Fun and Games with Numbers: So Liberal Politicians like Obama can look Good!
By: Dr. Phil Taverna
We now live in an age of numbers. And we can base economies and the way we live on numbers. For example once the unemployment number reached 8.3 or so, the Liberal NY Times (Feb 3, 2012) wrote that the economy was blooming. Tell that to the 8 million or so that don’t have jobs, fulltime and benefits.
Granted when you look at the Super Bowl, those people were not in a recession. There were $4,000 tickets, $80,000 boxes and cheap $1,000 a night rooms who could ask for more.
Most people are working. But we need to look inside the numbers. Maybe we need an Obama plan that would be fair so all people can go to the Super Bowl for FREE, just like all people (women) should have FREE contraceptives.
So being a lay person, I want to know how many jobs have been lost since Obama took over. And how many jobs have been created under Obama.
I also want to know what kind of jobs he has created. Are they $10 dollars an hour jobs with no benefits and part time? Are they good jobs with a future and $50 to $60 G income?
Is the growth from private sector jobs or government jobs?
And most important how many new job seekers have been added to the bank of folks looking for jobs and how many are no longer looking?
According to Morris, he claims that the people (BLS) keeping these records and fabricating these numbers changed the rules about 8 months ago. You need to ask why would a bunch of liberal Democrats change the rules? I guess Democrats like to change the rules to reflect a truer (Wink wink ) picture. Just like Clinton when he changed the rules to prove that he balanced the budget. If the Clinton debt went up $1.5 trillion in 8 years like President Bush, then where is the effect of the balanced budget? Biden said there was a surplus?
So let’s start with the number of people entering the job market. If you take the time to look at Table A-1, there is a field labeled “Civilian non-institutional population (CNP)”. This goes up about 2 million a year. And it amounts to over 166,000 folks per month. So where do these folks come from. Some people are graduating, some are legal immigrants (a million) and the rest are illegal. These are offset by deaths and retirees, but the average has been relatively consistent. And remember most of these numbers are not accurate but are educated guesses made by these agencies.
Jan 2011 CNP comes in at 238.7 million. And Jan 2012 comes in at 242.3 million. This means that anybody who is not institutionalized or in the military and looking for work or is working should be accounted for in this number.
I guess in the old days when the military was paid pittance they didn’t want the military included in the data to avoid bringing down the wages. But we have officers and NCO’s that make a fair salary today. So this number should be a bit higher.
But as people are called up for service in the National Guard the numbers become a little bogus. If 20,000 guardsmen are called up this month that were employed as civilians and they go on active duty, then magically 20,000 jobs are created in the civilian population and the 20,000 who go on active duty should vanish from the CNP numbers. But since Obama has pulled out of Iraq, the opposite should be true. The civilian population (CNP) should have gone up.
Here’s where it gets a little funnier. There is a number that is called “Civilian labor force (CLF). This number goes up about 800,000 workers a year. This averages out to about 70,000 a month.
Please keep in mind some of these numbers are seasonally adjusted. That means they add salt and pepper and a year or 2 later they will show you the real numbers.
The strange thing about the CLF numbers is that they went down. So the number of people looking for work has gone down. The population (CNP) has continued to grow, but the people looking for work have gone down! Do you believe that? They want you to!
So in Nov 2011 the CLF dropped by 120,000. In Dec 2011 it went down another 50,000. And keep in mind that this number (CLF) is what the unemployment number is based on. In Jan 2012 the CLF went back up. So where did the 170,000 people go? Why is this number being fudged to make the failed policies of Obama look better?
The other problem is the unemployment numbers. If they can’t get the CLF correct, what are the chances of this being correct? And this becomes the basis for the unemployment number. So if you work 15 hours or own your own business and have not worked any hours you still get counted as employed.
What about wages? Under President Bush the hourly went up about 70 cent from 2006 to 2008.
Under Obama’s failed policies it is about 36 cents. I am happy to say capitalism does work.
If we look at wages, on average President Bush went up about $210 a year and Obama (excluding 2008) went down an average of $193 a year. Also factor in that Obama handed out a lot of political 6 figure jobs and the salary numbers still went down. After all you have to do your fair share. So when Obama talks about failed past policies is he talking about his own policies? Is this what he really inherited… his own mess!
So how many jobs have we really lost under Obama? 138 million folks were working when Obama took office. By December 2011 132 million folks are working. That’s a net change of 6 million jobs. That means Obama’s failed policies have cost us 6 million jobs. Biden and the other clowns claim they have produced 3 or 4 million jobs. I am not sure what they are counting, but in essence they have replaced 3 or 4 million jobs that have been lost. So the overall result of Obama failed polices is a loss of 9-10 million jobs and a gain of 3 or 4 million. That doesn’t sound like a bloomin’ anything to me!
Now if you go back in and factor in the growth of the labor force of about 70,000 a month in the CLF numbers something is rotten in Denmark.
But if we go back to Table A-1: It states in Jan 2012, that 12.8 million workers are unemployed and another 6.3 million want a job. And these numbers are lower than they were in December 2011. Does that make sense?
For the Times to say that Obama’s failed policies are making the economy bloom is a bit premature for springtime! Who knows maybe Obama saw his shadow.
When Obama took over the annual average for manufacturing jobs the backbone of the American economy was 13.4 million workers. Under Obama’s failed policies and GE’s benefit the United States is down to 11.8 million manufacturing workers. I guess that global FREE market thing is working well… Not!
So when the Times gets excited about 50,000 manufacturing jobs, the first question should be how much are they making and what are the benefits? Remember China has just received a bonus. Some of their manufacturing jobs are going up from $100 a month to $400 a month. We have a long way to go to get down to China’s standard of living! But with Obama driving the bus, it won’t take much longer!
Gallup shows a little different picture. Gallup has unemployment at 9% without any salt and pepper. And they track underemployment. That’s the folks that are working part time looking for full time. The BLS includes as employed the part time worker (15 hours per week).
Gallup’s underemployed includes the part time and the unemployed. Drum roll please… Gallup shows the underemployed at 19%. In English that means that 19% of folks want full time work and can’t get employed as full time workers with benefits! That Obama economy is a bloomin’.
So as you can see these numbers are bogus. And there is no time for celebration under the failed Obama policies. Look deep and look at the real numbers. If anyone votes to continue these failed policies, they deserve what they get! Please stop listening to the liberal propaganda of the Times, use your own brain and see if the Obama imagination is worth betting on again! And share your findings with all your friends and family!
Tell Obama it isn’t fun when you don’t have enough money at the end of the week to live the American Dream. The Commie dream is always available: But we want to go back to living the American Dream!
Dr. Phil Taverna owns and operates his own website.