Skip to comments.Big drop in unemployment rate for blacks (The BLS big lie, black unemployment drops 2.2% in 1 month)
Posted on 02/04/2012 6:04:09 AM PST by tobyhill
The unemployment rate for blacks fell more than 2 percentage points last month to its lowest level since March 2009.
The drop puzzled economists, who cautioned that it's too early to say that a job market recovery for blacks is underway. The rate for African-Americans didn't budge at all in 2011, ending the year at 15.8%. The overall unemployment rate fell nearly a percentage point last year.
But even at 13.6% for January, the unemployment rate for blacks is still far higher than the rate for other racial and ethnic groups, as well as the nation as a whole.
The white unemployment rate came in at 7.4%, inching down a tenth of a percentage point. Latinos had a 10.5% unemployment rate, down five-tenths of a point. The rate for Asians, which is not seasonally adjusted, came in at 6.7%. The national unemployment rate dropped to 8.3%, from 8.5%.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
I need help with this one. Is the job market for blacks different than for whites?
“I need help with this one. Is the job market for blacks different than for whites?”
Yes, it is. Kind of difficult to wrap ones mind around why exactly...mostly cause of where blacks choose to live (inner cities for example), and cultural differences (government dependence rammed into them at early age and not as good of education), and prejudice by some against them. There is a distinct difference between lifes opportunities for a black baby than a white baby...most are easily fixable. Like the mom getting married and staying married...making sure that they can attend a good school and work with them on their education, move out of inner city environments, be independent of the government dependence trap and expose those who believe that one human being is less than the next because of color...
When one Black and one White and one Latino have jobs, and everyone else is counted by the BLS as “unemployable,” each of these categories will have 100% employment.
BO’s enablers in the BLS and the msm are bailing water out of the sinking USS Democrat Party more furiously every month as the election approaches. They should be the laughing-stock of the nation by June.
Hey, easy on Barry our beloved dictator! He needs to shore up the black base and if he has to lie to do it, so what! It’s all to make us a richer more prosperous country! Sarcasm off!
Simple, all the numbers are cooked and they simply cooked the numbers for blacks a little bit more than they did for everyone else.
BLS: Bureau of Lying Statistics
Finally on paper he is helping his brotha’s, don’t forget to go out and vote.
Reparations still needed. Thanks tobyhill.
Doesn’t matter what the unemployment rate is for blacks. The vast majority will still vote for their Bam. Feel good goo trumps dire facts and realities—just ask Robert Mugabe the ruinous president of Zimbabwe.
As I understand it this results from changes made during the administration of the first 1960s Marxist-Alinsky campus spoiled brats to take charge of the federal government, the Clintons.
How did the Current Population Survey (CPS) -- a.k.a., BLS household survey, I believe -- change to get the results that the current Marxist-Alinsky campus spoiled brats wanted? -- to wit, how did the BLS change the interpretation of the answers to the survey questions to get the results that were demanded?
"To know about unemploymentthe extent and nature of the problemrequires information . . . After these statistics are obtained, they have to be interpreted properly so they can be used . . . ."
As I understand it, there are not questions like, "Are you marginally attached to the labor force?"
"Based on information collected in the survey and definitions programmed into the computer, individuals are then classified as employed, unemployed, or not in the labor force."
"definitions programmed into the computer" - I doubt that that has changed since the days of the IBM7080; to wit, tables. The computer consults tables to interpret a response to a question. The tables are there to be modified between runs in response to users' needs. So this month a particular response can have a different interpretation from last month.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with using tables. They are essential. But I suppose it's like the saying "Figures don't lie, but liars figure."
I recall the recovery from the 2001 recession. The same kind of arguments raged. But of course that was real recovery though somewhat anemic historically. IMO.
All the numbers are cooked and come under the official title of "seasonal adjustment" or more commonly known as demnoRAT Bullshit.
Magically, another 1,200,000 people left the job market, just quit looking for work.
When you see that number you have to ax yourself, what do they do, where do they sleep, how do they eat, did they just kill themselves?
Are these real people or just made up numbers, to make our savior look good?
The Bureau of Labor Statistics is first of all, controlled by obama's czars, so that any numbers that come out of that crew are suspect.
Yes; it's not a goal for them, so they are not "seeking employment".
They are "Holder's People", and can live off confiscated earnings of OTHERS (whites), so why go job-hunting?
Actual hiring is another BLS survey, the establishment survey of 400,000 companies.
The household survey of 60,000 families is where the unemployment numbers come from and the household survey estimates how many jobs were created which never matches the establishment survey count of actual W-2 and such real jobs. The establishment survey is the source for jobs created.
During the 2001 recovery the household would show hundreds of thousands of jobs created and the establishment survey would show 16,000 jobs created for example. Many talk show hosts would scream at the MSM about Bush bashing for not going with the household survey.. there were bitter arguments here also.
The establishment data are real -- and subject to adjustments when late data come in from real companies. The household data are extrapolated from 60,000 households to apply to 300+ million people.
That's how I understand it.
Also, a job in the household survey does not require income .. someone can be counted as now having a job if the person works 16 hours a week (I think is the count) in a family-owned business. Even someone "going into business" by becoming a "contractor" looking for a contract and no income can now count as being employed -- it all depends upon how s/he answers a series of questions and what those answers are coded to mean in this run.
“That would mean that all employers hired 500 black applicants for 1 white applicant.”
was that employer the NFL or the NBA ?