Up in smoke. There was a lot of voter fraud but there was still a large percentage of useful idiots that voted for this little man to continue his agenda of high gas prices, high unemployment, high taxes, a mandatory health tax, and a stagnant economy. It’s like a husband going to his annual review and telling his employer “No, I don’t want a raise, I want complete stagnation in my life for me and my loved ones”. Congrats, America, you are that guy.

Oh by the way, gas used to be under 2 dollars a gallon. Pretty cool, huh?

Employed dropped by 1.446 million people!

Now to be fair this is usual for January to some degree. But make no mistake folks — the layoffs this January were double that of last year, when January was -737,000. The idea that this report is “strong” is just plain crap — or if you prefer, a lie.

Not-in-labor force moved too — the wrong way. 423,000 gave up last month alone.

The benchmark revision also added massively to population, taking it up 313,000 people, which is about double the monthly average. If you want to look at employment including the change in working-age population it’s about 1,750,000 fewer employed, population-adjusted.

This is a serious deterioration

This is the obamaeconomy. The new normal. And it is by choice. You keep electing the truly stupid and evil to office in Washington.

In other words there has been no meaningful change in actual population-adjusted employment whatsoever over the last 12 months.

tom daschle concerned on February 2, 2013 at 3:06 PM

I agree. One more bad report with some extra fake sauce. FOR FOUR FREAKING YEARS.

TouchdownBuddha on February 1, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Go to hell propagandist.

Seriously.

(Additional reporting by Ellen Freilich, Steven C. Johnson, and Leah Schnurr in New York; Editing by Ros Krasny and Andrea Ricci)

Please contact Ros Krasny and Andrea Ricci and ask them about their “Editing”…

Update II: Reuters closes the books on 2012, pointing out that the level of job creation has done little to improve the overall employment picture:

Job growth in 2012 averaged 181,000 a month, but not enough to significantly reduce unemployment. Economists say employment gains in excess of 250,000 a month over a sustained period are needed.

Though the unemployment rate dropped from a peak of 10 percent in October 2009, that was mostly because some unemployed Americans gave up the search for work because of weak job prospects.

The share of the working age population with a job has been below 60 percent for almost four years.

And it actually went backwards from that rate in January.

Ed, they’ve edited that article and sent that text down the memory hole!

If you search for “Job growth in 2012 averaged 181,000 a month”, it’s no longer in the main article and can only be seen in the comments where one commenter quoted the original article:

Tired • 22 hours ago

Job growth in 2012 averaged 181,000 a month, but not enough to significantly reduce unemployment. Economists say employment gains in excess of 250,000 a month over a sustained period are needed

Just needed to highlight this part of it……

Clearly, someone didn’t like Reuters being quoted on this, so in true Orwellian fashion they have edited the article and sent that quote down the memory hole. Now it is replaced with the spin:

Employers added 157,000 jobs last month and 127,000 more jobs were created in November and December than previously reported, the Labor Department said. Revisions performed each January to the prior year’s data showed the labor market was healthier in 2012 than initially thought.

That re-write is a story in itself!

We’ve now had six continuous years of Democrats holding majority control of Washington, D.C., the average Employment-Population Ratio over those six years has been 60.0%, and we haven’t had a month above that average since February 2009.

The average over the four years of Obama’s first term was 58.7%, and we haven’t had a month above that average since August 2009.

Each and every month of the Obama Presidency has “featured” an Employment-Population ratio that was lower than it ever was under President George W. Bush.

The worst month under Bush was better than the best month under Obama.

TouchdownBuddha on February 1, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Better than expected? Like baseline budgeting what a joke.

Did you know around 170000 people left the work force….no this is not good news….well unless you’re a CBS newsman.

So, how big was the “seasonal adjustment” to get the plus 157,000 jobs?

+2.1 MILLION

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-02-01/average-january-nonfarm-payroll-seasonal-adjustment#comments

Consider all the positive “adjustments” they had to make, all inflated, and the best they can do is add 157,000 for the month, and normal population growth [people aging into the workforce minus people aging out of the workforce or working age people dying, plus working age people entering by immigration (legal or illegal)] requires between 200K-300K a month to break even. Somehow, I don’t think it unreasonable to assume that we are being deliberately lied to.

The supposed net gain in jobs is <7.5% of ONE [seasonal] of the inflated adjustments. Given the other adjustments, that is in the best case scenario a rounding error.

Unless, one considers doubting the word of Obama and his prophets to be apostasy.

Tenwheeler on February 1, 2013 at 12:21 PM

True, I keyed on October for the sake of the low info voters who don’t seem to be able to understand and retain much beyond a couple of weeks. But they still wouldn’t have vote against Obama so you are correct.