Jack Welch Suggests Jobs Report Rigged

[editec]

Neuron Jack is a GOP partisan.

duh!

 

[copsnrobbers]

Yeah. And, towards the end of that interview with Chris Matthews, he tried to claim it wasn't an accusation, but rather a question to see if people would investigate it.

Personally? I think the fucker is totally whacked and he needs to stay off my television screen.

Exactly ,Obama is a fucker who is totally whacked and he needs to stay off my television screen.

Even if Obama is the president for the next four years I will spend that time as I have the past few years, looking forward to the day that he and his awful wife are no longer on T.V. on a regular basis. I actually dislike that awful wife of his as much as Obama. With all of their hatefulness towards many Americans and our country itself it is difficult to look and listen to their constant lies and complaints.

She is a fucking Train Wreck isn't she.

I have a Large..... and a .. with some... and for desert I'll have two.. and one of those.. and make those Extra Large Cokes.

 

[American_Jihad]

Jack Welch: I Was Right About That Strange Jobs Report

The economy would need to be growing at breakneck speed for unemployment to drop to 7.8% from 8.3% in the course of two months..

By JACK WELCH
10/10/12

---

The good news is that the current debate has resulted in people giving the whole issue of unemployment data more thought. Moreover, it led to some of the campaign's biggest supporters admitting that the number merited a closer look—and even expressing skepticism. The New York Times in a Sunday editorial, for instance, acknowledged the 7.8% figure is "partly due to a statistical fluke."

The coming election is too important to be decided on a number. Especially when that number seems so wrong.

Jack Welch: I Was Right About That Strange Jobs Report - WSJ.com

Hey libtards, see the way you feel about Welch, that's how I feel about soros x10...

 

[expat_panama]

Jack Welch: I Was Right About That Strange Jobs Report - WSJ.com

This thread about what Welch supposedly said has been going on for three pages, and now at post 43 we actually have something Welch said. OK. Bottom line here is that current econ policies began in Jan. 09 with the UR at an outrageously high 7.8%, the rate's never been lower, and so all of a sudden we're supposed to swallow the line that somehow 7.8% in Oct. '12 is good?

Welch is spot on.

 

[Rshermr]

Welch said it, I heard it. Welch also said he has no facts to support his belief.

These labor figures are constructed professional civil servants insulated from political pressure.

I have trouble with the numbers, too, but until we have a good, objective evidenced rebuttal, the American public will accept them as real.

The numbers came from the same place as they have for decades. The numbers are calculated in the same way as they have been for decades. They are as accurate, and as inacurate, as they have been for decades.
So, why are you only now questioning them? And why did you not question them when they were worse???

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Supposedly said"?

I heard him.

He said that he does not have any evidence but he disbelieves that numbers.

That's what he said.

Jack Welch: I Was Right About That Strange Jobs Report - WSJ.com

This thread about what Welch supposedly said has been going on for three pages, and now at post 43 we actually have something Welch said. OK. Bottom line here is that current econ policies began in Jan. 09 with the UR at an outrageously high 7.8%, the rate's never been lower, and so all of a sudden we're supposed to swallow the line that somehow 7.8% in Oct. '12 is good?

Welch is spot on.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Reshy, you have me confused. I have trouble with the numbers, but I have no evidence of any dishonesty.

You want me to lie about how I think about this?

Welch said it, I heard it. Welch also said he has no facts to support his belief.

These labor figures are constructed professional civil servants insulated from political pressure.

I have trouble with the numbers, too, but until we have a good, objective evidenced rebuttal, the American public will accept them as real.

The numbers came from the same place as they have for decades. The numbers are calculated in the same way as they have been for decades. They are as accurate, and as inacurate, as they have been for decades.
So, why are you only now questioning them? And why did you not question them when they were worse???

 

[Bigfoot]

Yanno..................they never had a problem with the Bureau of Labor Statistics before. Matter of fact, up until this month, the GOP accepted and touted the numbers quite a bit.

I guess it's only when it comes out in Obama's favor that it becomes suspect. Same with a lot of the legislation that the GOP is currently against. They were the ones that came up with it, but because Obama supports it, they go against the very thing they created.

I guess they're still pissed that a black man is in the White House.

LOL, yeah it's all about racism. What a douche bag.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Welch said it, I heard it. Welch also said he has no facts to support his belief.

These labor figures are constructed professional civil servants insulated from political pressure.

I have trouble with the numbers, too, but until we have a good, objective evidenced rebuttal, the American public will accept them as real.

The numbers came from the same place as they have for decades. The numbers are calculated in the same way as they have been for decades. They are as accurate, and as inacurate, as they have been for decades.
So, why are you only now questioning them? And why did you not question them when they were worse???

Because the numbers were politically advantageous for the GOP until they dropped below 8 percent.

As soon as it became favorable for Obama, that is when they were supposedly rigged.

 

[expat_panama]

"Supposedly said"? I heard him...

That's nice; you're convinced you heard it. We'll be convinced too when we get a transcript/video so we can "heard it" too. Reality is that there is no video/transcript. Yet. What exists is: Jack Welch: I Was Right About That Strange Jobs Report - WSJ.com. Either prove to everyone that the voices you're hearing are real or stop talking about them.

 

[Rshermr]

Welch said it, I heard it. Welch also said he has no facts to support his belief.

These labor figures are constructed professional civil servants insulated from political pressure.

I have trouble with the numbers, too, but until we have a good, objective evidenced rebuttal, the American public will accept them as real.

The numbers came from the same place as they have for decades. The numbers are calculated in the same way as they have been for decades. They are as accurate, and as inacurate, as they have been for decades.
So, why are you only now questioning them? And why did you not question them when they were worse???

Because the numbers were politically advantageous for the GOP until they dropped below 8 percent.

As soon as it became favorable for Obama, that is when they were supposedly rigged.

DING, DING, DING, DING. That is the answer, indeed. If they don't like the answer, they attack the messenger. Or the analyst. Or whoever they can to deflect from the truth.

 

[Rshermr]

"Supposedly said"?

I heard him.

He said that he does not have any evidence but he disbelieves that numbers.

That's what he said.

Jack Welch: I Was Right About That Strange Jobs Report - WSJ.com

This thread about what Welch supposedly said has been going on for three pages, and now at post 43 we actually have something Welch said. OK. Bottom line here is that current econ policies began in Jan. 09 with the UR at an outrageously high 7.8%, the rate's never been lower, and so all of a sudden we're supposed to swallow the line that somehow 7.8% in Oct. '12 is good?

Welch is spot on.

But, of course, you have no proof. You simply believe what you want to believe. Which is a con trait. But you have never had problems with the numbers when they were bad. Odd, eh. dipshit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I watched and heard him on the TV.

Your refusal doesn't mean anything.

"Supposedly said"?

I heard him.

He said that he does not have any evidence but he disbelieves that numbers.

That's what he said.

This thread about what Welch supposedly said has been going on for three pages, and now at post 43 we actually have something Welch said. OK. Bottom line here is that current econ policies began in Jan. 09 with the UR at an outrageously high 7.8%, the rate's never been lower, and so all of a sudden we're supposed to swallow the line that somehow 7.8% in Oct. '12 is good?

Welch is spot on.

But, of course, you have no proof. You simply believe what you want to believe. Which is a con trait. But you have never had problems with the numbers when they were bad. Odd, eh. dipshit.

 

[peach174]

The number's just don't add up.
In Aug. unemployment rate was 8.1%, then it went to 7.8%
Jobs added in Sept. were 114,000.
In order for the rate to go from 8.1% to 7.8% you need to add 873,00 jobs.

 

[Katzndogz]

The numbers left out a large state that is suspected of being California with a state UE rate of about 15%.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Cali was counted. The problem is that we don't like the numbers, but we don't have any evidence they were cooked. Former BLS guys, some under Bush, say the numbers can't be cooked.

 

[peach174]

The question is, where did the extra 759,000 jobs that has to be added come from?
You can't say 114,000 jobs were added and then say unemployment dropped like that.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

As soon as the election is over, none of this will matter. This story will buy some votes and drive some votes away. My prediction, which couldn't be proven anyway, is that it will drive away more votes than it will gain.

Here are the only verifiable facts of the matter: there is a man named Jack Welch who was once a successful CEO of GE, and he said that the most recent unemployment report issued by the BLS is fudged by the Obama campaign.

I'm sorry folks, but that's it. That's all there is. The only proof that any of us have that the numbers were manipulated is what Jack Welch says. It also doesn't mean that they weren't, so when you have a single man with some business clout making a lot of noise about a conspiracy, it only makes sense that lots of people in this age of conspiracy paranoia are going to lock onto it. He doesn't have to prove anything, he only has to say that it happened, and most people are either going to accept it as truth without verification or dismiss it. It doesn't even matter if there are people with just as much or more clout than Mr. Welch countering his accusation, he only has to say it and those who are predisposed to believing it will buy it instantly and scream it from the mountaintops.

A similar phenomenon happens when a celebrity is accused of rape. Fans of the celebrity will defend him and call the girl a slut, while others will assume he is guilty. In other words, most people will have their minds made up long before any investigation or trial happens. It's practically a Psych 101 class in session.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You can say that all you want, but if you don't have the evidence of how you come up with your numbers, then that is simply your opinion.

The question is, where did the extra 759,000 jobs that has to be added come from?
You can't say 114,000 jobs were added and then say unemployment dropped like that.

 

[peach174]

You can say that all you want, but if you don't have the evidence of how you come up with your numbers, then that is simply your opinion.

The question is, where did the extra 759,000 jobs that has to be added come from?
You can't say 114,000 jobs were added and then say unemployment dropped like that.

The number of 114,000 in Sept. comes for the Bureau of labor Statistics. It's not me who came up with the numbers.