Economy Stalls, Media Lies Continue (Boycott AT&T and Yahoo)

"Economy grew at 2% rate in third quarter"


The above is the LYING headline from the despicable Associated Press, as featured on AT&T/Yahoo.


How can the headline be a lie? Isn't the statement accurate? Ah. that is whre yu do not understand media PROPAGANDA and LIES, which is why you need me.


The "staetement' is accurate, but NOT the "news". Taht is the LIE. The despicable A)/AT&T/Yahoo are rpresenting that the NEWS today is that the economy "grew" 2% in the thrid quarter. That is a lie. Here is the correct headline: "Growth in the third quarter revisded down to an anemic 2%."


Yoiu would never know it from the headline, but there was NOT an "announement" today of "growth" for the thrid quarter. Tath at announcement was made a month ago, and was trumpeted as a "much better than expected" 2.5% GDP growth. What happened today was that the previous 2.5% number was REVISED downward to 2%--a whole 20% downward revision in "groth" rate. That meakes all of those mainstream media stories--not tomention Obma Administration assertions that the economy was "fine"--FALSE. Those stories, that have reallly extended ove the previous month, wre based on a FALSE number (at least if today's number is accurate, and it is uposed to be more accurate than the original number). While 2% "growth" is "better" than the 1% "growth" for the first HALF of the year, it is hardly a major improvement.


And that is what has been heappening in th past month. Essentially BAD "news", shwoing a STALLED econmy, has been "spun" as "good news". Everyone is saying today that the downward revision in GDP was EXPECTED (although maybe not quite this much). If "expected", what does htat make the stories about how "good" the initially reported 2.5% rate was. In contrast, there have been reviions UPWARD in terms of jobs created, which have bbeen "hyped" as showing an "improving" job market. Hogwash. The REvISIONS merely show that these numbers--as this bog are told you--are WRITTEN ON WATER. None of these numbers mean much, except OVER TIME (really lots of time). For example, there was that month that "job growth" was reported as ZERO. Then came the revisionis. The very next month, that number was "revised" to a sEASONALLY ADJUSTED "growth" of 57,000 "jobs". As this blog has told you, there is a MARGIN OF ERROR in those "job growth" numbers of AT LEAST 100,000. The "seasonal adjustment" alone can cause the number to vary at least that much, depending on the formula yu use and whether the economy has CHANGED in terms of its exct seasonal 'pattern".


Then look at the ne unemployment calims. That nubmer reached 400,,000 at the end of last year, and reached a low in February of this year. In other words, the number of new unemployument calaims has NOT IMPROVED this entire year, and has been sTUCK right around 400,00 for A YEAR. In fact, it has been STUCK right at 400,000 for about two months. And the number can be DISTORTED by the HOLISDAY SEASON, where the "seasonal adjustment" is especailly suspect. Yet the media LIEARS have been telling you that initially reported numbers of 390,000 and 388,000 over the past two weeks--bEFORE those numbers are REVISED--represented the "lowest number in 7 months", and showed an "improving job market". Hogwash. There ha been NO CHANGE. The MARGIN OF ERROR is much more than the 10,0000 diefference between 400,0000 and 390,000, and we were at thes same level in FEBRUARY--when the economy was "gowring' the SLOWEST. How can this be? Wellk you can argue that there is a "lag", but I don't think that is it. Rather, the SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT variations make this weekly number UNRELIABE on a shrot term basis, which is alson true of the MONTHLY "job growth" numbers (as the HUGE "revisions' have proven). Unless the unemployment calims number goes down STEADLILY, by relatively large amounts (like toward 350,000,and then twoard 300,000), the weeky number is pretty meaningless. Oh, it idoes show ONE good thing: I think it is safe to say that the economy is not getting substantially WORSE (during the longest recession since the Great Depression, and the WORST "recovery"). That should provide you NO comfort, especially with events in Europe and around the world, becasuse we are CONSTANTLY on the EDGE of sinking into a further economic DECLINE from a poiint of essentially NO RECOVERY. That is very BAD. You might remember that the GDP growth, in the second half of 2009, was 4-5%. Since then, as the 'recovery" STALLED, we have NOT "been moving in the right direction".


Therefore, realizse lthat the media reproting of these constantly shifting, and unreliable, numbers is FALSE---especially when they try to make a "trnd" out of numbers which are really not showing a trend., and which are constantly being revised. Note that today's GDP revisoin did not represent any CHANGE in actual "growth". The "growth" was what it was. All that has CHANGED is the REPORTED number (showing you, as the employment numbers hav shwon you, especially the constantly revised monthly numbers, that the initially REPORTED number does not mean very much, except over time). The "seasonal adjustments" lone are so unreliabe that only MAJOR moves, over time, give these numbers any significance (in terms of a "trend"), Meanwhile, the economy remains STUCK in the same anemic place we have been since essentially January of 2010. Indeed, the unemployment rate has not essentially improved since July of 2009.


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight). I do my best, by the way, to check the numbers as I type them, although I would never tell you that I never make a typo on the numbers. Taht is why I often repeat them more than once in an article.