Connect with us


Unemployment: Obama lies



Barack Obama in a happier, more brazen, time for him.

Many of you believe that this Obama Administration is corrupt, manipulative and downright dishonest.   You believe that because, well, that is precisely what it is.  Not that most governments don’t do a little data juggling here and there for political positioning, but these leftist scalawags now occupying our government have brought this to a new and unprecedented level.

They believed my false unemployment report? Ha, ha.Their growing list of lies and misinformation is long and quite historical, from forged birth certificates, altered Selective Service documents, billions of dollars going into bundlers’ pockets in the form of green energy boondoggles, Benghazi, backing the Muslim Brotherhood, turning Iraq over to ISIS, releasing Israel’s nuclear secrets, releasing terrorists back into the world, handing automatic weapons over to drug lords, creating hate and distrust between blacks and whites and too many more to mention here. But you get the picture.

But this is about just one category of outrageous lies.  The Unemployment Report.   So huge is the space between truth and fabrication relating to not just the economy but the data they use to mislead the American people, even Stalin or Lennon would be too embarrassed to associate with it.  But no sir, not this press protected administration.

Why are they producing false unemployment reports?

Quite simply to obscure the real situation until the entire system is so far gone, no future effort by anyone or any means will be able to save it.  Can anyone doubt that destroying this country, its culture and its domination in economic and political arenas of the world is Obama’s purpose for living?  What other possible motive could there be?

Okay, so let’s get to the latest unemployment numbers which Obama’s lapdog Director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics just released for June of 2015.  Laughingly, he reported that unemployment has once again gone down to a wonderful point where the unemployed percentage is just 5.3%.  God bless America and Obama. Just 5.3% are unemployed.

But hold on just a second.

How did they get to this utopian number?  Do they actually gather statistics and then do a little math?  Well no, no they don’t.  Doing that would be, how do you say it, honest?   How they get these results more closely resembles the methods used by the United States Census.  The Bureau (BLS) conducts a monthly survey which involves 60,000 households.  They are relying on people contacted to tell the truth and we all know people always do that when called at supper time.

So if you are wondering why they go through that huge expense, contacting 60,000 homes every month instead of let’s say breaking out a pocket calculator and doing a little math, you just might be tagged as a trouble maker.  A clinger to God, guns and real math.

So we decided here at TPATH to do just that.  Gather statistics, combine them and do a bit of simple arithmetic.   It’s still simple for us because we were fortunate enough get educated by local school systems and not by the Federal Government’s Common Core.

Before we give you our calculations it is only fair to say that our resources are limited but we did our very best to get as accurate a count on all the data we used.  Also we would like to say that the outcome percentage we came up with may be off a bit because some of the numbers we gathered may differ slightly from source to source.   But what we will tell you is, the math is sound and the unemployment percentage we came up with is so distant from what Obama’s sycophants have issued, we are certain our reality confirms the government thinks their fairytale will be gobbled up like Goldilocks’ porridge.  That could be the only thing they are correct about.


The current US population is     321,230,000


62,318,620     are 14 years old and younger
22,040,343     are 15 to 18 years old
17,487,475       are full-time college students aged 19 and up
30,267,984      are 65 and over (retired)  
132,114,422   Total number of American citizens who are not in the labor market


321,230,000     Total Number of American Citizens
(132,114,422)    Deduct the Total Number of American Citizens not in the labor market
189,115,578     Total Number of American Citizens in the Labor Market

16,012,760       Total Number of American Citizens collecting unemployment (June/2015)
93,626,000     Total Number of Unemployed American Citizens not collecting unemployment
109,638,760   Total Number of all Unemployed American Citizens during June/2015

189,115,578      Total Number of American Citizens in the Labor Market during (June/2015)
109,638,760    Total Number of all Unemployed American Citizens during (June/2015)

Divide 109,638,760  by 189,115,578 = 0.5797447
To get a percentage number multiply 0.5797447 X 100 =   57.97%

Could the unemployment number actually be 58% ?

[ezadsense midpost]

Probably not that high because we decided not to use several pieces of data which we found to be difficult to verify and to calculate.  Here are a few items we did not calculate.

  • There are about 1,650,000 people incarcerated in prisons and jails. Possibly 13% of them are not legal citizens but there is no way to find out.  Also, about half of the citizens in prison most likely were not ever in the labor market nor ever would be.  So their numbers most likely would be a wash.
  • Also not calculated are senior citizens who are working, nor could we count those who want to work but can’t.  Again, this data would be almost impossible to gather effectively.  As with the prison population, this number could also be a wash.
  • Not included in our calculations are those whom live in mental institutions and either don’t work or can’t.
  • Also not included are married people where only one is working but where two would be if there were work to be had.  No way to calculate how many or what percentage that would be.
  • Not calculated are college students whom would work full-time if they could but can’t find anything and because of their full-time student status, can’t file for benefits or be counted.
  • Another two groups not calculated are those working off the books or underemployed or working less than full-time.  Impossible to accurately count and calculate that number.
  • And finally many small business owners are not calculated as being employed even though they do pay into the system but can’t collect.  This number which might include various family members is also hard to calculate with any certainty of accuracy.
Unemployment reports don't normally include prison inmates, do they?

Estimated number of persons supervised by adult correctional systems, by correctional status, 2000–2013.
From page 11 of the source PDF: “Total includes all inmates held in local jails, state or federal prisons, or privately operated facilities. It does not include inmates held in U.S. territories (appendix table 3), military facilities (appendix table 3), in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities, in jails in Indian country (appendix table 3), or in juvenile facilities.”
From page 7 of the source PDF: “In these data, adults are persons who are subject to the jurisdiction of an adult court or correctional agency. Persons age 17 or younger who were prosecuted in criminal court as if they were adults are considered adults, but persons age 17 or younger who were under the jurisdiction of a juvenile court or agency are excluded.”
Source: Lauren E. Glaze and Danielle Kaeble, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice

So, if there were a way to gather up all that information and plug it into the unemployment calculation, that 58% number could drop by a few percentage points.  Maybe even as much as 10%.   If we then give the benefit of the doubt to our number, the unemployment rate in this country during the month of June, 2015 was very near 48%.

This number might possibly still be a bit on the high side but who among us thinks Obama’s unemployment percentage of 5.3 is more accurate than ours?

Research links for this article

Reprinted from TPATH

[ezadsense leadout]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Well, yeah, Dwight, if you come up with your own definition of unemployment, you can get pretty much any number you want. I see zero percent unemployment – but then I define it as do my partner and I have jobs. We both do, so, yay! Zero percent unemployment! Best President ever.
I’ll admit my definition is ludicrous, but that’s the point. For your definition to have any significance other than a way to inflame the tea party’s uninformed, ignorant base, you’d need to “run the numbers” and compare them over a period of time. Which I know you won’t do, because that would defeat your purpose: as I said, is “way to inflame the tea party’s uninformed, ignorant base.”

Terry A. Hurlbut

Why don’t you run the numbers? You will probably find the real unemployment figure, counting back all the “unpersons” according to the B(L)S, has never been as high, let alone higher.


Your 93,626,000 “Total Number of Unemployed American Citizens not collecting unemployment” is actually the number of people not employed and not looking for employment (“labor market non-participants”). This includes many of the categories you subtracted as “Not in the Labor Market,” for instance students above the age of 16 and retired people. They are therefore represented in the numerator but not the denominator of your percentage. This is either a major error or major dishonesty.


Why don’t I run the numbers, Terry? I’m not the one redefining the statistic.,

BTW, one reason the number of unpersons, as you so charmingly put it, is so large, is that the baby boomers are reaching retirement age. What do you expect the Big Bad Barack to do about *that*? Organize “death panels”?

Terry A. Hurlbut

That’s not the only reason, and you know it. That includes involuntary “retirements.” And I expect him, not so much to do something, as to stop doing it. To get out of the way.


You’re actually acknowledging he may leave office? There’s hope for you yet.

Terry A. Hurlbut

I want more than just him to go. I’d like to see the government out of everything except police, military, and judicial functions.

Surly Curmudgen

Again some one on the far left has taken us in recovery from a recession and pile drove the nation into severe depression while screaming it is the Republicans fault. FDR was the first and now we have Obama doing the same. I tried doing the math some time back and got 33% unemployed. Your math is much more accurate.

LOL Obama has doubled the dept and FDR’s unemployment numbers.

Surly Curmudgen

But for the second amendment and seven out of ten owning firearms the death panels would be in full operation right now. Take a look at the past history of the far lefts ideology, we are past that point where in other nations they were all ready shooting their opposition.
LOL Bill Ayers is chomping at the bit in his eagerness to get started on what he postulated forty years ago, thirty five million conservatives with a bullet in their heads.


Is there somewhere where you lay out your justification for the government being involved in police, military, and judicial functions? Private enterprise could handle those functions just as well as handling transportation, education, health care, energy, scientific research, etc.

(Pinkertons, Halliburton, Blackwater, private arbitration, private prisons, and so on. Contracts between security firms address jurisdictional issues and make clear what arbitrators will be consulted. An armed populace combined with active private security eliminates the need for ‘protective’ police activity. Use of private areas like businesses, roads, and homes implies acceptance of jurisdiction of the relevant private security organizations and acceptance of Terms of Use of that area. Private arms manufacturers provide heavy weapons to HOAs or larger congolmerates. Private security firms contract with private prisons for incarceration of violators. That sort of thing.)

Terry A. Hurlbut

The firms you named, provided protection for specific private clients, or for consortiums of them. Ayn Rand gave the simplest justification of all, with this thought-experiment: suppose Mr. Smith, client of Police Agency A, suspects Mr. Jones, client of Police Agency B, of mugging him. By what right does Agency A serve a warrant on Jones? What’s to prevent Agencies A and B from starting a gang war?


What keeps the mall secruity dude and the town cop and the county sheriff and the state trooper and the FBI agent from starting a gang war?

The invisible hand of the market would keep the private security firms from fighting each other; it is not in the best interests of any of them. Jurisdiction flows from where the crime occurred and details are handled by contracts between the security agencies, right?

Terry A. Hurlbut

Local police still act for everybody in exerting force in retaliation against those who start its use. Or to carry out the orders of a court.

The gang-warfare hazard occurs if you have no agency acting in the name of the public.

A Pinkerton’s or similar outfit might have rich clients likely to face threats the general public would not face. But you don’t want them attacking innocent people on trumped-up evidence, just to give their own clients some kind of advantage. Nor do you want Pinkerton A and Pinkerton B to go to war with one another because they don’t have a recognized authority before whom to bring a dispute.


But these were not issues that you considered problems in your discussion of private roads: you said that private roads could have private security forces that serve the same role as current police forces, as well as private regulatory and licensing agencies.

You also pointed out that life is proverbially not fair, and that there might be abuses of citizens by road companies, which would get ironed out by the invisible hand of the market, as the road company lost rent income due to clients moving away.

It seems that such would be the case with private police forces in your private-roads world. An area known for its corrupt private security forces would not be visited, and persons/businesses living there would terminate their contracts or move away. If jurisdictional issues aren’t a problem for private _road_ police forces, I don’t see why they wouldn’t be for any other private police forces. If a company hires the proverbial jack-booted thugs who try to shake down shoppers at their retail outlets, people will stop patronizing that store. The same thing that makes private roads work makes private police work. Or why not?

Terry A. Hurlbut

You make the same mistake the statists make. The exertion of force, not merely in defense but in retaliation, is a type of “service” apart from any other “service” anyone can render. It’s one thing to defend yourself, or someone else, from an attack in progress. It’s almost the same thing to protect yourself against an attack you believe is imminent. But when you go and counterattack someone after he’s attacked you and is long gone, now you have to justify yourself. And if you can’t, you are now morally equivalent to the other guy and have no more right to attack him than he had to attack you, and I don’t care who started it!

That’s why we have such an institution as “law-enforcement agency” and “police.”

I’m not even talking about patrols for the private roads. Those come under the heading of:

  1. Immediate defense against an attack the patrollers spot, and
  2. Enforcement of the specific rules of the road – speed limits, load limits, lane discipline, and all the rest of it.

Now it’s all right for someone to investigate a crime – be it murder, robbery, or other things, including things best not to mention on a family-friendly site. But at some point in the process, you have to turn over the evidence, or your suspect, to the authorities. Otherwise, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is strictly academic, don’t you think?


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x