Some find it absolutely convenient that the unemployment stats from the Federal BLS came out at 7.8% which would be a 3% drop from the previous quarter. That is highly unlikely and almost inconceivable, or as one former CEO put it; implausible. Indeed, I tend to agree those numbers do not even make it into the category of; plausibly deniable. More like impossible if you ask me. Nevertheless since this is such a heated debate, let's talk about it.
The New York Times had an interesting article on October 5, 2012 titled; "Drop in Jobless Figure Gives Jolt to Race for President," by Shaila Dewan and Mark Landler. The article reported 7.8% unemployment figures coinciding with the early voting opening in the swing states. Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric then tweeted: "Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can't debate so change numbers?"
Interestingly enough, I had predicted that this would happen, why you ask? Simply looking back at how the Administration had played the numbers prior to other events such as the State of the Union Speech, or Mid-Term elections, and then later conveniently revised the numbers back down. In watching this, I've seen it happen 4-other times, but this time was rather curious. Thus, I hope I can expand this thought for a moment if I might.
You see, quite frankly, it is rather obvious that the questions in the 60,000 household survey were asked differently, in a different way, called upon a different skew (i.e. more people in ND than usual), or criteria was slightly altered to achieve this result. Liars figure and figures lie, and well, Jack Welch is correct, something is amiss, and this is implausible. Thus, I charge the administration with playing games with economic numbers just before the election, a typical socialist move, in fact, it is done all over the world with socialist leaders.
Of course, the Democrats now deny anyone fudged the numbers and now wishes to challenge anyone who challenges them, by making us prove how they fudged the numbers, still, no one will make the data readily available or show how the criteria was changed. Okay so, let me give you a different scenario on how hard it is to prove animal abuse as an example. The philosophical line of questioning might go something like this;
I can't prove what you kicked your dog with, but your dog is on the floor bleeding and it is scared of you, thus, with all the evidence available I believe you kicked your dog, and since you've done it before, I'd say that's the most likely scenario. So, please tell me which shoes you were wearing, and we can blame it on the shoes if that pleases you? Now do you see my point here?
The BLS (United States Bureau of Labor and Statistics) has quite often revised their numbers previously, often after coming out with stellar numbers during an event such as EU banking crisis, mid-term elections, stock market pull-backs, etc. It's almost become a propaganda machine for the government, and granted consumer confidence is paramount to a strong economic recovery, but that doesn't make it okay to create false data, especially to save a politician from his rhetoric or piss-poor economic performance.
Since Obama has never run a business and leans left towards socialism in the way he runs the nation; "fair share for all" motif as were his closing remarks in the recent debate against Mitt Romney his challenger we can forgive him, but regardless, I must ask; "Did the Obama Administration put heavy handed pressure on that agency (BLS) to produce the numbers they were looking for to propel the Obama Administration's re-election one day before early mail-in voting and early voting in swing states?"
Indeed, I think that question deserves an answer, and an investigation. If the investigation takes longer than the end of this political campaigning, and if emails, or correspondence are found to suggest what I am asking, then removal from office would be the proper way to deal with it. If he's not re-elected, then at least we will know. Please consider all this and think on it.
Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative series of eBooks on Economic Issues. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net/
No comments:
Post a Comment