[highlander_UW]

Oh, and my favorite, this month there is a net loss of some 20,000 jobs (not counting the seasonal Christmas employment layoffs). And somehow the unemployment rate goes DOWN?

I agree with you that it's just lying propaganda...but there is a way for it to be accurate. That would be that so many people had their benefits run out that even though more people were laid off a bunch more ran out of benefits and no longer can claim being unemployed. Of course that's just a number game and doesn't change how many people are really without work...but dems don't care about employment anyway other than how it might impact their reelections.

[Red Badger]

They are stalling for time. They “hope” the economy will recover so they can obviously take the credit. They really believe that their policies will spur job growth, when in reality it has the exact opposite effect. The will continue to finagle and fudge the numbers until it becomes so aggriegous that even the MSM can’t help them spin anymore. The death spiral of jobs lost-revenue-lost-more taxes will continue un abated until such time as the disaster is too big to hide................

[ProudFossil]

I will ask about another miracle in statistics related to productivity in the US. Every month we hear that productivity is going up even though there are fewer workers and many jobs have become part timers. So does that mean the lucky ones who still have a job are working harder or better?

Suppose we have two companies, one getting a productivity of 75% and the other only 25%. That would imply a productivity of 50% for both companies. The worse company would probably go out of business. All of a sudden we have a productivity of 75%, a nice increase.

Of course that number does not show those individuals who now have a productivity of 0% but it still looks good in the MSM. Am I missing something in this analysis?

[NC28203]

1. The payrolls number that is reported monthly is a survey of businesses. The unemployment rate is based off of a survey of households.

2. The -820,000 revision is an adjustment to payrolls data from the period Apr08-Mar09. Essentially, the number of payroll losses were underreported during that time period because goverment models were not sufficiently capturing the rate of decline in business closures. The preliminary adjustment to these number was announced back in October.

3. Where the payrolls number failed to capture the decline in business formation during Apr08-Mar09, this would not have an effect on the HH survey and thuis no effect on the reported UE rate.

4. Because the payroll and unemployment rate are based off of two different surveys, they frequently send different signals when the labor market is at or near a peak or bottom.

[padre35]

And you are surprised?

The .Gov statistics have been manipulated since the Clinton Era.