Well, today we received the final unemployment number before the mid-term election.
Low and behold we have fallen below the magic number of 6% to 5.9% Inching us closer to what many economists consider to be full employment of 5.5%.. Of course that’s only if a Democrat is president during the Bush 43 years the media in the 2006 mid-terms did it’s best to make an unemployment rate of 4.7% seem awful:
The bias is so evident from even a cursory review of recent headlines from prominent newspapers nation wide. San Jose’s The Mercury News this week: “Gloom At a Time of Growth.” “GDP 4.8%: Less Than Some Expected,” New York Times. From Reuters, “U.S. Job Openings Little Changed,” (even though at 4.7% unemployment rate we are technically fully employed!) Course, what can you expect from a news agency that refuses to call terrorists what they are: terrorists!
Other headlines further typify this bias. “GDP Growth Disappoints; Job worries linger,” Chicago Tribune. “Economy Puts on the Brakes,” New York Daily News. “GDP growth fails to impress,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “Economy’s Growth Rate Cools Off,” Los Angeles Times
A Pew Research Center poll disclosed that in reporting unemployment, 44 percent of the headlines under the Clinton administration were positive while only 23 percent under Bush 43. By comparison, the average unemployment rates were fairly similar, 5.2 percent under Clinton’s eight years and 5.3 percent under Bush.
The media is going to tout the headline number of 5.9%, but the fact is more people have dropped out of the labor force than found jobs (again). 315,000 people left the workforce, while 248,000 jobs were created, leaving us with the lowest labor participation rate in 36 years of 62.7%. As for wages, they suffered their first monthly decline since July 2013.
But that headline number fell from 6.1% to 5.9%, right before a big election.
Hmmm… sound familiar?
On Friday October 5, 2012, the BLS released what was arguably the most important report of Obama’s first term: the final jobs number, and unemployment rate before the November 2012 presidential election. As so many predicted, it “plunged” from 8.1% to 7.8% allowing the president to conduct countless teleprompted speeches praising the success of his economic recovery. It also served as the basis for the infamous Jack Welch tweet: “Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can’t debate so change numbers” and prompted the pro-Obama media to quickly brand all those who questioned it as conspiracy theorists
But as the NY Post reported:
In the home stretch of the 2012 presidential campaign, from August to September, the unemployment rate fell sharply — raising eyebrows from Wall Street to Washington.
The decline — from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in September — might not have been all it seemed. The numbers, according to a reliable source, were manipulated.
And the Census Bureau, which does the unemployment survey, knew it.
I’m not saying today’s numbers have been manipulated,
I’m saying we are in the home stretch of another election and the Democrats are on the verge of losing their majority in the Senate and, once again, there’s a major “improvement” in a headline number.
It just makes me say…Hmmmmm.