The official unemployment rate fell a miraculous .3% in a month, from 8.1% to 7.8% just in time for the November elections. This comes a month after the BLS miraculously found a few hundred thousand new jobs they had "previously missed" this year dropping the official rate from 8.3% to 8.1%, last month. This would be good news, if it meant that more Americans were finding work in proportion. Unfortunately, this is NOT the case. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), works for the Executive Branch, for the White House, for Obama, and says there were 114,000 new jobs in September, but there are 465,000 fewer unemployed workers in September. The difference of 351,000 appears to be unaccounted for.
Somehow, though only 144,000 people found work last month, there are 775,000 more people employed than in August. And this is irrespective of those laid off in September.
The question is how do you reduce the unemployment rate so dramatically while adding only as many jobs as needed to maintain the current rate? The answer, for the BLS, is to reduce the number of unadjusted 16-19 year old males you include in the Labor Force, dramatically. This allows you to show realistic numbers in other blocks, including the "adjusted" numbers, while lowering the unemployment rate. Then you reduce the number of "unadjusted" unemployed by 954,000 instead of the 144,000 new jobs, so the "adjusted" number goes down by 456,000, or .3% in a month. This takes 211,000 total people out of the "adjusted" Labor Force, in a month.
"Seasonally adjusted," there are fewer Americans in the Labor Force now than in June, officially. That would mean that since June, accounting for those Americans that returned to school, 100,000 more Americans have retired, died, or been thrown in jail or psych wards, than entered working age. That's 211,000 fewer Americans, of all ages, that are in the Labor Force than in September 2011. To get there, they reduced the number of 16+ year old males in the Labor Force by 268,000 since last month, seasonally adjusted. It reduced the number of 16+ year old males in the Labor Force, in unadjusted numbers, by 711,000, and "seasonally adjusted," by 799,000, from last year. Either we have a lot fewer 16+ year old males than last year, or we have a lot more in jail.
If these numbers don't add up, you could blame MS-Excel that did the math for me, or you can go to the BLS page that reported the numbers. But since it automatically updates, you'll want to save a copy of the data for future comparisons. I'm not an accountant or statician, but I do know that if you add ONLY 144,000 jobs, you can't have 775,000 more workers. And I do know if you reduce the number of people available for work without finding it, you will also reduce the rate of people that can't find work.