It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Classic MSM Doublespeak

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 08:55 AM
Jobs Data

The title claims that companies added 71,000 during June and that unemployment remained steady at 9.5%. The very next sentence reads:

Overall employment fell 131,000 and unemployment held at 9.5 percent.

The good news is companies claimed to have added 71,000 jobs. The bad news is we still have a 60,000 net LOSS on jobs. If this doesn't remind of you 1984 I don't know what will folks.

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 09:10 AM
reply to post by ninthaxis

It's not just about jobs lost versus jobs gained. You also have to take into account, the number of new workers entering the workforce which also affects the unemployment rate. I don't know the exact number, but the U.S. must create at least enough jobs annually to equal the number of new entries into the workforce, just to remain at a break even point. So you see, it's really not that big of a stretch.

If you subtract the number of lost jobs from the number of new jobs added and then add to that, the number of new high school and college grads entering the workforce, you will understand why the unemployment rate seems to remain unaffected.

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 09:23 AM
Hey, the other day, I heard on MSNBC that people were being hired, yet the unemployment numbers were going to go up.

Hmmmm, I do not know, if more people get hired and the unemployment numbers go up, I would think that more people got laid off or fired.

Can SOMEONE explain that to me, I have not figured out government double speak (lies) yet.

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 02:15 PM
reply to post by Flatfish

I think you misunderstood the statistic I was commenting on. I fully understand that unemployment % can stay the same despite the creation/destruction of jobs. My point was that the articles headline claimed to have increased jobs available by 71,000 but 131,000 jobs were lost, creating the 60,000 net loss of jobs I had commented on.

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 02:46 PM
reply to post by ninthaxis

Most MSM metrics are suspect at best.

Unemployment is not a properly weighted number.

If we lose 1,000 jobs that paid $100k to outsourcing and create 1,000 temporary minimum wage jobs then we are awash in unemployment numbers.

BUT I could report that my company made 1,000 new jobs and the government would report this in the economic recovery numbers.

I can also report the savings to my shareholders as a return on their investment.

We need to start reporting the number of CEOs that get shanked by rebels.

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 02:50 PM
reply to post by zroth

We need to report the number of CEOs that get shanked by rebels.

I am afraid that would be a very small number. People are more willing to fight amongst their peers than to act out against their "superiors" for some reason.

top topics

log in