Explained in a picture

Give this about a week and the number will change …. to 8.1 again when the real number cruncher do the math…

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/05/jobless-rate-falls-to-78-percent-in-september/

Obama thrown under the bus again by a one time supporter :

The data even elicited a conspiracy theory from former General Electric CEO Jack Welch, who tweeted: "Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can't debate so change numbers."

Way too little, way too late. Literally. Sad when a good jobs report is barely enough to outpace population growth.

And the only reason this number is under 12% is because of all the people that have quit looking for work.

Agreed; he can't cook the books fast enough.

Romney now ahead in all 3 major battleground states, as everyone saw the empty suit Wednesday night and realized why we are in such trouble.

very interesting that 1 month before election that unemployment magically falls below 8%. If they reported the ACTUAL number of people unemployed, it'd be over 10% and no way Obama would get reelected. Government cooking the books as usual.

tk421;1287884 wrote:very interesting that 1 month before election that unemployment magically falls below 8%. If they reported the ACTUAL number of people unemployed, it'd be over 10% and no way Obama would get reelected. Government cooking the books as usual.

U6, which includes those not looking, is at 14.7%. This one also includes those working part time that want to work full time.

Romney nailed it the other night; obama spent 2 years getting obamaKare through while 20 million Americans didn't even have a job; that is a strategic error of horrific proportion, and one that will ultimately cost him his job. And here we are 2 years after that, and 23 million Americans still don't have a job, and we're on course to destroy the finest health CARE in the world. One the greatest presidential blunders in history.

QuakerOats;1287994 wrote:Romney nailed it the other night; obama spent 2 years getting obamaKare through while 20 million Americans didn't even have a job; that is a strategic error of horrific proportion,

I agree with this actually.

I agree to not put too much stock in the numbers, but are you guys really saying the numbers are made up?
So, what's to say we should believe any numbers on unemployment when Romney enters the White House? Or, will suddenly those numbers be legit?

Also, if the administration had influence over the numbers, why were they so bad the previous months?
I mean cannot have it both ways.

The numbers are nice, but are just one data point in the overall health of the economy.

Yeah, they don't have to rig the numbers. It's been so long now that hundreds of thousands quit looking every month. It's a yo-yo between what direction the needle goes based on new claims vs. dropouts.

the biggest one time drop in unemployment in 29 years happens the month before the election and we are not supposed to find that suspicious? Yeah, right.

They may have not made up the numbers, but there is some shady accounting going on. No way in hell you only add 114K jobs and the unemployment number drops .3%. Someone found some previously lost jobs somewhere.

ptown_trojans_1;1288034 wrote:I agree to not put too much stock in the numbers, but are you guys really saying the numbers are made up?
So, what's to say we should believe any numbers on unemployment when Romney enters the White House? Or, will suddenly those numbers be legit?

Also, if the administration had influence over the numbers, why were they so bad the previous months?
I mean cannot have it both ways.

The numbers are nice, but are just one data point in the overall health of the economy.

The rate could be below 5% and the folks here and at the RNC would have something negative to say about it. It's all part of their prayers for economic failure to give their man a chance next month.

Let's face it, after Obama beat McCain in 2008 the Republican Party was in such a sad state that they were willing to do anything to be a major player again, even if it meant rooting for things to tank and give themselves a chance. That's about the time they got together and decided that saying "no" to everything could be their ticket back. They even rode the tea party's coattails and sold their souls to take back the House. What have they done with it since then? Absolutely nothing, other than some social engineering bills and symbolic votes on everything from "In god we trust" to reading the Constitution on the floor of the House. Anything that could be seen as job creating was put on the back burner until they ran this ship aground and got their own man in the White House. And now they think they're on the cusp of doing just that, if Mitt can turn things around in time to win the election. The biggest problem I see with their strategy is that this time they have to deliver. Any kind of repeat of W's policies will turn them out as fast as possible, and there may be no recovery for them.

ptown_trojans_1;1288034 wrote:I agree to not put too much stock in the numbers, but are you guys really saying the numbers are made up?
So, what's to say we should believe any numbers on unemployment when Romney enters the White House? Or, will suddenly those numbers be legit?

Also, if the administration had influence over the numbers, why were they so bad the previous months?
I mean cannot have it both ways.

The numbers are nice, but are just one data point in the overall health of the economy.

The numbers are not "made up". They signify real things. They just don't mean what they are telling you they mean.

So putting it all together, what does this mean for the true state of the US economy? Recall back in September one of our Charts of the Day was the number of Unemployed and Underemployed for the month of August, which was 25.8 million. Readers may be surprised to learn that when putting it all together, in September this number increased to 26.2 million.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-05/reason-todays-unemployment-rate-plunge-part-time-jobs-economic-reasons-surge-most-qe

Cleveland Buck is correct as usual. The numbers aren't "made up" but they can be manipulated, and I echo previous posters' points that it is funny that it is being manipulated so close to an election. The easiest way to make the unemployment rate go down is to make the job seekers pool go down as well, including those working part time that would take a full time job if offered.

It is just shifting numbers, similar to the GM ad a year or so ago when the CEO said that GM paid back their debt in full. On the one hand it was correct but on the other, and more accurate hand they didn't do anything, they just shifted numbers on their financials and used a different taxpayer funded debt to pay off the claimed taxpayer funded debt.

They didn't change anything to help Obama. Bush used the same phony numbers and Clinton before him. They have to keep their subjects believing that they have things under control.

stlouiedipalma;1288122 wrote:The rate could be below 5% and the folks here and at the RNC would have something negative to say about it. It's all part of their prayers for economic failure to give their man a chance next month.

Let's face it, after Obama beat McCain in 2008 the Republican Party was in such a sad state that they were willing to do anything to be a major player again, even if it meant rooting for things to tank and give themselves a chance. That's about the time they got together and decided that saying "no" to everything could be their ticket back. They even rode the tea party's coattails and sold their souls to take back the House. What have they done with it since then? Absolutely nothing, other than some social engineering bills and symbolic votes on everything from "In god we trust" to reading the Constitution on the floor of the House. Anything that could be seen as job creating was put on the back burner until they ran this ship aground and got their own man in the White House. And now they think they're on the cusp of doing just that, if Mitt can turn things around in time to win the election. The biggest problem I see with their strategy is that this time they have to deliver. Any kind of repeat of W's policies will turn them out as fast as possible, and there may be no recovery for them.

Kind of hypocritical when the left was saying those exact same things about Bush because the U3 was 6%.