Poking fun at the US Job Numbers

Rob Kirby from Kirby Analytics had this to say about the US Job Numbers.

• Last month’s Labor Report was revised from 51K to 148K?
  
  And the month’s previous to that from 188K to 230K?
  
  And listen to this one...the unemployment rate declined from 4.6% to 4.4%?

And Allen Wastler had this more colorful commentary posted on CNN website. ( here )

• NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Numbers lie. Especially economic ones. But some of you already knew that.
  
  And it's all a conspiracy.
  
  Take the employment numbers Friday. The government reported that 92,000 jobs were added to U.S. payrolls. Its previous estimate of jobs created in September was revised from 51,000 to 148,000. And the unemployment rate dropped to 4.4 percent.
  
  Despite our best efforts, the conservative conspiracy was apparent.
  
  "I had to laugh at your story on job creation and unemployment," Miguel G. wrote to us. "How in the hell do you revise the number of jobs created in September from 51,000 to 139,000? (sic) Why does Bush even report the numbers if he's just going to change them a month later? Anything from his fanatical Christian government is pure lies."
  
  Or was it a liberal conspiracy?
  
  "Just curious if you'll be leading your newscasts off today with the new unemployment rate?" David W. flamed. "Our economy is good and it's about time you liberals in the media stop hiding that fact. Tell the truth on the economy and perhaps you'll gain more viewers."
  
  Half-empty, half-full? You're tagged either way.
  
  Either view is right. The employment report is actually made up of two different surveys ... one of employers (the payroll number) and one of households (the unemployment rate). Economists frequently debate the merits of the two and what they do and don't count. The payroll number doesn't reflect the self-employed all that well, say some. The household number doesn't reflect all the people who gave up looking for a job, say others. It's the stuff number-cruncher cage matches are made of.
  
  There's a fight like this about every economic number:
  
  The leading indicators are actually lagging.
  
  The gross domestic product doesn't give the service sector its due.
  
  Shouldn't food and energy be considered "core" to inflation calculations?
  
  And on and on.