Allen West alleges Obama administration cooking the books on jobs numbers, spars with CNBC host

Daily Caller ^ | 5 Oct 2012 | Jeff Poor

[Intolerant in NJ]

“It’s not about believing what Mr. Welch says,” West said. “It is about studying the numbers and understanding that I continue to see these inconsistencies, we continue to see revisions of the numbers upwards and downwards...I so hope today's numbers were accurate - it spells big trouble for Obama - statistics talks about "regression to the mean", that any big deviation from a long term average eventually, and usually sooner than later, drops back toward that mean and sometimes even undershoots it to even out - so a household jobs number today of 875000, the biggest in 30 years, will certainly decrease significantly next month, and even if the payroll jobs number doubled, the overall unemployment percentage will have to jump back up by a couple of tenths of a percentage point or so - in a report released four days before the election, giving the GOP plenty of time to blitz the country with ads about the economy getting worse again.......

[3Fingas]

I don’t care which administration is charge, these numbers don’t add up. We need the truth from the BLS.

If you remove a sizable chunk of the workforce population from the employment stats along with another sizable percentage who are now claiming a disability, than these “improved” numbers don’t mean much. E.G. 100 people are of working age. 20 get signed up for disability and another 20 disappear from your view. How can anyone claim that the employment situation is improving for all when nearly 40 percent is not counted?

I want to know if the methodology has changed. If so when did it change and how did it change? I have heard people claim that it has changed and common sense seems to point that out. If employment was calculated in the same manner as in the time of Reagan, what would today’s employment rate be?

This goes to transparency and honesty in government, something we see precious little of at the moment.