Job Summit 2009
2009 December 4
KnightHawk has been asking for more information on the “lost data” at the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. I haven’t found anything new except for this notice on their hall bulletin board!
__________
H/T: TobyToons, used by permission.
![](http://www.parentalrights.org/vertical/Sites/%7BC49108C5-0630-467E-9B9B-B1FA31A72320%7D/uploads/%7B3EA8D754-D841-4FF4-882C-32895D89991D%7D.PNG")
[1]
Nice “Humor break,” INC!
[2]
MRC.org headline–day 14 and counting with no mention of this on the state-run media.
Wonder how long they can continue?
I’d say it’s better than even money that they never mention it, even if the bottom drops out completely.
The panting orgasms about the ‘economic improvement’ have been as nauseating as expected.
[3]
ROFLMA!!!!!!
[4]
Once the ‘revised’ numbers come in, i.e. once the phony numbers are replaced by real data, there will be nothing said. Just as nothing is said about the every increasing U6 number of chronic unemployment. Or the fact that job losses continue to increase, not decrease. And once the post-Christmas lay-offs start and unemployment surges.
10.5% by January. Book it.
[5]
What do you make of this?
I would put nothing past them.
[6]
Sorry, bad link. Here it is again
[7]
Yes, you have it PG, the downtick was due to seasonal hiring. They will probably fudge some to prevent the jump to 10.5 in Jan.
[8]
10.5% by January. Book it. Or higher.
[9]
What I don’t understand is that even if you lose only 11,000 jobs in a month (which sounds suspiciously low), how does that contribute to a downtick of .2 in the overall unemployment number?????
Wouldn’t the unemployment number just stay about the same???
What am I missing here?
[10]
Ok to celebrate our new “low” unemployment and the return of happy times (ie state facisim/socialism!) lets all get ripped on our BumWine of the day:
WILD IRISH ROSE!!!!!
http://bumwine.com/wildirishrose.html
“Field reporter “Greyham” brings us this report: Here is Wild I’s devastating new addition, “Wild Fruit with Ginseng”. I’ll be honest with you: the normal Wild I has turned into some sort of fierce energy drink gone wrong mixed with the original to create a bumworthy migraine-inducing concoction. I purchased a 750 mL which goes for 3.99 and a 375 mL which goes for 2.59 (at least here in FL). Word on the streets here is that the bums are wary of it. I talked to a couple that said they’d prefer to “stick with what’s tried and true”. Apparently they haven’t accepted it yet as the real deal. As for me, I drank the 375mL on a semi-full stomach and was just ruined by the stuff. The flavor retains it’s same potent Wild I nastiness but has a whole new bouquet of fruity flavor added as well (potentially aimed at bums of the female persuasion). Upon completion of the 375, I was thoroughly inebriated and found myself honestly wondering where my next fix of the stuff was going to come from. This scared me so I immediately started drinking water….here’s the best part. After that relatively small bottle, I didn’t piss until the next evening despite drinking copious amounts of water. There is DEFINITELY something in this stuff that dehydrates you…possibly the “ginseng” or whatever it is that they added to this already foul stuff.”
[11]
People that have given up and stopped looking for work dropping off the unemployment rolls.
It’s a matter of how unemployment is measured.
[12]
NightTrain is still recommended by 9 out of 10 alternatively lifestyled individuals.
[13]
#12 NightTrain maybe pullin’ in to the station soon too!
The Train is all biznezz if ya know what I mean!
[14]
Bush always had the lower than expected numbers posted every single time and these numbers were splashed everywhere and the revised numbers were always revised upwards, but quitely published.
Obama’s number are always higher than exptected, but the numbers always get revised downward. Gee, I wonder how this happens?
Here’s the real problem: In the first quarter of 2013, there will be a Republican president and suddenly the number crunchers will start using real numbers. I have no doubt the first quarter of Palin’s presidency will show unemployment at 12-15%.
[15]
the unemployment numbers that will count are those in March-October 2010. If the unemployment is still above 10% then even the Dems will have trouble spinning that as GOOD NEWS!
[16]
This admin and its willing accomplices don’t even really need to try that hard to keep the unemployment rate at what 10%.
Imagine if they made even a half-assed effort, they could easily shave 2% off ANY number. If they made a concerted effort, we would be in the words of The One, “experiencing a spectacular recovery.”
[17]
Right I don’t think the number even has to be 10% to be bad in March ’10. If its 8-9% that will be bad. Having 4% unemployment was only 3 years ago so its not some dim recesses of memory.
[18]
“10.5% by January. Book it. Or higher.”
Agreed
[19]
*Claps*
LOL!! That was great, thanks for the good chuckle INC.
[20]
14 – While your generally right that was typical there were definitely a couple months were job gains were revised down during bush’s term.
[21]
KH–glad you liked it! 🙂
The Weekly Standard is also getting into the act. This is the cover of their latest issue (via WUWT?):