I can always tell when the economy is doing well. You people start accusing statistical agencies of lying. A grouchy Republican is the best bull market indicator out there. I imagine I can use it for at least 4 more years. . .
Well Ricky when you are right you are right, this drastic reduction in the unemployment rate is a direct result of the economic policies of the current occupier of the white house and his party.
But here are a couple of stats that you will never see reported:
o In January of 2008 the CES employment statistics peaked at 138,023,000 people employed
o In November of 2007 the CPS employment statistics peaked at 146,595,000 people employed
o With today's numbers the current CES is 133,500,000, and the current CPS is 142,974,000
I know this won't alter your world view, but I will do the math for you anyway:
o According to the CES employer survey 4,523,000 jobs have been lost since January of 2008, and
o According to the CPS household survey 3,621,000 jobs have been lost since November of 2007
Just two examples of how well the economic policies of the current occupier of the white house and his party are working.
Obama took office in January of 2009. Why are you quoting me data from 2007 and 2008? We lost 3.6 million payroll jobs in 2008. In January of 2009 we lost 818,000 payroll jobs--that is a 9.8 million annualized rate. Now we are gaining jobs. Quite a few. In fact, we are gaining a million more jobs a month than we were when Obama took office, aren't we? It takes some time to get that sort of devastation turned around.
The CPS shows 2.9 million jobs added over the past 12 months, 3.6 over the past 24 months. The CES shows 1.8 million payroll jobs added of the past 12 months, 3.6 million in the past 24.
The BLS has already reported early QCEW numbers, which indicate CES will be adjusted UP to match CPS for the past 12 months, when the annual matching to state UI databases occurs.
But I think the most important thing to learn here is the consistency you tea party types display. Even in a thread in which you have been called out on it, you call BLS numbers a lie when you think they go against your partisan slant, and then cite them when you think they support your partisan slant. How completely lame.