Jobs Report: Carping, Criticism, and Conspiracy Theorizing

As you may have heard, U-3 unemployment took a steep drop in September, from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent. This is the first time unemployment has dipped below 8 percent since February 2009, the first full month of Barack Obama's presidency, and matches the 7.8 percent rate that held when Obama was sworn in. 

Bloomberg's Alex Kowalski reports that the increase in employment will provide tons of neat stuff in terms of a Keynesian boost in aggregate demand. (Kowalski also uses the familiar adverb "unexpectedly" to describe the job numbers, but for the first time in recent memory to describe a strengthening job market.)  

The economy added 114,000 workers last month after a revised 142,000 gain in August that was more than initially estimated, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington. The median estimate of 92 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for an advance of 115,000. The jobless rate dropped from 8.1 percent and hourly earnings climbed more than forecast.

Improving employment prospects that lead to stronger wage growth provide workers with the wherewithal to boost their spending, helping cushion the economy from a global slowdown. 

The job numbers can be considered positive only in the context of a miserable half-decade of economic growth, and they are obviously convenient for President Obama, who suffered a humiliating defeat in his debate with Republican challenger Mitt Romney Wednesday. Does that mean the numbers are cooked? 

Former General Electric CEO Jack Welch seems to think so. "Unbelievable jobs numbers.." Welch tweets. "these Chicago guys will do anything..can't debate so change numbers."

This doesn't make a whole lot of sense: If the Obama administration was gaming the numbers, why didn't they do it before? And the BLS, while it is a division of the government and thus subject to political pressure, is staffed generally by career apparatchiks whose work, as I noted in a print column a while back, is extremely thorough and, by government standards, pretty transparent. Granted the Obama team's recent hanky panky with the Lockheed layoffs does not inspire much confidence in their ability to refrain from squeezing economic data, but if there's been an effort to cook the numbers we should see more smoke. 

Here's a good rebuttal to Welch's claim from Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute, who points out that the most damning case against the Bureau of Labor Statistics' claim — that the economy only added 114,000 jobs in September, seemingly not enough to account for such a precipitous drop — doesn't mean much. Single-month discrepancies of this type are not uncommon. (Related: These monthly numbers are subject to frequent revision, so the steep drop may look less impressive over time.) Labor force participation is also up, so this is not another case of large numbers of workers just leaving the work force. And unemployment claims have been rising lately. So if we leave out the conspiracy, we still have a puzzlement: Where are all these newly employed workers working? 

The answer can probably be found in a combination of the unadjusted nature of the monthly data, and the fact that, this drop aside, the jobs picture is still an ugly piece of modern art. At the American Enterprise Institute, James Pethokoukis says you don't need to smell any rats to know that the labor economy still stinks: 

Only in an era of depressingly diminished expectations could the September jobs report be called a good one. It really isn’t. Not at all... 

Yes, the U-3 unemployment rate fell to 7.8%, the first time it has been below 8% since January 2009. But that’s only due to a flood of 582,000 part-time jobs...

Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have risen by just 1.8 percent. When you take inflation into account, wages are flat to down.... 

The broader U-6 rate — which takes into account part-time workers who want full-time work and lots of discouraged workers who’ve given up looking — stayed unchanged at 14.7%. That’s a better gauge of the true unemployment rate and state of the American labor market.

The shrunken workforce remains shrunken. If the labor force participation rate was the same as when President Obama took office, the unemployment rate would be 10.7%. If the participation rate had just stayed steady since the start of the year, the unemployment rate would be 8.4% vs. 8.3%...

The 114,000 jobs created would have been a good number … but for 1962, not 2012. The U.S. economy needs 2-3 times that number every month to close the jobs gap (which is the number of jobs that the U.S. economy needs to create in order to return to pre-recession employment levels while also absorbing the people who enter the labor force each month.)...

We are still on pace to create fewer jobs this year than last year. 

In any event, it would be several summers of recovery too late for Obama to take credit for what is still a high unemployment rate. The Keynesian economic rescue packages, which started before Obama took office, have been in place for many years to no (or actually negative) discernible effect. The members of Obama's economic brain trust are almost totally gone, replaced by humbler figures promising much less. To say Obama can take credit for the improvement in unemployment is like saying the plot to kill Hitler worked because eventually he died. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Autumn of Recovery! I look forward to the revision.

  • califernian||

    the way to really get this job growth going is to raise taxes on the working class. yep. Right tony?

  • The Late P Brooks||

    (Kowalski also uses the familiar adverb "unexpectedly" to describe the job numbers, but for the first time in recent memory to describe a strengthening job market.)

    An unexpectedly correct usage.

  • Enough About Palin||

    Intended outcomes are not unexpected.

  • ||

    Intended outcomes have to be expected? I can fully intend to get a 4.0 GPA this semester, and yet not expect that to happen.

  • R C Dean||

    Single-month discrepancies of this type are not uncommon.

    Some examples of massive discrepancies like this (if there are any), and how they played out in subsequent months, would be nice.

  • H. Protagonist||

    I checked the difference between the reported monthly changes in CES and the CPS. Throwing out data compromised by changes in population controls, this is the 3rd largest discrepancy between the household and payroll services over the past 32 years. The two larger instances were September 2001 (not surprising considering events) and February 2002. This reading was 2.75 standard deviations above the mean over that time.

    Revisions may change this, of course, but it's definitely an outlier.

  • R C Dean||

    Saying that the third largest discrepancy in 32 years is "not uncommon" strikes me as a little, well, spinny.

  • Enough About Palin||

    I think we all know who Tim will be voting for again.

  • ||

    The only Reason writer I expect to vote for a major party candidate is Chapman. And even he's not a sure thing.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    In any event, it would be several summers of recovery too late for Obama to take credit for what is still a high unemployment rate.

    Are you serious?

  • ||

    So there's really been precisely zero improvement, and this nothingness has, predictably, provoked much shit-flinging.

    And not a single fuck has been given by anyone but CNN.

  • ||

    I guess if the economy is improving we don't need to raise taxes a trillion dollars, right? Right?

  • The Hammer||

    Is this the beginning of a lead-up to Cavanaugh declaring "I'm voting for Obama because the economy!!" in early November?

  • ||

    Last time he voted for Obama because he's black. He still is, looks like.

  • ||

    Don't even laugh about it, dude. Such jokes have a curious tendency to become reality.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    This country is too racist to ever reelect a black president.

  • ||

    Amerikkka!

  • Mainer2||

    Obama was judged by the color of his skin, not the content of his character.
    If racism no longer existed, Obama would have been rejected utterly unqualified for the presidency.

  • ||

    Yeah. I can think of no worse way to piss on MLK's grave.

  • Enough About Palin||

    So I guess you haven't read about his kids.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    This happened last year as well, and the dumbasses in DC and the media touted it as the beginning of real recovery.

    Jobsless rates go down around September/October because companies are hiring for the holiday season, then they will go right back up in January or February when the demand for seasonal workers has passed.

  • Mo||

    You are aware that the numbers are seasonally adjusted, right?

  • Bam!||

    So why does it keep happening?

  • Marshall Gill||

    The economy added 114,000 workers last month after a revised 142,000 gain in August that was more than initially estimated, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington.

    Does anyone know how many months in a row the numbers have been adjusted later? It sure seems like they have supposedly over-estimated the numbers several months in a row.

  • SugarFree||

    There was a story here not to long ago, and it was something like 51 out of the last 52 weeks. I'm not currently able to search for it if someone would be so kind.

  • gaijin||

    Not exactly what you asked for, but the second chart at this link has a nice visual of the initial claims by headline versus the claims as reflected in the revised numbers from each of the last 38 weeks of 2012: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/.....ees-it-bad

  • Marshall Gill||

    That is for what I was looking. Yep, the consistent upward revision of the numbers is what it seemed like has been happening.

    Not only are they regularly revising them upward, the revisions seem to be increasing. I am sure it is simply honest mistakes.

  • T o n y||

    Skepticism is good, but I have this funny feeling you guys are pissed that misery in the US has decreased slightly because you don't like the president.

  • ||

    The end of Bush's presidency were, by comparison to the present day, the "good old times," so fuck you and your pinko fanaticism.

  • ||

    Was, too.

  • T o n y||

    By what measure? 818,000 jobs lost in Bush's final month.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    I'm not voting for Bush, fuckstick.

  • ||

    If only it were merely as bad as Bush. At this point, we're fucked on a whole new dimension of awfulness.

  • T o n y||

    Just all his neocon buddies and deficit-exploding fiscal policies?

  • Sevo||

    T o n y| 10.5.12 @ 1:13PM |#
    "Just all his neocon buddies and deficit-exploding fiscal policies?"

    As compared to your pinko buddies and their deficit-exploding fiscal policies, shithead?

  • Brandybuck||

    Explain why Obama kept ALL of these deficit-exploding fiscal policies?

  • T o n y||

    They considered it bad policy and bad politics to raise taxes in a weak economy. Whether this form of Keynesianism succeeded is open to debate--what's not is the fact that the low tax rates kept worsening the deficit and never caused any trickle-down prosperity.

  • tarran||

    Because spending was through the roof, and the federal reserve was printing the money needed to make up the shortfall!

    Tony, your ability to walk up to the answer and then not see it is quite impressive!

  • Sevo||

    T o n y| 10.5.12 @ 1:26PM |#
    "what's not is the fact that the low tax rates kept worsening the deficit and never caused any trickle-down prosperity."

    No, shithead, continued spending above revenues caused that.
    If you don't spend more than you have, you don't run a deficit. This should be easy enough to grasp that even an abysmal ignoramus like you can see it.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Tony,

    They considered it bad policy and bad politics to raise taxes in a weak economy. Whether this form of Keynesianism succeeded is open to debate


    The act of NOT raising taxes =/= Keynesianism.

    Keynesianism is all about aggregate demand. Taxation or the lack thereoff is not the best wy to affect aggregate demand because individuals have this nasty habit of acting with self-interest (meaning: we aren't ants, or robots) and so will use their money in very diverse ways. So the best way to obtain aggregate demand is through government spending. WHICH, by the way, has been the main economic policy in the US since the 30's.

    So, once again, you're confused.

  • ||

    They considered it bad policy and bad politics to raise taxes in a weak economy. Whether this form of Keynesianism succeeded is open to debate--what's not is the fact that the low tax rates kept worsening the deficit and never caused any trickle-down prosperity.

    "Policies that were bad ideas under Bush are good ideas under Obama."

  • Rhino||

    The low taxes allowed for higher growth which did, in fact, bring in more revenue. The out of control spending is what worsened the deficit. the static model that says lower taxes always means lower revenue is flawed.

  • Rhino||

    And yet the labor participation rate was STILL higher than it is now. Its far lower now and has been that way for a long time which means people have been feeling the pain for a long time. So yes. Those were the good ole days compared to now.

  • SugarFree||

    Or you can go fuck yourself, sockpuppet.

  • ||

    He doesn't need to -- Shrike's already lubing up for their weekly Chris Matthews marathon.

  • T o n y||

    If I could, I would.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    See, this is exactly where teledildonics is called for.

  • ||

    that is weird to me.

    If there was a female version of myself I would not want to fuck her...it would be like fucking my sister.

    I don't think you have given this much thought Tony...when it comes right down to it I do not think you would want to fuck your twin.

  • T o n y||

    Yeah I'd do me.

  • fish||

    You have always reminded me a little of Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs.

  • ||

    "T o n i a, put the lotion on the skin."

  • ||

    Here you go then.

    http://vimeo.com/2381662

    It is a pretty good scifi to boot and safe for work.

  • Fluffy||

    My problem is that manufacturing was down in the lagging month, new and public school hires should be down so the seasonal adjustment should reduce the number not raise it.

    I could be convinced that the economy is grinding out a slow improvement based on the other numbers I see, but it shouldn't be lowering the unemployment rate yet, or raising labor force participation.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    The misery has not decreased at all, it is the funny looking numbers that draw derision.

    My income is tied to things like worker's comp and construction coverage being sold by my company - I so very much want a real recovery - not part time McJobs (as many a TEAM BLUE person would have described it pre-2009) being held by les Miserables.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I long for the days of (real) 5.6% unemployment and OMG JOBLESS RECOVERY!!!!!

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Indeed - I remember the squabbling over whether the short term incentive plaln would pay 120% or 125% of target... sigh. Ah, the days of the worst economy since Herbert Hoover

  • Restoras||

    T o n y! Where ya been, bro? Thanks for shedding all the sweet, sweet and salty tears after your boy got massacred the other night. More to come?

  • ||

    His tears contain hazardous levels of Agent Retard. Don't drink them.

  • T o n y||

    You guys deserved a day of respite from what must be the slow torture of the inevitability of Obama's reelection.

    But how embarrassing to be rooting for Mitt Fucking Romney.

  • ||

  • fish||

    Certainly possible to chastise the empty suit in the whitehouse and the empty suit running against him. Personally I'm just enjoying the thought of Super Bario weeping softly while Valarie Jarret gently cradles his head telling him what "A big Big president he is...and how he'll show all those regressive meanies how tough he is after the election"!

  • Restoras||

    Who said anything about rooting for Romnobot, shit-for-brains? Obama was pathetic and you know it. He didn't even mail it in. It didn't matter who was at the other end of the stage - he was a complete buffoon and made Bush look like a master orator.

  • T o n y||

    He was pathetic. What could have possessed him not to call Romney out on all of his ridiculous lies I can't figure out.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Tony,

    What could have possessed him not to call Romney out on all of his ridiculous lies I can't figure out.


    He was already too preoccupied spewing his own lies, he simply did not have the time to address Mitt's.

  • ant1sthenes||

    QFT

  • ||

    What could have possessed him not to call Romney out on all of his ridiculous lies I can't figure out.

    pretty easy to explain:

    1. Most of Romney's lies are Obama's lies. Exposing Romney's exposes his own.

    2. He is not a good debater. Nothing bad there really in my opinion. Being a good debater should not make one a good or bad president.

    3. He has had a terrible presidency. Obviously you disagree with whose fault it is is. Regardless you have to admit it has been bad. Defending that terrible streak is simply hard to do without looking like a whining bitch. Like near impossible to do.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Really, T o n y? I would have though even you could have divined that at least half of us here think that divided government (Obama/GOP Congress) is probably the best we can do in 2012.
    (Can you still use the word "divined" without being a homophobe?)

  • T o n y||

    That's what we have. Why are you bitching?

  • ||

    In the name of God, are you really this fucking retarded?

  • tarran||

    Yes, he is that retarded.

  • ||

    Reps control the house and the dems control the White House and senate.

    Looks like divided government to me.

    Tony is retarded but he is right about that.

  • fish||

    That's what we have. Why are you bitching?

    Cuz we want moar gridlock you nitwit!

    And because it's fun watching the "smartest guy in the room" demonstrate that he is the epitome of empty suit!

  • Zeb||

    You do realize that different commenter handles generally correspond to different people, don't you?

  • T||

    Sock puppet assumes everyone else is sock puppet.

    It's socks all the way down. There is only one commenter: The Jacket.

  • ||

    You do realize that different commenter handles generally correspond to different people, don't you?

    WHOA now, Zeb, stop trying to deviate from the Reason group-mind.

  • Restoras||

    It is a simple soul - there is only Red and Blue in T o n y world. I've always found that the typical braindead idealogue has no room in their heads for anything outside of easy structures to comprehend.

  • T o n y||

    I assure you my brain is capable of comprehending a multiparty system. That's just not what we have, structurally.

  • Restoras||

    You haven't shown anything of that capability on these boards so color me skeptical. A one-party state, on the other hand, is something I'm sure is something very easy for you to contemplate.

  • ||

    structurally

    nah I think it is cultural rather then institutional.

    I guess you can argue that it is human nature to submit to an only us vs them structure...but there is nothing in the base structure of our elections system that requires only two parties.

  • circadia||

    Well yeah. Whether the new jobs number is an anomaly or the start of a trend, it doesn't change my view that Obama has been a terrible president and would continue to do more harm than good to this country if given another four years. So it sucks mightily that this happened *now*, giving him something to tout on the campaign trail.

  • Fluffy||

    If the Obama administration was gaming the numbers, why didn't they do it before?

    Because they would get caught over time.

    A relatively small fudge (say, 50k jobs) dramatically changes the headline numbers, but is still a reasonable amount to back out later, because it's well within the limit of standard post-hoc revisions.

    If they come out after election day and say, "Oopsie, we only created 45,000 jobs in September after all!" they win. They get their headline when they want it, but don't go full Argentina on cooking the numbers in a way that lets them get caught.

  • ||

    +1.

  • Mo||

    If this was the case, wouldn't they game the headline months and let the latter adjustment be lower? People don't pay as much attention to the corrected numbers as they do to the headline. Especially since people's opinions of the economy aren't just based on the September numbers, but the August, July and June ones as well.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    Actually they would never get substantively caught. Who gives a shit if a couple of Libertarian and right wing sites report it. They're idiots for not going whole hog Kirchner.

  • nicole||

    Speaking of Kirchner...the schadenfreude, it is so good.

  • Cytotoxic||

    That's awesome! We need more vindictive badass capitalists like Singer. He should build a private army and recruit from HandR!

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Get a Letter of Marque and Reprisal?

  • Drake||

    Yep - nobody except a few nuts and maybe some Fox commentators are going to say a word about an one-month bo-bo.

    After the election, who cares?

  • ant1sthenes||

    Dude, they openly promised to pay for company's legal costs if they violated the law and delayed warn their employees about impending layoffs until after the election. I don't think they give a shit about getting caught, that's what the whore media is for.

  • Invisible Finger||

    Fluffy is only half right.

    The other reason is that "good news" has better bang right before the election than waaaay before the election. We've got 5 weeks of great news still to come!!

  • gaijin||

    Part of the conspiracy comes from the fact that for the last 60 weeks, the weekly unemployment claims number for the prior week gets revised up...enabling a fresh new headline that unemployment claims declined from last week. This is not uncertainty or volatility...only an incompetent statistician or a data manipulator would have a revision that was so consistently in one direction. And this is the same governmental entity that released are employment report today. So, not so much a conspiracy 'theory' as a pretty good extrapolation of other facts.

  • gaijin||

    *our...d'oh!

  • R C Dean||

    Just so. Revisions are inevitable. Ideally, they would be 50/50 higher/lower. If they depart from that, you have to start wondering about the validity of the system.

    When you have all of them over more than a year going the same direction, and that direction just happens to be the one that produces favorable headlines, well, you do the math.

    At some point, utter bumbling incompetence (the best case explanation) stops being plausible.

  • Brandybuck||

    ^^^ this ^^^

    I use a clock radio to wake up in the morning. For the past year I have been waking up to reporters breathlessly announcing miraculous green shoot employment news. Every week more good news yet we're still stuck in the same spot in our history's longest recession.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Of course, the Jabbering-Moron-in-Chief was on the teevee a while ago demonstrating once again his complete and utter lack of understanding of how the economy (not to mention wealth creation) actually works.

    If we just subsidize college tuition some more, it will go down!

    Also, the purpose of "employers" is to hand out paychecks!

    Union wage apes are the middle class (and they're HURTING)!

  • ||

    The UAW are the middle class.

    PROLETARIANS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!

  • Ice Nine||

    This doesn't make a whole lot of sense: If the Obama administration was gaming the numbers, why didn't they do it before?

    Wouldn't be much of an October Surprise if they had done it before, now would it?

  • Killazontherun||

    Have you seen the video of Obama talking up this report? He is really proud of himself. Quite satisfied with himself. Take the weekend off, O-buddy. Take the week off. Catch a few rounds, you deserve it.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    "'Today's news certainly is not an excuse to try to talk down the economy to score a few political points,' Obama said. 'It is a reminder that the country has come too far to turn back now.'"

    Never thought I'd see crowing about 7.8% unemployment.

  • Killazontherun||

    The New Normal.

  • SugarFree||

    Isn't that the show that stars the withered corpse of Ellen Barkin?

  • Killazontherun||

    THAT'S Ellen Barkin? Ewwww.

  • Restoras||

    Seriously. Getting old sucks.

  • Killazontherun||

    Reminds me, Jenny McCarthy was looking pretty hot on O'Brien last night. I haven't paid attention to her in well over a decade. Wife says as JMc slinks on stage, 'I bet she is the type who likes to tell masturbation stories for attention.'

    Nailed it.

  • gaijin||

    Nailed it.

    So did Brian Urlacher!

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    lol, see my fake quote below.

  • The Hammer||

    You should see HuffPo. The big headline that they run at the top of the page because their average reader is too stupid to pay attention to anything that's not big and shiny is a simple "7.8%." And the comments on the story range from mild delusion to outright desperation:

    HUFFPOST SUPER USER
    phelonious
    world domination...one post at a time.
    134 Fans Become a fan
    54 seconds ago (12:50 PM)
    i'm much happier now than i was 5 years ago. stay the course.

    tuttlemsm
    Frustrating, isn't it?
    101 Fans Become a fan
    46 seconds ago (12:53 PM)
    Some repub pointed out that the simple explanation is that it's September, and new teachers have been hired.

    Yes, and who's always been in favor of hiring more teachers? Why, that would be one Barack Obama.

    147 Fans Become a fan
    2 minutes ago (12:52 PM)
    Thank you HP. There is something intrinsically lovable about President Obama's character. Romney not so much. President Obama cares about us and is trying to better our lives against very difficult circumstances.

  • Mainer2||

    intrinsically paternalistic, i think he means

  • ||

    No, I think he means "intrinsically paternalistic intrinsic paternalism."

  • Tman||

    MMMMMAAATTT DAAAAAMMONNNNN.

  • ThatSkepticGuy||

    Huffington Post, the Democratic Party's own personal North Korea.

  • Sudden||

    A question for my fellow California Libertarians:

    How do you guys plan on voting on Prop 32?

    I'm actually a bit torn on this. Obviously, I don't like the extraordinary level of influence that the unions have in Sacramento. However, having said that I am a pretty big speech purist and subscribe to the notion of money and campaign contributions as speech. Although, I do support prop 32's ban on using forced union dues towards political contributions. If that were the only aspect of it, I'd likely vote in favor of 32. But the speech restriction has me leaning towards holding my nose and voting it down, even while it pisses me off that my vote is to the benefit of govt employee unions.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Fuck the Unions - Yes on 32!

  • ||

    Can you go during off-peak times, so that there's not somebody standing right behind you waiting to use that voting booth, and just take a dump on the floor and walk out?

  • Sudden||

    That would certainly put a new twist on "I'm voting for Governor Brown."

  • ||

    I'd rather spend election day looking at photographs of hot Asian chicks on my PC.

  • Sudden||

    I've never been able to catch the yellow fever.

  • ||

    Caucasoidal and Negroidal babes are also on the agenda.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    I like to think I am an Equal Opportunity leerer, er, looker.

  • ||

    Tits is tits, bro. I ain't no discriminator.

  • Restoras||

    I have a jeans fetish. There, I said it. I love love love looking at women who look great in jeans. There are websites devoted to this - Creator I love the internet.

  • ||

    Yeah, sexy jeans are ace. Unless you want me to lose to temptation and go on another photo-dumping binge, STOP TALKING ABOUT IT.

  • Restoras||

    Please please please. I am having a crappy week. Been, uh, trolling shopping, yeah, shopping at True Religion online this morning...

  • ||

    Alright, but should I avoid nudity? You know, for all the fellas at work.

  • Restoras||

    Mix it up, keep us guessing!

  • nicole||

    (Semi-)serious question: do jeggings count as jeans for this purpose, or as the abomination they really are?

  • Restoras||

    I dunno, nicole. If they look great they look great - but are you speaking of denim leggings or something else? Aren't denim leggins just lighter weight denim that's a little extra stretchy?

  • nicole||

    I wouldn't say "jeggings" are denim--there are stretch denim jeans that are, say, 5%-20% lycra, which I would call "jeans," but "jeggins" are more like leggings with stuff drawn on them to make them look like jeans. Like they wouldn't have real pockets, but they would appear to have the same kind of pockets as jeans.

  • Restoras||

    I would say that jeggings definately don't count.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Restoras,

    I have a jeans fetish. There, I said it. I love love love looking at women who look great in jeans. There are websites devoted to this - Creator I love the internet.


    I love looking at women who look great in lycra pants.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Tits is tits, bro. I ain't no discriminator.

    Make more me-s.

  • Killazontherun||

    I've never been able to catch the yellow fever.

    Just google cosplay cuties, and say hello to your new fetish.

  • ||

    Fuck Zelda.

  • Restoras||

    Do not do this. I just did this and am regretting it.

  • ||

    Try this. It should help.

  • Killazontherun||

    You're right, it did!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I've never been able to catch the yellow fever.

    If you're not already in hopeless, unrequited lust for Kathryn de Long, you're baby-makin' parts don't work.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    *your

  • fish||

    You were right the first time!

  • fish||

    As a Californian as well, most times I'd like to run around naked screaming....All power to the Plutocrats.... just to piss off some of my neighbors! But I think it will be funnier to just vote it down (or do the honorable thing and abstain...from voting...not running around naked) and let California vote itself even poorer!

  • H. Protagonist||

    So you'd rather keep forcing people like my wife to contribute to unions she despises (remember, you consider that speech, so you're voting to compel her to make speech she finds loathsome) in order to keep from slightly narrowing the avenues others can exercise their speech (the limits are only on corporations-not employees-contributing directly to candidates, not PACs). Seems like a bad trade to me, compelling objectionable speech instead of not really restricting speech.

    If only for my wife, Yes on 32.

  • fish||

    I didn't say I was thrilled about it H. I think it will fail because these measures usually fail in California.

    Why do's you hatez the chiiillrens plays really well here!

  • Sudden||

    My wife is also a teacher. Although she doesn't seem to find it so loathsome, although we're only one year into marriage, so you'll have to give me some time to work on her.

    We actually briefly discussed the measure this morning, and when I mentioned the fact that I don't think those dues she is forced to pay should be used, without her explicit consent, to the tune of $18 mil on this proposition alone, she got a bit irritated.

    She means well, but has never been particularly politically attuned and I'm fighting a bit of an uphill battle trying to keep a happy and healthy marriage while still providing the reasonable counterpoint to all the union propaganda she is bombarded with.

  • Killazontherun||

    You should place the audio version of Friedman's Free To Choose under her bed while she sleeps. Put it on barely audible so she absorbs the message subliminally. I normally don't endorse such tactics, but this is your domestic life you have to cope with for years to come.

  • Brandybuck||

    My dad was the child of a FDR worshipping Teamster. But he was also a California schoolteacher for forty years and so he ended up hated unions with a passion. He was not a member of the union, but was forced to pay dues anyway, and those dues went to fund political activities my dad disagreed with. Free speech not.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    You didn't mention that the headline unemployment rate drop is based on the household survey showing an increase of over 800,000 jobs in september while the establishment survey showed 114,000.

    Difference - household survey 700% of the establishment survey is unprecedented. And, frankly, impossible. One of the numbers is clearly wrong.

    Does anyone believe that the economy created 800,000 jobs in september? That level of job growth, btw would correspond with economic growth of 8-10%. Does anyone here believe that happened last month?

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Tony

  • Drake||

    Barack? He seems gullible.

  • Danno||

    Not only that but ADP counts jobs and Household Survey counts persons with jobs. So there would have to be at least 686,000 jobs unaccounted for in the APD numbers, but note that many new hires hold down more than one job which means more than 686K jobs are unaccounted for. The stats released today have to fraud.

  • ||

    Nearly 600k were part-time jobs on the Household survey (listed as part-time for economic reasons), so if the 114k number is solely full-time then it makes sense when paired with the upward revision of 86k from the previous two months.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It's not.

  • Danno||

    The statistical difference is unlikely. And again, those getting Part-Time work typically are holding down more than one part time job.

    John Williams said "The August-to-September change in the headline unemployment rate almost certainly was not a 0.3% decline. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) knows the reported change in unemployment was wrong—other than by extreme coincidence—and it knows what consistent reporting actually showed. Only politics prevents the BLS from releasing the correct number, whether the unemployment rate actually declined, held even, or rose as predicted by consensus forecasters. The lack of transparency here in the data preparation allows for direct political manipulation. The problem is that the BLS knowingly has been preparing the seasonally-adjusted headline unemployment numbers on an inconsistent and non-comparable basis for some time. The September number was prepared using a different set of seasonal factors than was used in coming up with the August number.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Tim

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Oh, and when are we going to get a post about Obama calling for political violence in 2002?

  • ||

    I'd certainly be interested in that.

  • Killazontherun||

    A LightWorker, not a socialist.

    I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but rich people are all for nonviolence. Why wouldn’t they be? They’ve got what they want. They want to make sure people don’t take their stuff. But the principle of empathy recognizes that there are more subtle forms of violence to which we are answerable. The spirit of empathy condemns not only the use of firehoses and attack dogs to keep people down but also accountants and tax loopholes to keep people down.

  • ||

    Sweet mother of God. We chose this animal to be our President. Put us all out of our misery already, Zeus.

  • Killazontherun||

    The more you know, the more you have to appreciate the genius of David Axelrod in turning a typical civ-rights street hustler into the image of a centrist democrat with special articulation skills so many people bought into.

  • ||

    The population of a superpower bought into it. It's fucking sad beyond comprehension.

  • fish||

    Well there was the....

    harryreid
    He's clean and so articulate thing....he doesn't speak like a black...!
    /harryreid

  • BakedPenguin||

    "Clean and articulate" was Joltin' Joe Biden's contribution.

  • fish||

    Thanks BP my recollection of dem politico "compliments" of the president isn't what it once was.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    There's nothing to see here.

    Oh, racist!

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I'm sure that never happened. Such a likable fellow.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    the country has come too far to turn back now.

    That light up ahead- what if it's not daylight?

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Fucking liars. And it's all so predictable. And the idiots will believe this shit.

  • Rational Thinker||

    Record and historic job growth under a scientific plan and all you people can do is complain that it's not enough?

    Meanwhile Mitt Romney wants to cut taxes by $5 trillion on the wealthy, while raising taxes by double that on the middle class. Something he couldn't defend even with a cheat sheet.

    Once Mitt Romney and the rest of the Ayn Rand cult loses massively in the landslide election this country can finally get back to work creating jobs and restoring the basics of humanity to the American People.

  • ||

    You jumped the shark four times in a single post. Try harder.

  • SugarFree||

    I do like the irony of the handle though.

  • R C Dean||

    I think RT is doing a nice impression of a lefty/prog commentator.

  • ||

    I disagree. RT's far too coherent and logical. Jesus, dude, stop insulting the trolls of the Internet.

  • Fluffy||

    This would have been a perfect spoof if the opening had been a little more restrained.

  • R C Dean||

    Agreed. Even the sycophants aren't claiming "record and historic" job growth (that I've seen).

    So, a solid B?

  • Whiterun Guard||

    What are you, an NEA shill?

    C. C- if I haven't had my first Kahlua yet.

  • ||

    It's what lots of Obamanians and reds actually believe.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Fuck you, govt employee.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Rationing Stinker,

    Record and historic job growth under a scientific plan and all you people can do is complain that it's not enough?


    Changing the goal posts so you can call it "historical job growth" does not make a plan "scientific."

    Besides this, there's no such thing as a "scientific economic plan," as millions of famine victims can atest.

    Meanwhile Mitt Romney wants to cut taxes by $5 trillion on the wealthy,


    It that were true, it would be a good thing because I want to be wealthy. Don't you, "rational" thinker?

  • Sudden||

    Meanwhile Mitt Romney wants to cut taxes by $5 trillion on the wealthy,

    Also a bit of a misnomer considering there is no tax on wealth, only taxes on income and capital gains. So "cutting taxes on the wealthy" is a lie, obfuscation, or evidence of complete and total ignorance.

    In this guy's case, likely all three.

  • Cytotoxic||

    It's 'historic' because it barely beats out the last 4 or more years of shitty jobs numbers.

  • Sevo||

    Rational Thinker| 10.5.12 @ 12:47PM |#
    "Record and historic job growth under a scientific plan"

    You know who else lied about a scientific plan?

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Ming the Merciless?

  • T||

    Unit 731?

  • Enough About Palin||

    Dr. Michael E. Mann?

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Boring troll is boring.

  • ant1sthenes||

    Yet people still fall for it.

  • FD||

    "The job numbers can be considered positive only in the context of a miserable half-decade of economic growth..."

    Indeed.
    As the saying goes, figures lie and liars figure.
    Now that the teams are in the fourth quarter with about 7 minutes to play, Big O can depend on his allies (about 80% of the establishment media). Here's one view:
    http://money.cnn.com/galleries.....index.html

    To the uninitiated, these deliberately isolated slices are "Happy Days are Here Again."
    But a good candidate could, ethically and scientifically, take a wrecking ball to these views, especially someone who was a supposed "business genius." I doubt Romney and co. will -- inept campaign and campaigner, unable to even recognize when they're getting suckered into a skewed paradigm, an analytically fallacious whitewash.

    After the slave-mentality sycophants in our noble press-box tip these bars up and down, sideways and under, filter some data, nip off some frames, trash any like-by-like comparisons, and feign objectivity, while nodding that the statistics bear out a workable and working strategy, they need that little kid who gleefully shouted at the emperor's nudity to simply say, "But…. this is just bad!!!"

  • Rational Thinker||

    Cutting taxes has failed everytime it's been tried. How about we do something different for a change, by putting people back to work, putting money in their hands, giving them good education and health care?

    If after we've achieved that, the economy doesn't take off, then we can start thinking about revisiting the failures of the Rand/Romney/Paul/Ryan cult of economics.

  • Fluffy||

    Much better spoof work happening here.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    I agree, up to a solid B+. Needs more "investment" to get to A territory.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Needz more roadz

  • Drake||

    And "helpin' people out".

  • Enough About Palin||

    And "fair share".

  • Raistlin Majere||

    And "for the children."

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Raising taxes puts money in the hands of 'the people'.

    Yes proglodytes actually believe that.

  • Rational Thinker||

    You'd prefer it be left in the hands of the plutocratic elite?

    Anyone rational understands the nations wealth needs to be controlled by the people instead.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    OK, now you ar getting a bit too far for quality work. The first sentence - gold. But you went a bit far on the next. We'll await further efforts.

  • fish||

    Hey if you challenge him he'll try to deliver. But I find his trolling bland and predictable.

  • Drake||

    He sounds like Tom Tuttle from Tacoma, Washington.

  • ||

  • Cytotoxic||

    You're on a roll today!

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Rationing Stinker,

    You'd prefer it [wealth] be left in the hands of the plutocratic elite?


    The world meets another meathead that believes wealth = money.

    Anyone rational understands the nations wealth needs to be controlled by the people instead.


    This sentence makes no sense. First of all, nations don't possess wealth, only individuals possess wealth. Second, people already possess wealth. If you don't feel wealthy with your current possessions, then I suggest you either consider frugality, ascetism or anything that takes your mind from envy and jealousy, otherwise you will not reach Nirvana.

  • Ptah-Hotep||

    How about we do something different for a change, by putting people back to work, putting money in their hands, giving them good education and health care?

    And how do you suggest we go about this?

  • The Craig||

    Teachers, lots of fucking teachers.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    We already tried that. How about a draft?

  • The Craig||

    We basically need a 1 to 1 classroom ratio, then things will be perfect.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Racist.
    How can you say rich crackas should have the same teaching resources as disenfranchised minorities?

    And what about non english speaking undocumented children of political refugees?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    A political refugee is, by definition, documented.

    Jus' sayin'

  • Marshall Gill||

    What about the children?!!! Until every single adult is employed teaching children we will never reach the future!!!! Your cruel 1 to 1 ratio would exclude millions of potential teachers from participating in the advancement of society!

  • The Craig||

    Well, we'll need teachers to teach the teachers of the teachers.

  • Restoras||

    We were always at ware with Eastasia.

  • Rasilio||

    Yes, based on the news stories I hear there are lots of fucking teachers, and most of them appear to be banging their students.

  • The Craig||

    We prefer the term stimulating the students

  • Rational Thinker||

    By making the rich actually pay some taxes? By having government step in and provide full education and full health care to all? By using the proceeds from savings in both of these to create jobs for people?

    This shit is pretty simple.

    We just need the courage to actually stand up and accomplish something instead of sitting around whining and hoarding.

  • fish||

    You need to take a break. According to the panel you've done quality work here today (I disagree but it's subjective). Bring some more material on Monday after you've had the weekend to work on it.

  • Restoras||

    Oooo...very poor work. I think you need to check your facts and get back to us. C- work heading for a D+ unless you try harder.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    I am afraid I must agree - down to C range work with that one.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Rational Stinker,

    By making the rich actually pay some taxes?


    They're already paying almost all the taxes.

    By having government step in and provide full education and full health care to all?


    You must have this vision of education being like serving milk on a glass from a pitcher. The fact is, government has proven to be extremely, EXTREMELY, almost tear-jerking, mind-numbingly INCOMPETENT when it comes to providing teaching.

    By using the proceeds from savings in both of these to create jobs for people?


    Any idiot can "create" a job. What's being questioned is the idea that government creates productive jobs.

    This shit is pretty simple.


    Simpletons will always think that way.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Cytotoxic||

    This one needs work but he has a lot of potential.

  • R C Dean||

    How about we do something different for a change,

    Like leaving people the fuck alone and getting "our" greasy mitts out of their pockets?

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Rationing Stinker,

    Cutting taxes has failed everytime it's been tried.


    The worst part is that this is not even a good lie, or a competent one.

    Canada cut their corporate taxes and their growth rate has surpassed the US.

    How about we do something different for a change, by putting people back to work, putting money in their hands, giving them good education and health care?


    Digging ditches and closing them up. Economic activity!

    You should change your nick to "Childish Economics" just to be more accurate, R.

  • Rasilio||

    Actually it is true to some extent, however the platitude shows a massive ignorance of basic numbers and historical economic facts and a blind willingness to simply spout team based talking points without any critical analysis.

    At one point in a discussion on the impact of changes to tax law I went out and looked up every major tax law change since World War 2. There were 14 of them, 7 were supposedly tax cuts and 7 were supposedly tax hikes.

    I correlated those tax law changes with changes in inflation adjusted revenue for the 5 years following the change. I found 5 instances of revenues going up, 5 of them going down, and 4 of them remaining essentially unchanged.

    However there 5 increases and 5 decreases were each split 3 - 2 between the tax hikes and tax cuts.

    End result, there is literally no correlation between tax revenues and changes to tax law. So it is to some extent true that any tax cut that was non radical enough to actually get passed is unlikely to make any real measurable difference in the economy it is also true that any tax hike is unlikely to have any impact on revenues or deficits. Simply put tax rates are not a driving force in the economy unless you make a massively radical change and politically that is just never going to pass.

    The important part however, it took me less than a half an hour to find all this information on my own but no one is willing to do even that level of basic research to see if what they are saying or hearing is accurate.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    "In any event, it would be several summers of recovery too late for Obama to take credit for what is still a high unemployment rate."

    Are you fucking serious?

    This is easy:

    Obama: "It took me only 4 years to fix 8 years of BushHitler destroying the economy. We are now back to the same ue rate as when I took office. Make no mistake, we are not of the woods yet, but we are going in the right direction, and cannot afford to go back to the failed policies of the prior administration."

  • ||

    Yeah, but I'd much prefer it if he just got hit by a bus.

  • ||

    Ugh, I dunno about that one. Can you imagine the literal generations of Kennedy-style blathering about how Obama was just about to provide paradise for all mankind until that racist right-wing bus cut things short? I know people talk about President Biden, how about the chance of President Michelle Obama?

    I'd be more than happy to see his ass merely voted the fuck out.

  • ||

    Holy shit. You might be right.

    Scratch the bus.

  • FD||

    Amen!
    Are you sure you're not writing the sound bites for them? Because this is almost exaclty what you're going to hear the next few weeks.

  • R C Dean||

    Tangentially related, perhaps:

    79 year old man sentenced to jail for 30 days.

    His crime? Selling junk to pay for his wife's medication, so that he didn't clean up his yard to his neighbor's/the judge's satisfaction.

    http://www.heraldonline.com/20.....ts-30.html

  • VG Zaytsev||

    LoL Amerika. Land of the Fee, Home of the Slave.

  • Hyperion||

    Well, if the old coot can't remember that he is supposed to turn to the government for everything instead of trying some crazy extremist help yourself stuff, then he was just asking for it.

  • Restoras||

    T o n y approves beacsue I'm sure this leech didn't pay any taxes on the income he earned by selling his stuff off, not too mention didn't pay the appropriate permit fees to Leviathan.

  • T o n y||

    "Ramsey and his wife live in a mobile home on Social Security and veterans benefits that total less than $900 a month."

    Why do you care about these parasites?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Yes, how dare he attempt to get some of the money back that was taken from by gunpoint?

    GEORGE T O N Y OUGHT TO HELP!

  • T o n y||

    I've paid lots of social security taxes and not once has a gun been involved.

  • Sevo||

    T o n y| 10.5.12 @ 1:29PM |#
    "I've paid lots of social security taxes and not once has a gun been involved."

    I'll bet you truly are stupid enough to think that means something, shithead.

  • R C Dean||

    I've paid lots of social security taxes and not once has a gun been involved.

    That's because its the not paying it that brings out the guns.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I've paid lots of social security taxes and not once has a gun been involved.

    You're a liar. What happens if you chose not to pay the tax?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    20 minutes later and Tony still hasn't answered the question as he can't think of a way to lie himself out of this truth.

    So he disappears, only to reappear in another thread, spouting the same old tired polemic, like nothing ever happened.

    Where in the Internet is Tony?

    Do it, Rockapella!

  • nicole||

    And here I was holding my breath...

  • ant1sthenes||

    Unless you're self-employed or working under the table, you can't actually choose not to pay the tax any more than you can choose not to pay sales tax.

  • T o n y||

    So what you're bitching about is having to obey laws. Talk about entitled.

  • Randian||

    I can't understand why gays were so pissed when sodomy was illegal. Talk about entitled!

  • Citizen Nothing||

    I'm sure T o n y would have obeyed.

  • T o n y||

    Don't want to pay taxes, move somewhere there is no law saying you have to. I'm sure any place you find will be quite livable.

  • Fluffy||

    At least you've abandoned the pretense that there's no gun involved.

    Took you all of four posts.

  • ||

    Don't want to pay taxes, move somewhere there is no law saying you have to.

    Or I can ignore laws I find immoral, while trying to get them overturned or revised in a more just direction.

    I'm sure any place you find will be quite livable.

    Sorry T o n y, we have our hands full trying to protect this place from people like you.

  • dinkster||

    I've paid lots of social security taxes and not once has a gun been involved.

    Cognitive dissonance! We've broken T O N Y. He can't even put A and B together anymore!

    Irwin Schiff has had lots of guns pointed at him.

  • Sevo||

    T o n y| 10.5.12 @ 1:22PM |#
    "Why do you care about these parasites?"

    Because we're more than a bit different than you, shithead.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    They're probably grandparents, too, so I imagine T o n y not caring much, either.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    This paragraph pissed me off:

    Clover Police officers handcuffed Ramsey – whose nephew is a sheriff’s deputy, whose son is in Afghanistan on his fourth deployment to war – and walked him outside the court building and put him in a police car.

    Because he has relatives in the Law, Order, and War machine, he's special somehow?

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Journalist looking for pathos?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I think you can get enough pathos with "79 year old man". You don't need to over-egg the pudding.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    You and I understand that, but we are speaking of a modern American journalist, right?

  • nicole||

    Yes, which means it's not only super-pathetic, but also ambiguously written and poorly edited. Is the nephew's son in Afghanistan, or is Ramsey's son?

  • Sevo||

    "79 year old man sentenced to jail for 30 days.
    His crime? Selling junk to pay for his wife's medication, so that he didn't clean up his yard to his neighbor's/the judge's satisfaction."

    Maybe this is the 'something new' the troll is proposing.

  • Zeb||

    Hmm. DO people in jail count as unemployed, or not?

  • LTC(ret) John||

    They ae out of the labor force, so unemployment goes dow! WINNING!

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Yay. At this rate we'll be back where we started just in time for Obama to begin his third term.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    His crime?

    UNMUTUAL

    UNMUTUAL

  • Killazontherun||

    Labor force participation is also up, so this is not another case of large numbers of workers just leaving the work force

    Where is the data on labor participation rates at that link? Could you point it out to those of us who are a little slow, TC?

  • VG Zaytsev||

  • Killazontherun||

    Oh, you have to go to another link to get the info TC suggest is at the other link.

    Measure from Sept '11 - to Sept '12, that ain't so hot.

  • Hyperion||

    All of the folks that I currently know that who not working, it is by choice, they aren't even looking because life is unfair and the government needs to give them more. I don't know one single person who wants to work that does not have a job.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Fuck you

  • Hyperion||

    Wow, I must have touched a nerve there? So McDonalds won't hire you?

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    I'm trying everything. Overqualified for lower paying jobs.

    Just today, for a temp job, I was told they're looking for an "entry level or junior" candidate.

    For any decent job, companies prefer people who are currently employed than those who are unemployed.

    The job market is just about impossible for someone of my age and experience level.

    I know so many people around my age who have given up and haven't worked for years.

    It infuriates me to no end to hear this phony positive jobs report and Obama talking it up and his sycophants eating it up.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    No offense, but if I were in your position, and only by the Grace of God, I'm not, I'd make my own job by starting my own business or freelancing.

    Of course, it is difficult and risky, but what's the alternative?

  • Lisa||

    agreed@ starting a business and freelancing

    Even though I love blaming government for all kinds of things, I don't have sympathy for the "there are no jobs!!!11" sentiment. A job is not some kind of animal that you have to capture. It has to be created. If someone else isn't creating your job, it's up to you. Move, get new skills, or start a business.

  • Lisa||

    Also, I think a lot of people would be well-served, before they go to college, to consider "How long will I look for a job after I graduate before I give up and take a retail position?" If the answer is anything but "I will never give up because my prospects for success in this field are too good or my determination is too high to not get this job" then you shouldn't waste your money, because you haven't done your homework on the demand for your field and you're not passionate enough to justify the money spent.

  • ||

    Perhaps you should join the police force?

  • Hyperion||

    What HM said. You are obviously upset about my comment, but I was being completely honest. Of course that is just my experience. I was out of full time employment in 2008 for 4 months so I free lance contracted work to keep afloat until I found full time work again. I also moved to another state where more work was available. You just do what you have to do, not always a choice.

  • R C Dean||

    I've been no fooling unemployed twice.

    Once, I tried hanging out my own shingle. Dismal failure.

    The other time, I took a sub-lateral move to another state.

    Fortunately, I've never been unemployed in an environment like we have now.

  • Rasilio||

    Actually this can be true. Back in the Dot Com Crash I was out of work for 20 out of 27 months and no, McDonalds, gas stations, Wal Mart, none of them would hire me because in my prior job I was an IT professional making $65,000 a year.

    I actually sat through an interview for a truck driver position with Schwans (they do home delivery of prepared foods) and was told to my face that I wasn't getting the job because he knew I would leave as soon as a better job came along.

    That said, if you are long term unemployed today then it is for 1 of 3 reasons...

    a) you simply lack any marketable skills. demand is so friggin high for people with even basic computer literacy right now that if you're capable of posting on here you should be able to find a job pretty quick.

    b) you live in the wrong market. Even with the strong demand for computer literate workers good computer skills are not going to help you very much in Las Vegas or Cleveland so you might want to consider relocating to someplace with a better job market.

    c) You worked a long time in 1 career and are too old so no one wants to waste the time to retrain you

  • Hyperion||

    No one should ever be out of work if they are a skilled IT worker. You can free lance, contract, move to another area. I have never been completely out of work in my IT career since 1992. So here I am an old geezer with 20 years of experience and there hasn't been a single month that I did not earn money doing it.

  • Hyperion||

    Matter of fact, the only rough stretch that I had was the one I mentioned back in 08, but I still make money every month. I had to relocate. So if you are in an area with a very weak economy, its better to just pack up and move rather than let your skills get out of date. Because when that happens, then you might have issues. I hear about ageism and have often worried about it, but I have never personally experienced it. I was 48 when I got my last full time job and they didn't seem to be worried at all about my age.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    When I got laid off from a big bank, they brought 4 of us from my floor in to get the news, one by one. At 42, I was the youngest.
    And whenever we did hire when I was there, it was always young kids, and usually temp jobs.

  • Rasilio||

    Packing up and moving is definately the way to go but there is a funny side effect to that that no one seems to be talking about.

    As a practical matter job security is becoming synonymous with being willing and able to move with the jobs. Being Geographically tied down to one city is in many cases the road to long term unemployment. This trend has been building slowly for the last 2 decades but has only become really pronounced in the last 7 - 8 years.

    Now, what is one of the major things that can keep you tied to a single location?

    Being a Home Owner.

    That is right, the one thing that is supposedly keeping the economy down is being specifically devalued because of the reality of the mobile economy.

    The fact is the housing market will never recover to the levels it hit in the 2000's because owning a house is becoming an albatross to your career even in a good market.

    Sure at a low enough price point it becomes worth it for a worker who wants to remain mobile to own a home but long before home prices ever reached that point it would have become profitable for investors to buy the house and rent it to the worker meaning that we are likely to see increases in the numbers of single family home rentals and permanent declines in rates of home ownership.

  • Rasilio||

    The one thing that can of course put a halt to this trend is if American Businesses finally start making major moves into work from home arraingements. However while this is happening some it tends to be more in the form of giving people the flexability to work from home a portion of the week rather than moving to 100% remote workers.

  • R C Dean||

    Rasilio's point is well-taken.

    Its possible that the Dean clan may be relocating soon. If so, I will make every effort to find an acceptable rental, in large part because I don't want to own real estate when rates go up and the market crashes again. The mobility is definitely also a factor.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Appreciate all of the responses.
    I'm in the NYC job market, and the supply of young, talented labor here is overwhelming for a guy in his 40's to contend with.
    Also, in this area, if you don't have a contact at a particular firm, you have to go through a headhunter, and they will not look at you if you are out of work for more than 3 months.
    Moving or freelancing are probably my best options. I'm cashing in my pension plan in Dec and am thinking of moving to AC to try to get a job at a casino.

  • tarran||

    If you are willing to move, consider texas or Atlanta. Seriously.

    If you are thinking of changing industries, there is a huge oil boom going on in North Dakota.

  • tarran||

    Don't move out to Seattle - Episiarch won't hire anybody unless they agree to wear a clown nose and watch his Robin Williams movie collection.

  • fish||

    ....watch his Robin Williams movie collection.

    I think worker protection laws prohibit this. I know good taste should.

  • Randian||

    Columbus, Ohio! One of lowest cost-of-living areas in the nation combined with a great city. Lots of financial stuff and outside of the city, the natural gas thing is taking off.

  • Rasilio||

    I lived in Columbus, not a bad place to be but unless things have radically changed in the last 5 years the economy was not worth it.

    On the plus side the had some of the best parks of anyplace I have ever been and the city is practically empty from June through late August.

    On the down side you have to deal with Ohio State Football fans.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Thanks I will look into Columbus and maybe Cleve. I enjoyed the people when I lived in Buffalo, and I assume Columbus and Cleveland are similar types of places to Western NY.

  • tarran||

    As to cashing in your pension plan, don't do it!

    Rather, if you want to start your own business, you can set up the business, set up a Solo K, roll the pension into the Solo K, and then take a loan on it.

    You get access to the capital, you pay the interest to yourself, and no tax hit!

  • R C Dean||

    As to cashing in your pension plan, don't do it!

    If its a defined benefit plan, you might take a good hard look at how well its funded before you make this decision. If they're assuming returns above, say, 4% YoY, I'd get out, because they are underfunded.

  • Auscifer||

    Count me as another one recommending Columbus, OH.

    And to Rasillio, I have been in Cols for less that 5 years, but the commercial construction is booming. At least in the part of town that I work. I've always thought the city has great highways too, but there is a huge improvement project happening on the 70/670 corridor now.

  • Hyperion||

    BTW, Rasilio, I was basically agreeing/adding to your post, I wasn't criticizing it so hope I didn't come off that way.

  • Rasilio||

    Didn't think you were.

    A lot of what held me back during the dot com boom was that for personal reasons I was tied to Atlanta, which being heavily into both dot coms, and the telcom industry was hit harder than most cities for a significant part of that time.

    When I finally did get a job it required relocating to Cincinnati. Next job after than I had to relocate to Columbus Oh after a short period of being laid off and since then I have had just 1 month when I was not working and I was collecting severance during that period.

    Right now I'm back in Boston and I literally get a minimum of 3 calls or e-mails a day from recruiters interested in my skills for jobs and even though I'm working at a job (for which I'm under paid) I've been offered 3 others that I turned down for various reasons and in the process of interviewing for 3 more.

    As far as the ageism thing, I don't think it matters so much if you are getting a job in the same field, your experience will continue to be valueable to someone. I was more thinking about people who worked in Finance for example but lost their jobs in the housing crash. A lot of those jobs are never coming back and so if you're 55 and have worked in finance for 20+ years you're going to find a VERY hard time switching careers to anything that pays worth a damn

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    It's so frustrating how the recruiters are ignoring unemployed people and instead are inundating employed people with offers. I hear the same thing from friends with corp jobs.

    Of course, recruiters are just following the direction of their clients, so...... Not even sure how to finish that.

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||

    c) You worked a long time in 1 career and are too old so no one wants to waste the time to retrain you

    That's the wall I hit. It gets a lot tougher at 40. I finally lobbied myself into a job, but it took a long time and some family connections to get it done. Life is great now, but 2 years ago things were damned grim.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Congrats.

    Signed,

    Grim in Jersey

  • The Late P Brooks||

    You'd prefer it be left in the hands of the plutocratic elite?

    No. I'd prefer it be left in the hands of the people who earned it.

  • ||

    I don't get it.

    /Leftist.

  • Hyperion||

    But they didn't earn it, someone else earned it for them. We are all comrades now in the great fatherland of USSA.

  • ||

    Ever play 'World in Conflict'? I bet that scenario in reality would make Tony wet.

  • Hyperion||

    Nope. Is that a RTS?

  • Restoras||

    Think of all the broken windows and de-hoarding the government could do. Jerbz for everyone!

  • LTC(ret) John||

    "de-hoarding"

    Say, I kind of like that. Sounds like it could come straight from GOSPLAN!

  • CPBrown||

    If the GOP were previously painted as responsible for *not* passing the "Jobs" bill, and the resultant lack of more "stimulus", do they now get the credit for the improving numbers (for the same reason) ?

  • Mike M.||

    This doesn't make a whole lot of sense: If the Obama administration was gaming the numbers, why didn't they do it before?

    Maybe they were stupid enough to believe that their policies would actually work on their own.

    And how do you know that they weren't doing it "before", whenever that was? Practically every word that comes out of this scumbag's mouth is a lie. You honestly believe that the people who tried to claim that Ambassador Stevens was killed because of some YouTube video nobody had ever heard of before are above fudging the numbers to their benefit? Get real.

  • Danno||

    "This doesn't make a whole lot of sense: If the Obama administration was gaming the numbers, why didn't they do it before?"

    The BLS lies with Seasonal Adjustments based on assumptions that are clearly wrong in this environment and then the Biz Birth/Death Model has been creating 46K jobs per month out of thin air. BO and crew probably figure they can release 2 months of heavily massaged stats without getting caught before his is re-elected.

  • amelia||

    Read this and then headed over to FB, where an idiot I went to high school with has posted a picture of the Sesame Street cast and this (self-penned) caption:

    "Big Bird: Hey Kids, we're learning about decimals today. Can you say 7.8? I thought you could!"

    This guy was older than me, president of his class and a member of the debate society in college (we went to same college). I saw him as a really smart guy, back then. Now I can't wait to see his FB vomitus, always good for a laugh.

  • Killazontherun||

    Hey kids, if the job situation grew by 115,000 per month for the entire 2nd Obama term, how many years would it take for Obama's record on job growth to equal that of the mediocre growth of the George W. Bush terms?

    4, no? 8, no? I'm sorry kids, Big Bird tricked you with that question, at that rate multipled by the division of years, Obama's record will never obtain even the mediocre performance of GWB.

  • ||

    it's an assymptote (sc!) thing

  • Killazontherun||

    From a WaPo post on this issue:

    If it weren't for the government jobs lost to reduced government spending, the unemployment rate would be in the 6 range rather than the 7 range. The government is doing its job by reducing cost and spending. The private sector has not done its job by hiring those displaced workers, regardless of the stock market reaching three-year highs.

    That's just sad anyone thinks like that.

  • ||

    It's an outright lie. Government spending has increased every year of my life.

  • amelia||

    When it comes to Obama, this guy's brain couldn't make contact with reality if you pounded it in his ear with a hammer and chisel. When O made an asinine apology for some trivial thing having nothing to do with the POTUS, he said "Our President is a class act!" He posted a wedding pic of O M the other day and congratulated them on their X number of wonderful years.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    The household survey and employer survey do measure slightly different things, so it's not unexpected that they would be different.

    Jobs the household survey counts that the employer survey doesn't: farm employment, self-employment, people on unpaid leave, and people who do unpaid work for family businesses.

    Jobs the employer survey counts that the household survey doesn't: second jobs, employees under 16 years old.

    Of course, a gap of 750,000+ in the monthly change would require a big shock happening with one of those categories, which there doesn't seem to be a reason for.

  • dinkster||

    Easy, the Big O won't let anyone get fired:

    http://thehill.com/blogs/defco.....-this-year

  • wash2yacht||

    The Hitler analogies are getting really old.

  • wash2yacht||

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement