Supermodel Supermogul: Inside Ireland's Empire Investing Advisor Network Bonds Commodities & Currencies ETFs International Intelligent Investing Markets Mutual Funds Options Personal Finance Real Estate Retirement Stocks Taxes 
Special Report: Investing Outlook 2012 Tech CIO Network Data Driven Games Gear Green Tech Human Ingenuity Innovation & Science Future Tech Mobile On Demand Security Social Media Techonomy 
Special Report: Data Driven Entrepreneurs Exit Strategy Financing Management Players Sales & Marketing Taxes & Law Promising Companies 
America's Most Promising Companies Op/Ed 
The U.S. Economy: Regions To Watch In 2012 Culture & Books Fact & Comment Economics Forbes Quotes Innovation Rules Law Policy Politics Regulation World Affairs Leadership 
The Top Hiring Employers in America's Biggest Cities Careers CEO Network CMO Network Corporate Responsibility Education ForbesWoman Leaders Managing Sales Leadership Lifestyle 
America's Fastest-Growing Small Towns Arts & Entertainment Food & Drink Health Places & Spaces Sports & Leisure Style & Design Travel Vehicles Lists 
The World's Most Powerful People America's Best Colleges America's Best Small Companies Best Places for Business & Careers Celebrity 100 Forbes 400 Richest Americans Global 2000 Leading Companies Largest Private Companies Most Expensive Zip Codes 100 Most Powerful Women World's Billionaires World's Most Powerful People All Lists 
Help??|??Login??|??SignUp Free Issue > 
Top 20 Franchises For The Buck 
Best Exercises To Do At Your Desk 
Careers Headed For The Dustbin 
AdVoice: Avoid Valentine's Massacre 
Peter Ferrara, Contributor I cover public policy, particularly concerning economics. + Follow on Forbes Op/Ed| 2/09/2012 @ 11:33AM |43,207 views Don't Be Fooled, The Obama Unemployment Rate Is 11% 39 comments, 0 called-out + Comment now + Comment now 
Image by AFP via @daylifeWhen Barack Obama entered office in January, 2009, the labor force participation rate was 65.7%, meaning nearly two-thirds of working age Americans were working or looking for work.
When the recession supposedly officially ended in June, 2009, the labor force participation rate was still 65.7%.
In the latest, much celebrated, unemployment report, the labor force participation rate had plummeted to 63.7%, the most rapid decline in U.S. history.? That means that under President Obama nearly 5 million Americans have fled the workforce in hopeless despair.
The trick is that when those 5 million are not counted as in the work force, they are not counted as unemployed either.? They may desperately need and want jobs.? They may be in poverty, as many undoubtedly are, with America suffering today more people in poverty than in the entire half century the Census Bureau has been counting poverty.? But they are not even counted in that 8.3% unemployment rate that Obama and his media cheerleaders were so?tirelessly celebrating last week.
If they were counted, the unemployment rate today would be a far more realistic 11%, better reflecting the suffering in the real economy under Obamanomics.
Just last month, while the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported finding 243,000 new jobs, they also reported in the same release that an additional 1.2 million workers had dropped out of the work force altogether, giving up hope under Obama.? If labor force participation had remained the same in January, 2012 just as it was the month before in December, 2011, the unemployment rate would have risen to 8.7% in January rather than supposedly declining to 8.3% as reported.
Some additional facts highlight how misleading the reported unemployment rate, and the political rhetoric around it, can be.? One year ago, 99 million Americans were unemployed or otherwise not working, and the unemployment rate was 9.1%.? Today, while the reported unemployment rate is 8.3%, over 100 million Americans are unemployed or otherwise not working.
In January, 2009, 11.6 million Americans were unemployed, with 23% of those unemployed for more than 6 months.? By January, 2012, 12.8 million were unemployed, with 43% of those out of work more than 6 months.
At the official end of the recession in June, 2009, America was 12.6 million jobs short of full employment.? By January, 2012, we were 15.2 million jobs short, falling behind by another 244,000 in that month alone.
The time has come to begin to raise questions about the precipitous decline in the labor force assumed by BLS.? Are the career bureaucrats there partial to President Obama, and favorable towards promoting his political chances for reelection?? Or has the Obama Administration placed someone in a leadership slot over at?the BLS or the unemployment statistics branch that is imposing this assumed sharp decline?? Because of the oddness of this record setting decline, coinciding with President Obama’s ascension to office, these questions bear further investigation.
Page 1 2 3 ??Previous?PageNext?Page?? 39 comments, 0 called-out + Comment now + Comment now PrintReport CorrectionsRequest ReprintMore on Forbes Right Now Today's Top Stories Don't Be Fooled, The Obama Unemployment Rate Is 11% +29,352 views Five iPad 3 Rumors That Just Might Be True +28,885 views Kim Jong-Un Dead? That's The Rumor +26,839 views Features
Intelligent Investing 
Google's Big Problem They Don't Want You To Know About Post Your CommentCancel replyPost Your ReplyYou are logged in as $wp_login (log out)
Enter Your CommentForbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.
Submit Comment
Post Your CommentCancel replyPost Your ReplyLog in to post a commentUsername:Password: Lost your password?Remember meLog inDon't have an account?Join Forbes Now. Create a Forbes Account Username: (Must be at least 4 characters, letters and numbers only. We encourage you to use your real name.) Email?Address: Passwords are sent to this address, so please make sure it is correct. Password: Confirm Password: Type your new password again. Register
By clicking JOIN FORBES you are indicating that you’ve read and agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy. CommentsCalled-OutExpand All Comments 
Debasis 2 days ago Is this a political campaign article? I like economic analysis part, not the political BS that are put out by biased authors intentionally.
Permalink Flag Reply
billyearout 2 days ago If the President touted the BLS figures this week, as he did, to point out his success, then the article has freedom to throw the flag and criticize his efforts based on facts.
Permalink Flag Reply
drsnyc05 7 hours ago Is 2+2 = 4 biased? Mr. Liberal, I suggest you stop lighting candles at the alter of your lord and savior Obama because the man is absolutely clueless about how business and the economy works. He’s an ambulance chaser who sues anything and everything that gets in his way. The man is not a problem solver but a problem creator. The unemployment rate is just a number that shows how many people collect unemployment checks. Once their 99 weeks is up, they are no longer counted. Wow, that was complicated!
Permalink Flag Reply
daviddelosangeles 7 hours ago Hello billyearout,
You are completely correct. The problem conservatives have is that when the same BLS numbers were unfavorable to the POTUS, they were waving them about as prove that the voters should unseat the Mr. Obama. Now they have to say “Oh, the BLS numbers do not mean anything, they are biased”. They cannot have it both ways, if bad unemployment numbers mean the POTUS should be removed from office, good unemployment numbers have to mean that he should be re-elected.
Permalink Flag Replybillyearout 2 days ago Doesn’t matter, they’ll blame Bush!
Permalink Flag Replydrsnyc05 7 hours ago Bush? Obama?should blame Abraham Lincoln! Why not go way back? Look, Obama was the kid in school who told his teacher his dog ate his homework. People are so dumb.
Permalink Flag Reply
shripathikamath 6 hours ago Bush is to be blamed for turning a budget with surpluses into one with deficits. And two unfunded wars, and a free-falling economy that was losing 750,000 jobs a month when his term was up.
Permalink Flag Reply
economart 2 days ago Sorry Debasis to hurt your feelings. Just face it: Obomba is a failure.
What exactly in Mr. Ferrara’s figures do you disagree with? Knowing the problem in your interpretation of figures, we can then amend your error in analysis.
GM
Permalink Flag Reply
cofassio 1 day ago This is obviously a biased, partisan article. To begin with, the author assumes reasons why people have withdrawn from the labor force, without anything to actually back up hese assumptions. Then, try as he might, he keeps trying to count as unemployed people those who have not actively looked for work over the preceding four weeks. Obviously, there is serious doubt how much someone wants to work if they have not even looked for work over the preceding four weeks. Finally, as the excellent paper and book by Rogoff showed, any recession caused by a financial crisis follows a very different recovery path from standard recessions.
Permalink Flag Replyeconomart 15 hours ago Hello Cofassio,
And why do you think people have left the work force? Because they inherited a fortune and moved to Bermuda or the Cayman’s?
Is that what happened in the construction business after the financial collapse? So many workers became independently wealthy and just withdrew to a wealthy enclave in sunny Florida?
Now many people will just move to the underground economy and pick up jobs there, but not enough to account for the huge discrepancy.
This is not just a financial crisis. Its a crisis that has struck the very homes in which most people live. Rogoff is just another Keynesian out to defend the great Keynesian failure. Coming up for four years of unprecedented deficits and government intervention in all areas of daily life, and nothing to show for it except inflation, in a recession. Its the Japan syndrome.
GM
I
Permalink Flag Reply
steinpiaz 11 hours ago “The author assumes reasons why people have withdrawn from the labor force, without anything to actually back up hese assumptions.” Exactly. There are many reasons people leave the labour force. One of the principal reasons today is the huge drop in employable people due to retiring baby boomers. But, partisan propaganda makes better headlines then factual research so in the absence of facts some “journalists” have to make things up as they go along.
Permalink Flag Replydrsnyc05 7 hours ago > One of the principal reasons today is the huge
> drop in employable people due to retiring baby
> boomers
Baby Boomers?? Are you kidding me? Man oh man, you libs will do practically anything short of putting on knee pads for Obama. So let me get this straight, during the worst recession in decades people decided to retire like it was 1998? Never mind numbers and facts right? What gets me is the immense emotional tie libs have with this man that makes the rest of us sick. Obama sucks, get over it.
Permalink Flag Reply
carlos1 7 hours ago Listen cofassio, your patron saint Obama is cooking the books with these numbers. The population is growing yet the actual jobs are dropping. That isn’t biased, it is simply the truth of what is going on in this country today. I think in November they had 120,000 new jobs but lost 340,000 by dropping out. Again, our population is growing and our jobs are shrinking.
Permalink Flag Reply ? 1 2 3 ?
没有评论:
发表评论