In response to:

This Jobs Report Not Actual Size

Arley2 Wrote: Mar 09, 2013 1:31 PM
".. . . so that the net number of jobs created in the first month of the year was a negative 21,000 jobs." ______________________________________________________________ Per my simple minded self, it would seem that the NET number of jobs gained or lost is the most important of numbers. Yet I rarely see that reported. Why is that? If 200,000 jobs are created, but 300,000 jobs were lost...........well, we're not doing so well. If 300,000 jobs were created and 200,000 lost there would be a net gain, and that's a good thing. I admit to being only a lame researcher, but I can't find a source that reports NET gain or loss.

The American economic juggernaut keeps churning out good news folks. According to government economists 236,000 jobs were created in February, plus or minus a margin of error of 100,000 jobs.

Anyone wanna take the under here?

In other news, the BLS revised January jobs data down 38,000 jobs so that the net number of jobs created in the first month of the year was a negative 21,000 jobs.

That’s right; 21,000 fewer jobs in January than in December. 

No wonder consumer confidence is moving up. The government is lying every month about something, anything, and...