Obama Fails on Jobs Again: Loses 1,702,000 Jobs in Four Weeks (Media Lies Continue)

Yes, the Thursday Labor Department report on new unemployument claims (presumbably representing lost jobs) came out this morning. Again, it was bad news. For 8 straight weeks, the weekly number of reported new unemployment claims has been above 400,000--a BAD level, and no improvement in at least six months. In other words, the job market, and the economy, ave STALLED (again). This remains the worst recovery since World War II, with 7 million fewer jobs now than in the peak in 2007, and millions of fewer jobs than when the recovery supposedly started in the spring-summer of 2009.


Here are the number of new unemplooyment claims (seasonally adjusted, and NOT "concrete" numbres, which is lie no. 1 in the way the media reports these numbers): 422,000 (this week, to be revised next week); 428,000 (revised UP from 424,000, as I informed you last week it would be); 414,000 (revised UP from 409,000); and 438,000 (revised UP from 434,000). Now even our mainstream media, including our despicable financial media, can "spin' the supposed 6,000 "improvement" from last week as a "good" number. This is the same media who were AGAIN saying that the "improvement" of the number of new unemployment laims at the end of last year, and early tis year, to below 400,0000 represented "conclusive' evidence that the job market had finally turned the corner--an "irrevocable trend". But notice that the reported "drop" of 6,000 in new unemployment claims from last week is a LIE, as was the headline last week that new unemployment claims had gone up 10,000. The REVISED number this week shows that last week's new unemployment claims went up 14,000--NOT 10,000. If you compare aplles to apples (unrevised numbers), this week's number actually went down even less than the headlines say: 2,000 on an apples to apples basis. Fu;rther, look at the number actuallly REPORTED in headlines last week : 424,000. What is the ACTUAL number for this week (realizing that even this number is at least partly a subjetive number, rather than a COUNT)? To get the actual number for this week, you have to wait for the REVISED number next week. If the recent trend holds, that revised number will be 426,000, instead of today's headline number of 422,000. That would be a 2,000 INCREASE from the number actually REPORTED last week. The way the media--all of the media--reports these numbers is an absolutely disgraceful LIE.


Now, as I informed you last week would happen, the four-wek average of new unemployment claims declined fairly substantially. Since these numbers only have significance OVER TIME (another LIE in media coverage, although the media was forced this week to talk about that 8 straight weeks over 400,000, since it just jumps out at you), the four-week average is more meaningful, in context, than the number for a single week. However, an aberrational one week number can obviuosly distort the four-week average as well. Thus, this week we have dropped from the four-week average that misleadingly high number of five weeks ago: 478,000. In other words, we dropped 478,000 from this week's four-week average, and added 422,000 (yet to be revised, but the revision cannot affect the four-week average much). So the four-week average dropped from someting like 439,000 to something like 425,000. Not really very significant, despite the apparently significant improvement, because it really means that you had one aberratioinal number that was distorting the average. However, the average is still higher than it was six months ago. The only real significance of the drop in the average is that it confirms that the 478,000 was not a reliable indicator of where we actually were, in terms of the number OVER TIME. What is significant, in other words, is that 8 weeks of sustained BAD news on new unemployment claims, and not the weekly fluctuations. All it means that we failed to stay newar 478,000 is that we have not reached ARMAGEDDON. The job picture remains merely terrible, rather than sliding back into catastrophe.


ADP (private payroll processing frim for which my only female friend words as a "case analyst") reported a "gain" of only 38,000 private sector jobs for May--essentailly no gain at all. Unemployemnt is still at 9% (Gallup says it has been at 10%, and this is a POLL). As stated above, a government report came out (reported in this blog) that this is the WORST job recovery, in a supposed recovery, since World War II--all under the Obama Presidency. AP/Yahoo headline last night (I could never make this ridiculous stuff up): "Job gains close state budget gaps."
"News" organizatioins just do not get any worse than the despicable Associated Press--not in ANY universe--because they cannot get any worse. Did I mention that HOUSING news has indicated a "double dip" RECESSION in the housing market? Did I mention the 1.8% "growth in the first quarter--realy no growth at all when you take into account that this "growth" is entirely due to the Federal Reserve PRINTING MONEY, and to commodity/food/energy INFLATON? Propaganda does not get any worse than the propaganda from the despicable AP (featured every day on Yahoo, and so many other media outlets). Property taxes (local budgets), for example, can hardly to up with housig prices still going DOWN (7% or so in April alone).


What is the AP talking about? As I said, it is ridiculous propaganda. But the basis for it is that California reproted "higher" sales tax receipts, and tax receipts, in the first quarter. That wwas for the FIRST time since 207. Problem: A good part of the increase in sales tax receipts was GASOLINE (makes you feel better, does it not). Other inflationary items probably explain the sales tax receipts. AND, we have been in a "recovery" since 2009. At SOME point, California HAD to show a LITTLE improvement. That is what we got: a LITTLE imporvement in tax receipts. As with new unemployment cliams, however, for the desicable mainstream media/AP, a LITTLE "improvement" represents a major trend. You just do not get any worse than these people. Nope. I am NOT saying the media shuold fail to reprot the FACTS. Just reprot the numbers, without the lpropaganda, and on things like the weekly number of new unemployment claims, do not LIE about the numbers and their significance.


Now, tomorrow we are going to get the "net" employment numbers for May from the Labor Department. Again these are NOT "concrete" nubers, but numbers with a large subjective component (seasonally adjustged, and at least the unemployment RATE is a POLL). For example, last month's report of a gain of 244,000 jobs was FICTION. Yes, I am willing to flatly say that. That number was inconsistent with the RISE in the unemployment rate; inconsistent with the RISE in new unemployment claims; and it was inconsistent with the LACK of growth in the first quarter (econonomists agreeing that 1.8% is not enough to improve the employment picutre). This month, we have the same factors already reproted, along with the ADP reprot of little private job "growth" in May. Therefore, it is impossible for the Labor Department to report substantial job "growth" for May and be believed. Any "good" number would have to be regarded as another fiction.


How SHOULD these numbers be reported? Yes, I can tell you, and it is easy. Serious "journalists" (espicacillay financial "journalists")--a crature that no longr exists--should do a GRAPH (chart) of numbers over the past five YEARS. No "seasonal adjustments". No gimmicks. For example, take the end of May of 2010. Take the total number of people employed (and, yes, youre really "seriouis" "journalist" might have a separate chart as to UNDEREMPLOYED peole and average wages). See how the number for May of 2111 compares with the number for May of 2010, and do the same thing for 2009, 2008, and 2007 (or however far back you want to go). Do the same thing for every month between May of 2010 and May of 2011. You can do the same thing for weekly new uneployment claims numbers. Yes, the timing of HOLIDAYS might cause small glitches, but this kind of running chart would give you actual INFORMATION usning (hopefully) COUNTED numbers (instead of "seasonally adjusted" numbers). If you do NOT do SOMETING like this, you are not a "journalist". You are an incompetent political hack (appplies to EVERYBODY at the despicable AP, down to the janitors--as I continue my uncuccessful, Sodom and Gomorrah search for a competent, hoest AP employee). If you don't like my method, REFINE it. As with Medicare, merelly sticking your head in the sand and distorting these economic numbers is unacceptable. It makes modern "journalism" totally useless.


Yes, I know that modern "journlaists" talk about "the weeds", and how the PEOPLE have no patience for "journalists" going "into the weeds" to report real information. Fox News--part of the PROBLEM, and not part of the solution--uses this excuse all of the time to "report" ONLY opinion and "analysis" instead of actual information. That is why modern "journalists" are beneath contempt. They are undermining our democracy. They are all about agenda, and don't have the competence to actually reprot the news , even if they wanted to do it (which they don't).


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking of the above (bad eyesight). I do TRY to check the numbers as closely as I can. You, and "journalists", can get the numbers, even the RAW numbers, from the Labor Department website. I have not even mentioned the YEARLY "adjustments" in these numbers, which resulted, for example, in some 330,000 "gained" jobs actually disappearing last year.