PDA

View Full Version : Unemployment Down To 7.8% Repigs Outraged



Gayle in MD
10-05-2012, 10:59 AM
<span style="color: #990000"> So, naturally, RomneyRyan and other Repiglicans and pundits from the right are already trying to suggest that the numbers were fixed, in spite of the FACT that there have been signs for quite a while, such as rising Home Prices, good and rising numbers in consumer confidence, Americans paying down personal debts, and others, as well, which preceeded these new numbers, and hence, I have included some follow up articles on these new numbers. </span>




<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Jobs Report: U.S. Economy Adds 114,000 Jobs In September; Jobless Rate Down To 7.8 Percent </span>

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent last month, dropping below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years and giving President Barack Obama a potential boost with the election a month away.

The rate declined from 8.1 percent because the number of people who said they were employed soared by 873,000 - an encouraging sign for an economy that's been struggling to create enough jobs.



The number of unemployed Americans is now 12.1 million, the fewest since January 2009.

The Labor Department said employers added 114,000 jobs in September. It also said the economy created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than the department had initially estimated.

Wages rose in September. And more people started looking for work.

The revisions show employers added 146,000 jobs per month from July through September, up from 67,000 in the previous three months.

The 7.8 percent unemployment rate for September matches the rate in January 2009, when Obama took office. In the months after Obama's inauguration, the rate rose sharply and had topped 8 percent for 43 straight months.

The decline in the unemployment rate comes at a critical moment for Obama, who is coming off a weak debate performance this week against GOP challenger Mitt Romney.

The September employment report may be the last that might sway undecided voters. The October jobs report will be released only four days before Election Day.

"This is not what a real recovery looks like," Romney said in a statement.


<span style="color: #990000"> BWA HA HA HA! Pri*k! </span>

But Sal Guatieri, an economist at BMO Capital Markets, said the report signals improvement.

"An overall better-than-expected jobs report, consistent with most recent data that suggest the economy is gaining some momentum," Guatieri said in a note to clients. "The sizeable drop in the unemployment rate could lift the president's re-election chances following a post-debate dip."

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis was asked on CNBC about suspicions that the Obama administration might have skewed the jobs numbers to aid Obama's re-election prospects.

"I'm insulted when I hear that because we have a very professional civil service," Solis said. "I have the highest regard for our professionals that do the calculations at the (Bureau of Labor Statistics). They are trained economists."

After the jobs report was released, the Dow Jones industrial average gained 60 points in the first hour of trading. Broader stock indexes also rose.

The yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury note climbed to 1.73 percent from 1.68 percent just before the report. That suggested that investors were more willing to take on risk and shift money from bonds into stocks.

The job market has been improving, sluggishly but steadily. Jobs have been added for 24 straight months. There are now 325,000 more than when Obama took office.

The number of employed Americans comes from a government survey of 60,000 households that determines the unemployment rate. The government asks a series of questions, by phone or in person. For example:

Do you own a business? Did you work for pay? If not, did you provide unpaid work for a family business or farm? (Those who did are considered employed.)

Afterward, the survey participants are asked whether they had a job and, if so, whether it was full or part time. The government's definition of unemployed is someone who's out of work and has actively looked for a job in the past four weeks.

The government also does a second survey of roughly 140,000 businesses to determine the number of jobs businesses created or lost.

The September job gains were led by the health care industry, which added 44,000 jobs - the most since February. Transportation and warehousing also showed large gains.

The revisions also showed that federal, state and local governments added 63,000 jobs in July and August, compared with earlier estimates that showed losses.

Still, many of the jobs the economy added last month were part time. The number of people with part-time jobs who wanted full-time work rose 7.5 percent to 8.6 million, the most since February 2009.

But overall, Friday's report dispelled some fears about the job market.

The "U.S. could be growing jobs at a marginally faster pace than feared mid-summer," Guy LeBas, a strategist at Janney Capital Markets, wrote in a research note. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>"Even with the issues in Europe and slowing production in China, U.S. economic activity does not look to be bearing the brunt of global downside, at least not anymore."</span>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/jobs-report-unemployment-rate_n_1942067.html?utm_hp_ref=business





U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis: Jobs Report Conspiracies 'Ludicrous'


WASHINGTON, Oct 5 (Reuters) - U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, in response to questions from a television anchor casting doubt on the validity of the latest jobless rate figures, said the idea it was manipulated is "ludicrous."

"I'm insulted when I hear that, because we have a very professional civil service organization. These are our best trained and most skilled individuals," she told CNBC.

"It's really ludicrous to hear that kind of statement."






http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05...hp_ref=business (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/jobs-report-conspiracy-hilda-solis_n_1942328.html?utm_hp_ref=business)



















<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Obama Better For Economy, Workers And Economists Agree </span>

Workers and economists agree: President Obama is more likely to help the economy than Republican nominee Mitt Romney.

Economists gave Obama's economic plan an average grade of 3.15 on a five-point scale: nearly 50 percent higher than their 2.14 grade of Romney's plan, according to a new survey by The Economist released on Wednesday. The Economist sent its survey to 1,005 economists, and 384 responded.

Romney has touted his business experience as evidence that he knows the best way jumpstart the economy. But like Obama, he doesn't hold an economics degree. Romney has also rejected some of the views of two of his more renowned economic advisers. The two will debate domestic issues, including economic policy, during the first presidential debate on Wednesday night.

About half of the economists surveyed said that Obama understands economics better than Romney, in contrast to the 28 percent of respondents who believed that Romney had a better grasp of the discipline, according to The Economist. In addition, the number of economists that said the economy would grow more quickly under Obama was nearly double the number that said it would grow more quickly under Romney.

Workers are similarly confident in Obama's ability to help the economy. Fifty-one percent of workers say they believe that Obama has a better vision to create jobs than Romney, in contrast to 35 percent that preferred Romney, according to a survey by Glassdoor released Wednesday.

Romney has proposed slashing government spending by roughly 20 percent, but many progressive economists agree that suddenly cutting government spending could spur a recession. Obama, in contrast, has proposed a fiscal stimulus called the American Jobs Act, which economists estimate could create roughly 2 million jobs.


Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow

Wealthy Benefit Most From Tax CutsPaul Ryan's most recent budget proposal would save those making between $20,000 and $30,000 just $246 in taxes, compared to savings of $265,011 for those who make over $1 million, according to analysis from the &lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/2012/04/02/gIQAjn0grS_graphic.html" target="_hplink"&gt;Center on Budget and Policy Priorities&lt;/a&gt;.


Health Care CutsThe "Path to Prosperity" would cut $2.4 trillion from Medicaid and other health care programs for people with low or moderate incomes, according to analysis from the &lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/2012/04/02/gIQAjn0grS_graphic.html" target="_hplink"&gt;Center on Budget and Policy Priorities&lt;/a&gt;.


Fewer People Covered By MedicaidUnder Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" as many as 44 million fewer people would be covered under Medicaid, &lt;a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7417870n" target="_hplink"&gt;according to CBS News&lt;/a&gt;.


Reduced Health Care For RetireesRyan would raise the age of Medicare eligibility from 65 to 67. If the Affordable Care Act was repealed, something Romney has pledged, that means many 65- and 66-year-olds would be left uninsured, the &lt;a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/08/11/seven-things-the-media-needs-to-know-about-paul/189277" target="_hplink"&gt;CBPP reports&lt;/a&gt;.


Seniors Would Pay More For Health CoverageUnder Ryan's "Path to Prosperity," senior citizens would have to pay as much as 68 percent of their health care coverage, up from 25 percent today, &lt;a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7417870n" target="_hplink"&gt;CBS News reports.&lt;/a&gt;


Cuts To Food Stamp ProgramsRyan's proposed "Path to Prosperity" includes $134 billion in cuts to SNAP, according to analysis from the &lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/2012/04/02/gIQAjn0grS_graphic.html" target="_hplink"&gt;Center on Budget and Policy Priorities&lt;/a&gt;.


Lower Tax Credit For Single Moms

A single mother of two working full time at the minimum wage would have her Child Tax Credit cut by more than $1,500, assuming she made $14,500 a year, according to the &lt;a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/08/11/seven-things-the-media-needs-to-know-about-paul/189277" target="_hplink"&gt;Center on Budget and Policy Priorities&lt;/a&gt;.


Less Money For Education Compared to the most recent White House budget proposal, Ryan's budget spends 33 percent less on education, training, employment and social services, &lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/12/what-paul-ryans-budget-actually-cuts-and-by-how-much/" target="_hplink"&gt;the &lt;em&gt;Washington Post&lt;/em&gt; reports&lt;/a&gt;.


Poor Weather Forecasts

Ryan's proposed cuts to environment and natural resource programs could result in weather forecasts being only half as accurate, according to Third Way's budget expert, David Kendall. "For many people planning a weekend outdoors, they may have to wait until Thursday for a forecast as accurate as one they now get on Monday," &lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/12/what-paul-ryans-budget-actually-cuts-and-by-how-much/" target="_hplink"&gt;he's quoted as saying in the &lt;em&gt;Washington Post&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.


No Raises For Government Workers

The current government worker pay freeze would be extended under the "Path to Prosperity," meaning public-sector employees wouldn't get a raise until at least 2015,

&lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/paul-ryans-budget-plan-hits-federal-workers/2012/08/11/8953b832-e3a3-11e1-98e7-89d659f9c106_blog.html" target="_hplink"&gt;the &lt;em&gt;Washington Post&lt;/em&gt; reports&lt;/a&gt;.




What Paul Ryan Doesn't Want You To Know About His Budget


1*of*11



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/03/obama-economy_n_1936522.html?utm_hp_ref=business




Jobs Report: U.S. Economy Adds 114,000 Jobs In September; Jobless Rate Down To 7.8 Percent


WASHINGTON -- The U.S. unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent last month, dropping below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years and giving President Barack Obama a potential boost with the election a month away.

The rate declined from 8.1 percent because the number of people who said they were employed soared by 873,000 - an encouraging sign for an economy that's been struggling to create enough jobs.

(SCROLL DOWN FOR MORE UPDATES)

The number of unemployed Americans is now 12.1 million, the fewest since January 2009.

The Labor Department said employers added 114,000 jobs in September. It also said the economy created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than the department had initially estimated.

Wages rose in September. And more people started looking for work.

The revisions show employers added 146,000 jobs per month from July through September, up from 67,000 in the previous three months.

The 7.8 percent unemployment rate for September matches the rate in January 2009, when Obama took office. In the months after Obama's inauguration, the rate rose sharply and had topped 8 percent for 43 straight months.

The decline in the unemployment rate comes at a critical moment for Obama, who is coming off a weak debate performance this week against GOP challenger Mitt Romney.

The September employment report may be the last that might sway undecided voters. The October jobs report will be released only four days before Election Day.

if(HPAds.ad_check_page_config('mid_article')) { var adId = 'null'; HPAds.adSonar("1523912", "2354767", "300", "250"); var debugadcode = ''; document.write(debugadcode); } adsonar_placementId=1523912;adsonar_pid=2354767;ad sonar_ps=-1;adsonar_zw=300;adsonar_zh=250;adsonar_jv="ads.tw.adsonar.com";
Romney released a statement that focused on the job figures, which declined in September from August. He also noted that manufacturing has lost 600,000 jobs since Obama took office.

"This is not what a real recovery looks like," Romney said in a statement.

But Sal Guatieri, an economist at BMO Capital Markets, said the report signals improvement.

"An overall better-than-expected jobs report, consistent with most recent data that suggest the economy is gaining some momentum," Guatieri said in a note to clients. "The sizeable drop in the unemployment rate could lift the president's re-election chances following a post-debate dip."

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis was asked on CNBC about suspicions that the Obama administration might have skewed the jobs numbers to aid Obama's re-election prospects.

"I'm insulted when I hear that because we have a very professional civil service," Solis said. "I have the highest regard for our professionals that do the calculations at the (Bureau of Labor Statistics). They are trained economists."

After the jobs report was released, the Dow Jones industrial average gained 60 points in the first hour of trading. Broader stock indexes also rose.

The yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury note climbed to 1.73 percent from 1.68 percent just before the report. That suggested that investors were more willing to take on risk and shift money from bonds into stocks.

The job market has been improving, sluggishly but steadily. Jobs have been added for 24 straight months. There are now 325,000 more than when Obama took office.

The number of employed Americans comes from a government survey of 60,000 households that determines the unemployment rate. The government asks a series of questions, by phone or in person. For example:

Do you own a business? Did you work for pay? If not, did you provide unpaid work for a family business or farm? (Those who did are considered employed.)

Afterward, the survey participants are asked whether they had a job and, if so, whether it was full or part time. The government's definition of unemployed is someone who's out of work and has actively looked for a job in the past four weeks.

The government also does a second survey of roughly 140,000 businesses to determine the number of jobs businesses created or lost.

The September job gains were led by the health care industry, which added 44,000 jobs - the most since February. Transportation and warehousing also showed large gains.

The revisions also showed that federal, state and local governments added 63,000 jobs in July and August, compared with earlier estimates that showed losses.

Still, many of the jobs the economy added last month were part time. The number of people with part-time jobs who wanted full-time work rose 7.5 percent to 8.6 million, the most since February 2009.

But overall, Friday's report dispelled some fears about the job market.

The "U.S. could be growing jobs at a marginally faster pace than feared mid-summer," Guy LeBas, a strategist at Janney Capital Markets, wrote in a research note. "Even with the issues in Europe and slowing production in China, U.S. economic activity does not look to be bearing the brunt of global downside, at least not anymore."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05...hp_ref=business (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/jobs-report-unemployment-rate_n_1942067.html?utm_hp_ref=business)





U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis: Jobs Report Conspiracies 'Ludicrous'


WASHINGTON, Oct 5 (Reuters) - U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, in response to questions from a television anchor casting doubt on the validity of the latest jobless rate figures, said the idea it was manipulated is "ludicrous."

"I'm insulted when I hear that, because we have a very professional civil service organization. These are our best trained and most skilled individuals," she told CNBC.

"It's really ludicrous to hear that kind of statement."






http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05...hp_ref=business (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/jobs-report-conspiracy-hilda-solis_n_1942328.html?utm_hp_ref=business)

Soflasnapper
10-05-2012, 02:20 PM
They'll probably also complain about the 10 year note rising to a greater yield, as a sign of hyper-inflation about to occur (as they've been warning about for 3-1/2 years).

Although that is what SHOULD happen as the economy improves.

LWW
10-05-2012, 02:50 PM
Does anyone honestly believe this figure is legit?

Seriously?

Soflasnapper
10-05-2012, 03:13 PM
It's legit in the vague way these things go.

It will be revised, if history holds up.

Part of this release was the revision UPWARD of some lackluster to poor monthly numbers to far better numbers.

The whole survey way this is performed is subject to error. But the methodology is consistent, and so what error there is ought to be randomly distributed around what is true. Over time, and with revisions, it gets close enough for government work, as they say.

Sev
10-05-2012, 04:31 PM
The October surprise is quite amusing and predictable.
They have messaged the numbers.
The U-6 is 14.7%
The SGS is 23.5%

Workforce = 145000000.
Job increase = 114000.
114000/145000000=.00079=.079%.
LESS THAN 1/10 OF 1%. NOT .3%.

You need of over 200,000 permanent jobs a month to have a chance to make a true change in unemployment.
530,000 part time workers that will disappear.
Also if more people are looking for work then they are counted again as unemployed. Something odd going on there.
They also seemed to have left out the balance of people that simply dropped out and have given up.

So you can believe what you want. Its an election year you know.

LWW
10-05-2012, 05:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's legit in the vague way these things go.

It will be revised, if history holds up.

Part of this release was the revision UPWARD of some lackluster to poor monthly numbers to far better numbers.

The whole survey way this is performed is subject to error. But the methodology is consistent, and so what error there is ought to be randomly distributed around what is true. Over time, and with revisions, it gets close enough for government work, as they say. </div></div>

So your opinion is that it's both legit and wrong?

Soflasnapper
10-05-2012, 05:54 PM
Close.

Legit, and only approximately true. But as approximately true as always.

Soflasnapper
10-05-2012, 05:59 PM
Approx. 310,000 Boomers reached the age of 65 in September.

Not all retired, but 3/4ths roughly had already taken early retirement when it became available, at (I forget the age-- 62?? 59??)

Between the 200,000+ WHO ALREADY RETIRED (took partial retirement through early retirement eligibility), and the 100,000+ who had not taken early retirement, but now were eligible for full retirement, what number of this one month's retirement age cohort dropped out of the workforce?

Whatever the number, what's the beef with 65 year olds leaving the workforce?

Soflasnapper
10-05-2012, 07:31 PM
I should have mentioned the 'new jobs' figure has nothing to do with how the UE rate is calculated. Two different surveys altogether.

Also, ADP, the private payroll service company, has published its own tracking of employment, and from their sources, said there were 162,000 new jobs last month. (And they'd been reporting larger job growth than BLS for some months. BLS seems to agree, as they added about 90,000 for the prior 3 month period themselves upon revision.)

ADP report link. (http://www.adpemploymentreport.com/pdf/FINAL_Release_September_12.pdf)

Finally, the ACTUAL BLS UE (UE-3, I think it is the headline number reported) showed a 7.6% UE, non-seasonally adjusted.

It went UP to 7.8% BECAUSE of seasonal adjustment. (The other desperate claim of the skeptics of this number, that it is due to seasonal hiring for the holidays.)

On the other hand, historically, since the '70s, the average monthly adjustment figure has been about 50,000 (sometimes up, sometimes down).

Gayle in MD
10-06-2012, 06:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They'll probably also complain about the 10 year note rising to a greater yield, as a sign of hyper-inflation about to occur (as they've been warning about for 3-1/2 years).

Although that is what SHOULD happen as the economy improves. </div></div>

What is it about Repiglicans? How much more un-American can they get? They get angry when we see good economic signs of a continuing recovery! Don't want to lose their big talking point, and don't care that their statements are bad for the general outlook of consumers.

They denied we were in a recession for a whole year, the last year of the Bush Administration, and now they are outraged when unemployment drops below 8%.

The fact is, there are other signs which confirm and support these new numbers, like an uptick in the price of homes sold, more new homes being settled, Corporate profits through the roof, consumer confidence way up, and consumer debt down, Wall St. booming, but regardless of all of the good signs we are seeing, and which have been consistantly ticking up throughout the last two and a half years, they lie about the fact that we continue to recover from the very deep BIUSH RECESSION, NEARLY THE BUSH DEPRESSION, which happened on THEIR WATCH!

We all know they have done nothing but obstruct the recovery. They have lied about everything, and done everything they could possibly do to create a drag on the economy, including firing as many as they possibly could fired in every state with a Repiglican Governor. They have sent out e-mails to Repiglican Governors begging them not to report the economic improvements in their states.

Basically, they have buried themselves in their own bull****!

Americans have watched them obstruct progress, and Repigs continue to vow obstruction (Boehner) as long as there is a Democratic President.

To me, this kind of sabotage of the best interests of the country, is worse than TREASON! PROOF PERFECT that Repiglicans actually ARE PIGS, and do not care about the best interests of the country.

I think Romney is going to need more than an Etch-a-Sketch, going forward. Now he needs a crate of Mr. Clean Magic Erasers, LMAO!

Down with Lyin' Ryan, and Tricky Mitsey.

Obama/Biden in 2012! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Gayle in MD
10-06-2012, 08:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The October surprise is quite amusing and predictable.
They have messaged the numbers.
The U-6 is 14.7%
The SGS is 23.5%

Workforce = 145000000.
Job increase = 114000.
114000/145000000=.00079=.079%.
LESS THAN 1/10 OF 1%. NOT .3%.

You need of over 200,000 permanent jobs a month to have a chance to make a true change in unemployment.
530,000 part time workers that will disappear.
Also if more people are looking for work then they are counted again as unemployed. Something odd going on there.
They also seemed to have left out the balance of people that simply dropped out and have given up.

So you can believe what you want. Its an election year you know.


</div></div>



<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Solid Jobs Report Spawns Crackpot ‘Job Truthers’ Movement</span>

The economy added 114,000 jobs in September and unemployment declined to 7.8 percent. Not great numbers, but paired with major upward revisions to previous monthly reports and taken in the context of a slowly recovering economy, the report was viewed as good news for America.

Unless, of course, you were hoping for bad news. And apparently quite a few of President Obama’s critics were — so much so that they suggested the Bureau of Labor Statistics was part of a vast conspiracy.


The leader of the “job truther” movement: former GE CEO Jack Welch.

“Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can’t debate so change numbers,” he said on Twitter.

He had some friends in Congress too. Rep. Allen West (R-FL) tweeted “I agree with former GE CEO Jack Welch, Chicago style politics is at work here.” He added on Facebook that the jobs report was “Orwellian to say the least and representative of Saul Alinsky tactics from the book ‘Rules for Radicals.’”

FOX News’ Stuart Varney apparently sensed where his audience was going. Within minutes of their release he told viewers that “there is widespread mistrust of this report and these numbers.”

“How convenient the rate drops below 8% [for the] first time in 43 months, five weeks before the election,” he added later.

CNBC host Jim Carmer said he was pilloried by viewers for defending the BLS report’s integrity.

“This is very hot. You believe the number, you must be a card-carrying Communist,” he joked on the air.

Betsey Stevenson, a former chief economist at the Department of Labor under President Obama, said in a phone interview with TPM that the conspiracy theories were misguided in just about every way possible. For starters, the Bureau of Labor Statistics isn’t currently run by a political appointee. For most of Obama’s term, the commissioner was a holdover appointed by President Bush. The current acting commissioner John Gavin is a career BLS economist, not an Obama appointee.

The underlying data behind the BLS reports is also publicly released and used by analysts across the private sector and academia, meaning a conspiracy would have to survive scrutiny from trained economists of all political stripes.

Nor is there much time to cook the books at the top level if they wanted to.

“I worked for Secretary Hilda Solis and she didn’t know the job numbers until 8 a.m. on the day,” Stevenson said. “Which made my job very difficult, because I had to help her figure out what she was going to say when they were released.” The BLS releases the numbers publicly at 8:30 a.m. ET.

But conspiracy theorists are out in full force. Conn Carroll, a columnist at the Washington Examiner, noted that the Household Survey, which is used to calculate the unemployment rate, was more positive than the raw jobs numbers, which come from a survey of employers, and suggested that the true conspirators were unemployed Democrats:




Justin Wolfers, an economics professor at the University of Michigan, told TPM these kinds of fluctuations between the survey and payroll numbers were common.

“It’s not unusual — the household survey is a noisy measure, there’s no doubt about it, and that’s why most analysts rely more on the payroll survey,” he said.

Update: The conspiracy crowd may need to expand their theory to the private sector. The consensus from market analysts the day before the report was a 110,000 job gain. The private ADP survey, released earlier this week, found that US businesses added 162,000 jobs.

Update II: Add radio host Laura Ingraham to the mix.

Update III: CNBC host Rick Santelli criticized Welch for his tweet, but added that it was a common concern.

Update IV: Here’s FOX News’ homepage as of 12:10 PM ET:

The headline on the post itself refers to a “campaign firestorm” and flags Jack Welch’s tweet. It then goes on to cite mainstream economists who suggest that the unemployment rate drop may be a statistical outlier, not a conspiracy.

Update V: Allen West took to CNBC to say Obama “absolutely” is cooking the books.

Update VI: A White House spokesman, Josh Earnest, told reporters the conspiracy theories around the BLS were unfounded:


“They’re utter nonsense. Anybody, any serious person who has any familiarity with how these numbers are tabulated understands that these are career employees at the Bureau of Labor Statistics that are responsible for compiling and analyzing these numbers and they do that on their own.”

Update VII: Romney campaign policy director Lanhee Chen told Fox Business that they would adress the BLS report without delving into speculation over its validity.
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated Justin Wolfers’ academic affiliation. TPM regrets the error. 2012, 2012 presidential campaign, Jobs Benjy Sarlin
Benjy Sarlin is a reporter for Talking Points Memo and co-writes the campaign blog, TPM2012. He previously reported for The Daily Beast/Newsweek as their Washington Correspondent and covered local politics for the New York Sun.


http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/job-truthers-jack-welch-bls.php

"Job Truthers?"

The BLS is not a partisan organization, it is in fact very isolated from political power.

The President did not appoint the people there.

The Repiglicans use the numbers as FACT, when the numbers are not great, and then say the entire organization is corrupt, when they don't like the good numbers.

Seems to me any rational person, who watches any from of news media, would have expected the standard Repiglican Modus Operandi response, and would have expected the standard Repiglican response to good news about the economy, Denial and accusations of corruption, only this time, it's really a laughable, and totally absurd accusation.

G.

Soflasnapper
10-06-2012, 09:35 AM
They denied we were in a recession for a whole year, the last year of the Bush Administration

I don't blame them for that one.

GDP hadn't gone negative at all at that time, and most people who think they know what a recession is look at that one hallmark-- and not negative growth for a quarter, but two in a row, minimum.

So when later, on other, more comprehensive measures, there had been a recession determined, and starting in 2007, that surprised me even though I knew things were getting bad and I was no supporter to alibi for George.

Gayle in MD
10-06-2012, 10:24 AM
I do blame his denials, because he denied the falling GDP, AND job losses, and other indicators for a very long time.

Note the dates on these stories.


<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Bush Denies Reality: “We’re Not Headed into a Recession” </span>

Bush, at odds with dozens of economic experts, calls the recession, threatening to fall into a full-blown depression, a "slowdown" and then hypes his "$157 billion financial stimulus package" that will exacerbate the deficit.

Jon Ward
The Washington Times
February 28, 2008




Bush, at odds with dozens of economic experts, calls the recession, threatening to fall into a full-blown depression, a "slowdown" and then hypes his "$157 billion financial stimulus package" that will exacerbate the deficit.

WASHINGTON — President Bush today continued to insist that the U.S. economy is not headed for a recession, called new Cuban leader Raul Castro a “tyrant,” and expressed uncertainty about whether Russian president Vladimir Putin will truly hand over power this weekend, during a wide-ranging press conference at the White House.

Mr. Bush’s first press conference of 2008 touched on many topics but questions repeatedly brought the focus back to the economy.

“I don’t think we’re headed to a recession. There’s no question we’re in a slowdown,” Mr. Bush said, when asked about reports today of a slowing in the growth of gross domestic product.

He gave new details about rebate checks that will go out to taxpayers as part of the recently passed $157 billion financial stimulus package. Checks of $300 to $1,200 will start going out in the second week of May, he said.



http://www.infowars.com/bush-denies-real...ssion%E2%80%9D/ (http://www.infowars.com/bush-denies-reality-%E2%80%9Cwe%E2%80%99re-not-headed-into-a-recession%E2%80%9D/)


Jon Ward
The Washington Times
February 28, 2008




We cannot take growth for granted,” Mr. Bush said in a speech to a group of business leaders in which he acknowledged that “recent economic indicators have become increasingly mixed.”
But even after a government report on Friday that showed unemployment jumped to 5 percent last month from 4.7 percent in November, Mr. Bush stopped short of warning that the nation may be about to enter a recession.

Democrats in Congress and on the campaign trail echoed the president’s sobering view. With a number of analysts now predicting that an economic downturn could be imminent, both Mr. Bush and Congressional Democratic leaders say they are considering whether a rescue package is necessary to counter the threat of a recession, in which economic activity declines and joblessness increases over an extended period of time.

But the two sides would undoubtedly take vastly different approaches, setting up a clash that could dominate the 2008 election campaign and the remainder of the Bush presidency.

If the past is any guide, Mr. Bush is likely to favor broad-based tax cuts of the sort he pushed through early in his presidency. Democrats are discussing more targeted relief — tax cuts, spending programs or a combination of the two — to help lower- and middle-income Americans who would be hurt the most if the economy falters.

“This is going to be a battle over doing more of what George Bush has done for the past six years, or doing more for the middle class,” Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said in a telephone interview after spending the day in Chicago with Mr. Bush. “That’s where the fissure is going to be.”

The clash comes as the latest negative signs on the economy, coupled with uncertainty in the housing and credit markets, have forced Mr. Bush to abandon his usual sunny rhetoric and paint a darker picture of the economy’s condition.

After months of insisting that the economy’s fundamentals are strong — a theme he reiterated on Monday — Mr. Bush did not mince words. He acknowledged that “many Americans are anxious about the economy,” and he noted that “jobs are growing at a slower pace.” He said core inflation was low — “except when you’re going to the gas pump, it doesn’t seem that low.”

Still, the White House is not convinced it must act. The deliberations are tightly held, and aides to Mr. Bush say he will not make a decision about whether to offer a stimulus package, or what it should contain, until later this month, in time for his State of the Union address scheduled for Jan. 28. Appearing in New York on Monday, Mr. Bush’s Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., echoed that approach, and cautioned against any rush to action.

“Working through the current situation and getting the policy right,” Mr. Paulson said, “is more important than getting the policy announced quickly.”

On Capitol Hill, Democrats were positioning themselves to get ahead of any proposal the White House might present. Aides to Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, said that she had yet to conclude decisively that a stimulus package was needed, but that she had met with a group of economic advisers last month who urged her to take swift action aimed at stabilizing the jittery economy and lifting consumer confidence.

The group included Lawrence H. Summers, a Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton; Felix G. Rohatyn, the financier and former ambassador to France; and Laurence D. Fink, the chairman and chief executive of BlackRock, the global investment firm.

An aide to Ms. Pelosi said the three were “unanimous in saying that we should move out ahead." In an interview over the weekend, Mr. Summers said he believed that there was now a greater than 50 percent chance of a recession this year.

“My view is that now is the time to be thinking about policies that would provide recession insurance,” Mr. Summers said, “and if we wait until it’s entirely clear that there is a recession, it will be too late.”

But Democratic leaders said there was already a general consensus within the party that any stimulus package would be temporary and targeted to the middle class and the poor. Among the proposals under consideration are a $500 across-the-board rebate, possibly to be returned to taxpayers in their paychecks through the payroll tax system, as well as a plan to restore the $1,000 per child tax credit to many low-income families that currently do not qualify for it.

Polls show Americans are now more concerned with the economy than the war in Iraq, a trend that is reflected in the presidential campaigns. In New Hampshire on Monday, as the candidates furiously courted voters on the eve of that state’s crucial primary vote, pocketbook issues like the price of home heating oil and health care took center stage.

“The economy’s beginning to have some problems, which I’m worried about,” Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York told a group of voters on Monday morning in Portsmouth, N.H. “We’ve got this energy crisis, with oil now at $100 a barrel,” she said, citing consequences “for our economy, for our security, for the problem of global warming.”

On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, sounded similar themes, recalling his humble roots as he tried to persuade voters that he understood their “struggle.” Gas prices, home heating costs and health care bills keep going up, Mr. Huckabee said, “but your paycheck doesn’t go up to cover it.”

As for the Bush administration, Mr. Paulson, the Treasury secretary, tried to offer assurances that the White House is not standing still. He said the administration may seek to expand a program begun last year to help homeowners who cannot afford to repay subprime mortgages once they are adjusted upward.

Mr. Bush had expected to spend his final year in office focused on foreign affairs — he leaves Tuesday for the Middle East — and a few domestic issues, like reauthorizing his signature education bill, No Child Left Behind.

But the president has had trouble getting credit for the economy even when times were good, and he can ill afford to leave office on an economic sour note. Mr. Bush is well aware that if he does not appear to share the public’s concern, he — and, more important for the 2008 elections, his party — could easily look out of touch.

“I think Bush is looking not to give the Democratic candidate any more ammunition than necessary,” said Bruce Bartlett, a Republican economist who has been highly critical of the administration. “If we are in the middle of a recession in November, obviously the Republican Party is going to be blamed for that.”

Still, Mr. Bush must be careful not to depress the economy with pessimistic talk, and so his speech in Chicago on Monday offered a delicate balancing act. “People said, ‘Are you optimistic?’ I said, ‘Absolutely, absolutely optimistic,’” Mr. Bush said. “Do I recognize the reality of the situation? You bet I do.”

Steven R. Weisman contributed reporting from Washington.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/business/08bush.html?_r=0

Bush admits U.S. in recession
By Jon Ward

-

The Washington Times

Friday, December 5, 2008

View results

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>President Bush on Friday said for the first time that the U.S. economy is in a recession, four days after a key body announced that the country has been in recession for a year. </span>

“Today’s job data reflects the fact that our economy is in a recession,” Mr. Bush said, during a statement to reporters on the South Lawn.

Mr. Bush made the statement in response to statistics released by the Labor Department showing that employers cut 533,000 jobs in November, the most job losses in 34 years.

The president attributed the job losses to “severe problems in our housing, credit, and financial markets.”

“I’m concerned about our workers who have lost jobs during this downturn,” Mr. Bush said, citing the administration’s decision recently to extend unemployment benefits for the second time in recent months.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>The National Bureau of Economic Research on Monday said that their indicators show the U.S. has been in recession since last December. </span>


<span style='font-size: 17pt'>The White House has consistently refused to say that the economy was in recession, insisting that the precise term used to describe economic tough times was not as important as what they did to respond. </span>Mr. Bush also said repeated his administration’s position that any government money given to troubled auto manufacturers should come out of a $25 billion fund being distributed by the Department of Energy.

Mr. Bush called on Congress to “act next week” to expedite the companies access to the money.

“And it’s important to make sure that taxpayers’ money be paid back if any is given to the companies,” he said.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/05/bush-admits-us-recession/



HuffPo):
President George W. Bush publicly acknowledged for the first time Friday that the U.S. economy is in a recession and worried aloud that Detroit's Big Three automakers may not all survive their mounting troubles.

Four days after the government made the long-suspected existence of a recession official, Bush used the word himself.

"Our economy is in a recession," Bush said flatly, speaking to reporters on the South Lawn only hours after the release of a government report showing the biggest month of job losses in 34 years. "This is in large part because of severe problems in our housing, credit and financial markets, which have resulted in significant job losses."

I wonder how long it takes before the rest of the 28%ers come around to the same conclusion. Place your bets in comments.

http://crooksandliars.com/silentpatriot/president-bush-finally-admits-were-r


CHICAGO — President Bush, in a marked shift from his usual upbeat economic assessments, conceded here on Monday that the nation faces “economic challenges” due to rising oil prices, the home mortgage crisis and a weakening job market.





Bush denies U.S. economy in recession

April 22, 2008
President says economy did not experience a decline in fourth quarter, still waiting on first-quarter details.
feed://rss.cnn.com/rss/money_news_economy.rss
Paste this link into your favorite RSS desktop reader
See all CNNMoney.com RSS FEEDS (close)
April 22, 2008: 3:14 PM EDT



President Bush said Tuesday the United States is in a 'slowdown,' not a recession.

NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (CNN) -- President Bush denied Tuesday that the United States' economy is in recession, calling it instead a "slowdown."

He pointed out that the economy grew in the last quarter of 2007 and that figures are not yet in for the first quarter of 2008. A common rule of thumb says a recession is two consecutive quarters of the gross domestic product shrinking.

But in the United States, an official declaration of a recession is made - often after a recovery has already begun - by a committee from the National Bureau of Economic Research, a private organization.

It defines a recession as "a significant decline in economic activity" over a period of a several months, and takes into account the depth of the decline, not just the duration, according to the NBER's Web site. It also uses a broad array of indicators in addition to the GDP, it says.

The United States has not been in recession since 2001, but many economists expect a recession this year. Some economists have said the United States is already experiencing one, and surveys suggest much of the public agrees.