemployment Rate which has been calculated the same way for decades show that there is statistically full employment in the United States. Congratulations to the President for this achievement. It will add to his legacy alongside the Affordable Care Act, removing troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, closing Guantamano and his support for marriage equality. The list continues.

I have rarely attacked posters for "intellectual dishonesty:" it is either honesty or intellect (reasoning). When most provide faulty logic it does not follow they are being dishonest. Example, I presume[d]*** your post is honest, but it is intellectually flawed. When your third sentence is wrong all the water you pull from that well will be unpalatable.

Whether or not to "like" statistics is the purview of the emotional crowd- the left. Most data can be objectively interpreted and a shared observation common to all, except with those who can only "like" and feel the world. The BLS scam is no more than the reliance on a process that differs little from yarrow sticks and chicken blood divination. Its the modern of equivalent of an old man, a pointed hat, soma, and a full moon- utter rubbish. The left always appeal to the emotive because they lack the ability to self ascertain the origin of their emotions, erroneously granting feeling/liking the same legitimacy as rationale faculties. "Like" and feel have little value in numbers.

While I do not know where 34% came from its hardly a stretch to "round up" to 100,000,000 out of work from an estimated 92,000,000+.

("...arbitrarily round up to make it more frightening:" 92,000,000+ is hardly less frightening than 100,000,000. When 92x is terrifying as to be spellbinding rounding up to 100x is hardly worthy of comment). That you would pivot on this point reveals a marked absence of strength. Your linkage of this issue with Afghanistan, Healthcare, and war suggests the wobbly legs of your position. Why not simply provide the merit of your strength? How about some references to abuse our fantasies? Its easy to appear informed from your pajamas. Basically, you have soundly rebutted your own post as you progressed; thanks!

***I took your entire post seriously until I read "tea bag." This simple phrase outs you as a intellectual poser. You did such a good job of emotionally rebuking another but then the Fruedian voice could not help but sign the post with your real motivation. "Intellectual honesty?" Your kidding, right?***

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/unemployment-rate-wrong_n_3619152.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2012/10/16/why-jack-welch-has-a-point-about-unemployment-numbers/

"...the method hasn't changed in quite some time."

BLS changes- http://www.bls.gov/mlr/1995/10/art3full.pdf

BLS changes- http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-12-28-1Ajobless28_ST_N.htm

Well, I did expect better but once you start down the road of intellectual dishonesty, it is hard to claw back. The thing about logic is that it can be demonstrated. Merely claiming flawed logic without such demonstration is therefore logically flawed. QED, you might say. I will ignore your perpetuation of some fantastical view of emotional responses to data. It is a frivolous diversion and you know it.

Since you are deliberately missing the point, I will reiterate. Using workplace participation rates to counter unemployment rate figures is intellectually dishonest. I am happy for people to continuously argue the assumptions, metrics and methodologies behind such data and the way such data is used in budgeting, policy and planning. I am happy for arguments to take place about which data sets are more appropriate and revealing. But you cannot argue that the unemployment rate does not use a methodology the is understood and the basic underlying principles haven't changed for some time, even though some details may have changed - just as other indices change over time. But such changes are quite transparent.

Governments, businesses and all sorts of organisations rely on indices. They refer to indices with the full knowledge and understanding o the methodologies used to create the figures and how that impacts on their usage of the figures. That you have a political objection to the agency that produces these figures is irrelevant. They are intended to be used in various models to assist policy and decision makes, both public and private.

You are the one to conflate Afghanistan with the unemployment rate in a quite desperate attempt to go ad hominem. My words are clear and can be seen by all. I congratulate the President and refer to his legacy.

If you can demonstrate that the US is not currently at a level of statistical full employment, as measured by the standards used by the agency that calculates those figures, then please do so. Doing otherwise is certainly intellectually dishonest.

Actually, the false linkage with Afghanistan/other was not provided by me, only noted. It is possible I miss a point, or the point, but never deliberately. I have no political objection to the BLS, I just think the data is meaningless, except within the narrow spectrum of those in the selected sample. Many people much more able than me think these numbers are essentially useless as a central guide to anything much. You seem to know much about it yet find the data useful. Okay.

It is true that underlying my distrust of these numbers (under multiple administrations) is the sense that America ails more and more and the numbers parroted seem disjointed, surreal from what life is really like in America. You linked the Obama admin with what you cite as other successes as equally as I think those other things as failures. This clearly informs my position, as I suggest it does you. We just process it differently.

This is not the first time I have looked at the same information as another and had a different conclusion. I would prefer I ended this exchange with you on a positive note, rather than negative. I detest ad hominem attacks, however subtle. If I did that I did not realize I had, and would prefer I had not.

[gazzasore]

Paul Craig Roberts Rages At "Another Phony Jobs Number"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-09/paul-craig-roberts-rages-another-phony-jobs-number

Edited November 9, 2015 by gazzasore

[arjunadawn]

Paul Craig Roberts Rages At "Another Phony Jobs Number"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-09/paul-craig-roberts-rages-another-phony-jobs-number

Bravo! This clearly identifies the malaise that many of us sense, without the command of the information to deduce it like the author (who I frequently enjoy reading). The BLS nonsense is eye candy and worse, "Doublespeak" of the like "Work Will Set You Free." It cannot be otherwise as the subterfuge of a nation is behind the deceit. The numbers release are for a dumbed down populace to presume their own observations are just wrong: "my observations must be wrong, the government numbers say so."

Edited November 9, 2015 by arjunadawn

[samran]

I find it quite funny people crying crocodiles tears with respect to discouraged workers.

If we were talking about these same workers in the context of welfare, those same posters will be calling the slackers and not looking hard enough.