# Propaganda Unemployment Numbers

Employment went down but so did the unemployment rate, amazing!

The civilian labor force participation rate dropped from December 2011 to January 2012 from 63.8% to 63.4%. this is the lowest it has been since May 1983. The employment-population ratio dropped from 58.5% to 57.8% from December 2011 to January 2012. So why has the unemployment rate dropped from 8.5% to 8.3%?

The civilian non-institutionalized population increased from 240,584,000 to to 242,269,000, a increase of 1,685,000, and more importantly the actual civilian employment dropped from 140,681,000 in December 2011, to 139,944,000 in January 2012.

Using the BLS data the employment was 139,994,000 and the civilian labor force was 153,485,000 for a unemployment rate of 8.8%. So there is a statistical correction with their numbers of 0.5%?

If you use the late 90s as a base line the unemployment rate is 139,994,000/164,112,000 = 14.7%. The 164,112,000 is based on a growth rate of 16.68% in the civilian non-institutional population increase since June 1999.

If you use more recent participation rate the unemployment rate INCREASED to 11.5%.

Either way you calculate it the federal government has decided they do not want Mitt Romney cutting their budgets and the propaganda war is on. Look for this bogus data to continue through election day.

## 3 Responses to Propaganda Unemployment Numbers

• “If you use the late 90s as a base line the unemployment rate is 139,994,000/164,112,000 = 14.7%. The 164,112,000 is based on a growth rate of 16.68% in the civilian non-institutional population increase since June 1999.” who’s doing these calculations? These assumptions are coming from several different sources that cite nothing official.Especially the statement “people are not retiring as the popular propaganda goes: in fact labor participation in those aged 55 and over has been soaring as more and more old people have to work overtime, forget retiring)”. Also how is this “popular propaganda”? Both http://www.bls.gov/opub/ils/summary_10_04/older_workers.htm and http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_303.htm show clearly the unemployment and participation rate of the 55 and older group.

• All the numbers from the late 90s is showing a properly operating labor force participation rate where the federal government is consuming 18.2% of the GDP and extrapolating it into our current population, with no accounting for the aging of the population. Is this 100% fair? No, but it puts in perspective how bad our employment situation is today.

Okay so 14.7% is a little skewed, knock off 2%, which would more than compensate fort he aging of America and you still have 12.7% compared to the BS 8.3% number given out by the BLS.

I have written my congressional representative asking for the BLS to explain before a congressional committee what the rational is for not counting millions actively seeking employment and knocking off a full 0.5% due to seasonal adjustments.

The bottom line is less than 140 million Americans are working today, 1990s numbers, and we are getting this statistical crap out of Washington that is designed to make politicians look good.

By any account the jobs are not being produced and the public has a right to know.

• Notably, the January 2011 and 2012 seasonal adjustment factors ( seasonally adjusted payrolls divided by unadjusted payrolls) have been the two largest factors used by the BLS since the 1960’s, at 1.0166 and 1.0165, respectively. This compares with a January seasonal factor of 1.0155 a decade ago, and a factor of 1.0152 as recently as 2009. Now, a range of 0.0014 in the seasonal factors for January may not seem like much, until you consider that non-seasonally adjusted payrolls are presently about 130 million jobs, so variation in the seasonal adjustment factor alone amounts to a difference of 182,000 reported jobs.

http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc120206.htm