What’s worse: when a government fails its people or when a government that is failing its people resorts to propaganda to hide the truth?
Under Obama: 30 Worst Months of Employment in the Past 25 Years
8:05 AM, May 23, 2012 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON
The federal government’s Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes monthly tallies for the employment-population ratio. That stat shows something rather straightforward: Among those who are living in America and are free to pursue employment, what percentage are employed? (The bureau excludes those who are under 16 years old, are active-duty military, or are — in the bureau’s own words — “inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities, homes for the aged),” from its tallies.)
Over the past quarter of a century (a total of 300 months), dating back to May 1987 and the Reagan administration, here are the 30 worst months (that is, the bottom 10 percent) for the employment-population ratio, along with the president who happened to be in office at that particular time (scroll down to the see the list):
1. (tie) July 2011, 58.2 percent, President Barack Obama
1. (tie) June 2011, 58.2 percent, Obama
1. (tie) November 2010, 58.2 percent, Obama
1. (tie) December 2009, 58.2 percent, Obama
5. (tie) August 2011, 58.3 percent, Obama
5. (tie) December 2010, 58.3 percent, Obama
5. (tie) October 2010, 58.3 percent, Obama
8. (tie) April 2012, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) October 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) September 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) May 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) April 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) February 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) January 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2012, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) January 2012, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) December 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) November 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) September 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) August 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) July 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) June 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) February 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) January 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) November 2009, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) October 2009, 58.5 percent, Obama
29. February 2012, 58.6 percent, Obama
30. (tie) May 2010, 58.7 percent, Obama
30. (tie) April 2010, 58.7 percent, Obama
30. (tie) September 2009, 58.7 percent, Obama
Interestingly, the 30 (or 32, including ties) worst months for employment in the past 25 years have all come after the most recent recession ended, in June 2009. In other words, they’ve all come during the Obama “recovery.”
What’s more, under every other president during the past 25 years (spanning from the later stages of the Reagan presidency through the entire George W. Bush presidency), the employment-population ratio was always over 60 percent — every single month, for 260 consecutive months. In vivid contrast, with the exception of the month in which he took office (January 2009) and his first full month in office (February 2009), the employment-population ratio under Obama has always been under 60 percent — every single month, for 38 consecutive months. (For 32 consecutive months — from September 2009 to the present day — it’s been under 59 percent.)
In fact, the worst non-Obama month in the past 25 years was December 2008, when the employment-population ratio was 61.0 percent under George W. Bush. Comparatively, Obama’s best month to date (not counting January 2009, when he entered midstream) was his first, February 2009, when the employment-population ratio was 60.3 percent. In other words, over the past 25 years, the worst month under any other president has beaten the best month under Obama.
Again, what’s worse, employment numbers perennially in the toilet or government propaganda regarding said employment numbers being perennially in the toilet?
I’ll let you decide, but they’re both going on at the same time under the “hope and change” administration of Barry Hussein:
Inital Claims Soar Again, Ninth Consecutive Miss To Expectations In A Row: BLS Back To Propaganda School
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/19/2012 08:42 -0400
There are those who thought last week’s massive Initial claims miss was the last one. They were wrong. Instead of printing at the expected 370K, an improvement from last week’s already big miss of 380K, this week came at a whopping 386K, the worst standalone print in 4 months. Well, until last week’s revision that is: instead of the 380K print that stunned everyone, last week’s number has now been revised to a massive 388K. Why? So that mainstream media can declare, with a straight face, that this week saw the number of initial claims decline! Here is the reality: last week’s expectation was for a print of 355K. Instead we got a number of 380K. Now this number is being revised to 388K, and is the biggest initial expectation to revision miss since early 2011. Needless to say, this means two things: 1) the transitory bump associated with record warm weather, which was nothing but pulling from the future, is now over, and 2) the April NFP print will be another disaster, which is just as the Fed wants it – after all it is time to start setting the stage for the NEW QE (and certainly not QE3 which is already in place as Jeff Gundlach was so kind to explain) now that Obama is the margin hiker in chief.
The chart below shows the difference between the actual print (revised) and the expectation survey: 9 straight misses in a row.
For those not on the propaganda hopium dole, this is how YTD revisions look like, courtesy of John Lohman:
Tyler Durden wrote this back in mid-April. If I may draw your attention to the very last chart immediately above, Eric Bolling reported yesterday that the jobless numbers have now been revised upward – meaning the initial report was that employment numbers were better than they actually were – for twenty consecutive weeks in a row.
Obama knows that once the report comes out, the market reacts based on that initial report and few ever bother to pay attention about the revision that comes out later. It’s a great way to sell lies.
If I flip a coin and come up with heads twenty times in a row, you’d better look at my coin before we make a bet on the next coin toss when I call “heads” again.
But it’s still worse than that: because as New York Times reporter Louise Story pointed out May 26, 63 of the last 64 Department of Labor weekly jobless reports have now revised the jobless numbers HIGHER. I couldn’t find her work on that, but here’s an article from a few weeks earlier that describes the same situation:
As analysts dig into the government jobs numbers, questions are being raised about the reliability of the data. 59 out of the last 60 weeks, the weekly jobless numbers have been revised after the fact to a higher number. The unemployment rate has been questioned too because the number doesn’t include people who stopped looking for work, but still want a job.
By Elizabeth MacDonald
Published May 02, 2012
There is lots of talk about the “fiscal cliff” the U.S. faces at year end, as stimulus and tax cuts go away.
So the last thing the government needs now is market distrust in its job numbers. But, as analysts dig into the government job numbers, questions are increasingly being raised about the reliability of the data, from questionable revisions in the weekly jobless numbers to the odd changes in unemployment rates.
For 59 out of the last 60 weeks, the weekly jobless numbers have been revised, after the fact, always in the same direction: higher. That’s unheard of.
Those revisions higher make the present week’s unemployment number look better in comparison, more so since the markets often treat the prior week’s revision as an afterthought.
This is naked, glaring propaganda. But it’s not being very widely reported, is it?
This is the worst government for propaganda since Hitler and Stalin. It’s not just that the Obama regime continually lies; it is that a Joseph Goebbels-style media eagerly swallows each new lie with enthusiasm.