@ChrisCuomo
#unemployment is at 7.8% in September. Except it really wasn't. It is much higher, w/ underemplyd and those who stopped looking. #notfixed Adding to the mystery is the fact that the U-6, the longtime underemployment and unemployment number, remained fixed at a dismal 14.7%.
The unemployment rate declined by 0.3 percentage point to 7.8 percent in September. For the first 8 months of the year, the rate held within a narrow range of 8.1 and 8.3 percent. The number of unemployed persons, at 12.1 million, decreased by 456,000 in September.
The number of unemployed dropped 456,000 last month, while only 114,000 jobs got added. That either means that 342,000 people left the US, or they left the work force in one way or another.
This link is certainly more rational than the typical right-wing nutter accounts, but he's feeding the same fire.
The independent Bureau of Labor and Statistics is using the exact same data sources and methodology as it did when Bush was president and the unemployment rate shot from 4.4 to 7.8 and the exact same data sources and methodology as it did when the unemployment rate under Obama rose from 7.8 to 10 (notice that there was a smaller increase under Obama than under Bush).
To suddenly claim that it's not really the real unemployment rate and that we should calculate it differently because it's Obama and we want to make him look bad is just more of the typical chickenshit hypocrisy and dishonesty that we usually get from the Pubs. Always trying to pass off an apples-to-oranges comparison as the truth.
Go back and recalculate Bush's unemployment numbers and raise his lowest rate from 4.4 to 7.8 or something. Raise his highest from 7.8 to 10.2 or something. Then you can legitimately complain about the unemployment rates of Obama.
The author did point out the loss of manufacturing jobs and how the high-tech employment hasn't replaced those outsourced jobs. We lost about 4.5 million manufacturing jobs under Bush and only about a half-million under Obama. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezr ... than-bush/
You nutjob jokers are a scream. The UE numbers turned out to be ones you don't like and
so dumbasses like Welch say they were somehow manipulated and idiots like Foolgle jump
right in with thumbs up. Welch later admitted he had no proof, but putting forth ridiculous
propositions with no proof is the wingnut way of "argument." Any old loony tune that comes
along and the wingnuts will follow right down the rabbit hole. Even AEI said that anyone who
thought the numbers were manipulated by Obama was living in crazy town, which is right
next to wingnutville.
Not surprised that Thorny doesn't know what a lib is. That's one of his old tricks, using the
even the libs say spiel and of course they're not even libs at all, like his recent example of
Pat Cadell, who is about as liberal as Rush.
