How is it that the rate could drop by .3% while the actual number of jobs created came in line with expectations at 114k? Prior months revisions of +86k jobs added but the 3 month average of approximately +145k jobs added is barely enough to keep the overall level of unemployment flat.
Additionally, how is it that the rate could drop by .3% while the more broadly defined U-6 rate of unemployment remained unchanged at the elevated level of 14.7%?
The key to the change in the unemployment rate is the fact that there were a lot of people who reportedly found part-time work. Bloomberg highlights this fact in writing,
Some 582,000 Americans took part- time positions because of slack conditions or those jobs were the only work they could find.
Part-time positions can influence a report to this magnitude? How convenient. At this rate, we could still have the worst economy since the Great Depression and a 5% rate of unemployment. We would also be ridiculed as a nation of liars and fakers.(please see my other commentary this morning).
Friday, October 05, 2012
Just what happened on that unemployment report?
It was awesome, if the ultimate goal is loading up workers with part time employment...........
Posted by gordon gekko at 2:07 PM