Was the Employment Number Rigged?

by Ryan Mallory

Conspiracy theories aside, the employment number we got on Friday morning was quite a head scratcher. On the surface, it took 873,000 people finding employment to lower the unemployment rate from 8.1% to 7.8%. But there was only 114,000 jobs added during the month. Which 1983 aside, was the biggest surge we've seen in decades. 

Now what's ruffling feathers is that the Bureau of Labor and Statistics  (under the Labor Department) fall under the executive command of the White House, who took a huge hit during the debates Wednesday night, and one month out we get this huge surge in employment. Coincidence? I doubt it.

Also working in the employment number's favor was that they conveniently scrubbed 1,200,000 people from the work force because they have been looking for a job for too long! Now in an economy where GDP continues to drop off and stands at 1.3%, it is understandable why it could take more than six months to find a job. But these people (1.2 million jobless individuals) were scrubbed from being considered in the employment number. 

Personally, I think the jobless number is a farce, I've always believed it was a farce because who they consider part of the employment number (actively looking for less than six months). It just doesn't show the whole picture. But when you get such huge discrepancies like the one I described above, lets admit it, the numbers don't add up, and they should be called into question, particularly since a Romney victory in November results in the traditional lay-off of labor officials (a large percentage of which are active Obama donors) tied directly to the Obama administration. So it's not a surprise why there might be a conflict of interest. 

But don't take it from me, there are plenty of people who seem to agree with me on this, and have made their views much more public than I... here are a few: