The funny thing about the Labor Department’s monthly
unemployment report is that the number-crunching bureaucrats act
like they’re delivering high carat diamonds when the real worth of
what they’re reporting is closer to the value of a mud pie.
First, a college graduate with a degree in biomedical
engineering who gets a $90,000 job in his field is counted exactly
the same in the government’s unemployment report as a biomedical
engineering graduate who can’t find a job and is working weekends
as a bus boy at Applebee’s.
Or as the PBS Newshour succinctly stated it, “If you
only worked one hour in the past week, you’re counted as officially
employed.”
Given the large number of part-timers who are currently looking
for full time work and unable to find a job, that flaw alone by the
Labor Department of putting part-timers in the “employed” column
makes their monthly unemployment statistic meaningless.
An estimated 50 percent of young college graduates are currently
either jobless or significantly underemployed in positions that
don’t utilize their skills and education.
Second, if a guy loses his $150,000 job and he and his
previously stay-at-home wife each get part-time jobs paying
$25,000, the Labor Department counts that as job growth, two jobs
rather than one, a clear indication that job creation is
expanding.
If they can’t make ends meet, there’s even more job growth if
their kid gets a Saturday job drying cars at the local car
wash.
If another kid in the family ends up selling apples on the
street corner, that’s a 400% jump in the number of jobs in the
economy the way the Labor Department figures it, even though
everyone in the family is financially worse off.
Third, if everyone in the aforementioned family throws in the
towel, quits working, quits looking for work, and just goes on the
dole, then no one is counted as unemployed by the Labor Department.
Both the jobless household and the initially lost $150,000 job
simply vanish from the government’s calculations and there’s
nothing in the headlines to indicate that the economy is failing to
provide employment for that family.
The share of adults in the labor force, the participation rate,
is now at a 30-year low. If the participation rate today was the
same as just four years ago, the unemployment rate would currently
be 11 percent.
And the dropping out continues, with today’s unemployed workers
still more likely to quit looking than find a job.
The front page story from Labor’s Department is that the
nation’s jobless rate had suddenly dropped from 8.1 percent to 7.8
percent in September, the lowest level since January 2009, an
official jobless falling below 8.0 percent for the first time since
President Barack Obama’s inauguration.
Below the headlines, there are these two sentences in the Labor
Department’s latest unemployment report: “The number of persons
employed part time for economic reasons, sometimes referred to as
involuntary part-time workers, rose from 8.0 million in August to
8.6 million in September. These individuals were working part time
because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable
to find full-time work.”
That’s a 600,000 jump in “involuntary part-time workers” in
September and not one of these people is included in 7.8 percent
unemployment number.
In order to produce a more accurate picture of how many jobs the
economy has to generate in order to get to full employment, how
hard would it be for the staffers in the Labor Department to
proportionately include these involuntary part-timers in the
jobless number? How hard is it to combine a work shortage of 20
hours per week each for two people and get 40 hours?
With obvious and easy to fix flaws in the Labor Department’s
methodology, why even pretend to accuracy with a decimal point —
7.8 percent instead of 7.7 or 7.9?
Bottom line? “The number of unemployed persons in September was
12.1 million,” reported the Labor Department. Again, skip the
decimal point. The number was 23 million if the involuntary
part-timers and the unemployed who’ve given up looking for work are
included, and that’s not counting the millions who dropped to lower
paying jobs, or the growing number of involuntary househusbands, or
any of those who are behind bars or otherwise institutionalized in
colleges, universities, trade schools or mental facilities because
of the lousy job market.
Appleby| 10.18.12 @ 7:17AM
My youngest sister (whose hatred for Romney is based solely on the fact that he is rich) has been holding down a temp job and working in a seasonal high-end craft market where she crafts and sells jewelry. She also has the good fortune to have two sons who are employed in sound industries (one is an exterminator and one has a job so complicated I have no idea what he does) who are keeping her from losing her house. She is counted as two jobs. Except she lost her temp job because the permanent employee returned from leave, and the season is about to end at the market. But she'll count as employed until after the election. She plans to vote for Obama simply because she hates Romney for being rich.
Alan| 10.18.12 @ 7:50AM
What your sister has is an envy problem, the kind of people the marxists depends on for life support.
TLP| 10.18.12 @ 3:07PM
Your Sister sounds like a Dumb B*tch.
Appleby| 10.18.12 @ 4:53PM
No, just a brat.
BShep| 10.18.12 @ 3:26PM
According to Google, Obama’s net worth ranges from $6 million (Forbes) to $11.6 million (various sites). Not bad for a community organizer and communication director.
Romney gave all of the money he inherited from his dad to charity.
They are both rich. Only Romney actually earned his.
Dai Alanye | 10.18.12 @ 11:45AM
I'd like to hear an announcement from either Romney or Ryan that they intend to reform the "jobs number" so that it reflects reality. It would do no harm to their prospects to come out for what amounts to honesty in government reporting.
While they're at it they might consider reforming the inflation index to take into consideration prices for all goods. At present it is artificially low by a considerable amount. And then there is growth in the money supply, something that should have us all investing in wheelbarrows so as to be able to carry sufficient cash when buying groceries. Thank you, Mr B S Bernanke.
JD| 10.18.12 @ 12:15PM
If they reformed it while in office, it would show an unemployment spike on their watch. Democrats have no integrity and would certainly misconstrue that in the 2016 election.
Mike G| 10.18.12 @ 3:37PM
Mr. Reiland, how dare you! To suggest that any our government entities has ever done anything that could be considered illogical is the height of treason.
Vance P. Frickey| 10.18.12 @ 6:00PM
And Bill Clinton, dishing red meat to the party faithful with Bruce Springsteen in Ohio, has the nerve to say that the GOP was panicking over the "drop" in unemployment to 7.8 - from where it was for most of the Bush administration, an average of five percent. But cynicism and lies are Bill Clinton's meat and drink - this is the man who, faced with a slam-dunk case against himself for perjury, asked with a perfectly straight face "What does "is" mean? What is "is"?"
The Democrats have canonized Bill Clinton for perfectly good reasons - he IS the Patron Saint of the "Party of 'So What?'" Bill Clinton made it respectable to lie, then lie about lying, then accuse one's opponents of the very lies you're telling. He is the Hegel of Bald-Faced Lying.
Vance P. Frickey| 10.18.12 @ 6:11PM
If a Republican were the incumbent right now, Bill Moyers would be abusing PBS viewers' ears with his Texas twang, inveighing about the Labor Department's cynical games with unemployment statistics and risking a cerebral aneurysm over how these numbers have been massaged to the point they cease to have meaning any longer.
But we've learned something else, too - Bill Moyers' rage, seemingly provoked by the sufferings of the victims of White House incompetence and indifference, is nowhere to be found on PBS when the incompetence and indifference are deliberate policy of a Democratic administration anxious to dress up its failures as successes. Righteous Texas rage is mute against Chicago puppy-humping.
Bob K| 10.19.12 @ 1:19AM
Is Moyers still on PBS?
Talk about lifetime government jobs! No unemployment problems for him! No wonder Romney wants to cut it's funding!
And it is long overtime for "A Prairie Home Companion" to be cancelled and it's unctuous host, Garrison Keillor, put in the unemployment line along with all of the "above average" people who are there now.