You don't say...........................
Posted on 03/13/2017 8:11:47 AM PDT by ColdOne
Mick Mulvaney told CNN's Jake Tapper on Sunday that he has long thought the previous administration framed data to make the unemployment rate "look smaller than it actually was."
"What you should really look at is the number of jobs created," Mulvaney said on "State of the Union." "We've thought for a long time, I did, that the Obama administration was manipulating the numbers, in terms of the number of people in the workforce, to make the unemployment rate -- that percentage rate -- look smaller than it actually was."
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
You don't say...........................
Somehow, I knew that picture would show up here.
Of course Odumbo people manipulated data...on everything! Everybody knows that. Anyone who thinks not is a bigger dummy than they were.
No surprise
I prefer it to Captain Obvious...............
“Claims” the jobs data was “manipulated.” I love the English language. The budget director didn’t “claim” anything . . . he STATED the facts. This data wasn’t “manipulated,” it was “made up!”
I wish writers would simply use the appropriate words of the many thousands available in our rich English language. Is it that they can’t? Or is it that they simply don’t want to?
They don’t want to, of course.
This morning the story that the Kremlin stated Kiselyak met with Clinton campaign was written as “alleged” and “allegations”.
We need to keep calling them on this sort of lie.
The employment-to-population ratio was bizarrely low. And the aging workforce doesn’t explain it. 12% of able-bodied, 25-to-55-year-old men were not in the workforce. WTF???
You could probably safely add 3-4% to the unemployment numbers to make them comparable to 1980s-1990s unemployment rates. That would mean unemployment now is about 8%... in the depressed economy range. Compare to the 1975-1985 era.
You mean Obama really didn’t create 900 million new jobs? I’m shocked!
Rather than the U3 rate being the official number for the unemployment, I think that the official rate should be the U6. That’s the rate that includes all of the factors that calculate the ‘true’ unemployment rate.
Keep on dragging up he swamp vermin and tossing them on the grass for all to see, daily, with no hesitation, no regrets and no backing down.
Through payroll data. If five positions are filled, but the company only added one net employee, then 4 positions were opened due to attrition.
I am certain that the statistical models used are much, much more sophisticated than this simple arithmetic, but I assume they follow the same logic.
Wrong word, FACT!
thanks. one net employee from when ?
If I finally fill one open position after 6 months, is it a job created or position filled ?
check a simple explanation of how the establishment survey is supposedly derived.
still can’t tell if positions filled vs. a job created.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/09/news/economy/monthly-jobs-report-bls/?iid=EL
Been in a jobs depression since 2007 and the MSM media has lied about it. Mexican government is horribly corrupt and the MSM media lies about it. Clinton was the most corrupt US Presidential candidate in history and the American media lied about it. Hillary was trailing in the polls and the MSM media lied about it. Why on Earth would anyone believe anything they say now ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.