It’s a Miracle – Unemployement drops by 456K but only 114K jobs were added. (updated with statement from Paul Ryan)
I agree with the point made at the end of the Humanevents piece I am including. I am glad our economy is starting to put friends and neighbors back to work, but why in the world are we celebrating 7.8% unemployment that cost us $5.5T in new debt and three rounds of quantitative easing. Reagan accomplished much more for much less. Paul Ryan captured it nicely today:
UPDATED: “Today is a sad indictment of the diminished expectations under President Obama. Far too many Americans are still waiting for their chance in the Obama economy. For those able to find work this month, any job growth is welcome, but this number is once again well below what is needed for America to meet its economic potential. Two-thirds of those who found work took part-time jobs when they are actually seeking full-time ones. We should not have to settle for this new normal. This is not what a real recovery looks like. We need a real recovery, and Mitt Romney has the detailed plan and leadership to provide it.” – Paul Ryan
More fun with numbers. Unemployment drops .03% to 7.8% in a month where only 114K jobs were created? That number is below the YTD average and 2010’s monthly averages. Economist predicted the rate would RISE if only 114 jobs were added but we had a dramatic drop. How is this possible? Partially due to revisions of prior month employment numbers. Revision to prior month GOVERNMENT Employment numbers. Nothing to see here, move along.
With the large revisions from the BLS–revising private sector jobs down, and public sector jobs up–the modest rise in September jobs coincided with an unusually dramatic drop in the unemployment rate, causing some experts to greet the new numbers with puzzlement.
- The 114,000 jobs created in September is below the average created this year, which was 146,000.
- The 114,000 jobs created in September is below the average created last year, which was 153,000.
- The U-6 unemployment number, which reflects the entire labor situation, was basically unchanged at 14.7 percent.
- If labor participation was where Obama had inherited it from George W. Bush, the unemployment rate would be closer to 11 percent.
- Part-time people employment jumped from 582,000 to 8,613,000, the most since October 2011, and the largest one month jump since February 2009. That means the quality of jobs people are finding is dropping.
- And a comparison: During the Ronald Reagan recovery the country average around 275,000 new jobs a month.
If bringing the unemployment rate back to the 7.8 percent (with fewer people working at lousier jobs) is what a stimulus plan, three rounds of quantitative easing and endless spending gets us, this presidency can be safely categorized as one of the worst investments in history.
Over at Breitbart, the skepticism continues: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/05/Fuzz-Math-CNBC-questions-unemployment-drop
What this .03% drop means (per Ed Morrissey) is that the number of unemployed people dropped by 456,000 when only 114k jobs were created–well below the monthly average, and below population growth. Where did 342k people go to lower the number so dramatically just 31 days before a presidential election? Did they retire, leave the planet, die of old age in the unemployment office?
Moreover, just 30 days before the election, 342K people dropped off the unemployment rolls and lowered the unemployment rate to below 8%–a benchmark number vitally important to President Obama who promised his stimulus would ensure we wouldn’t hit 8%.