{"id":26344,"date":"2012-02-21T12:00:32","date_gmt":"2012-02-21T18:00:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=26344"},"modified":"2012-02-21T10:31:33","modified_gmt":"2012-02-21T16:31:33","slug":"this-is-your-obama-recovery-a-more-pessimistic-correction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=26344","title":{"rendered":"This Is Your Obama Recovery: A More Pessimistic Correction"},"content":{"rendered":"

Yesterday, in my piece “This Is Your Obama Recovery<\/a>“, I looked at the math behind the unemployment numbers. \u00a0I concluded that when you subtract the unemployment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Labor Force Participation numbers<\/em>, the number of Americans working is two percentage points lower than it was when Barack Obama was inaugurated, and only a fifth of a point better than the “low point” of the recession (in uemployment terms), in October of 2009.<\/p>\n

I reached the numbers by subtracting the\u00a0unemployment\u00a0figure from the participation figure; for example, in October of 2009, I subtracted the 10% unemployment rate from the 65% participation rate to get an overall employment rate of 55%.<\/p>\n

A commenter at Hot Air<\/em>\u00a0– where Allahpundit was kind enough to run my post in its entirety<\/a> – pointed out that I did the math wrong. \u00a0He was correct, of course; the unemployment rate is among those participating in<\/em> the labor force, not the entire force. \u00a0I needed to recalculate, multiplying the BLS Labor Force Participation Rate <\/em>\u00a0by the same month’s unemployment rate<\/em>\u00a0as supplied by the BLS.<\/p>\n

It actually makes things worse for the Administration<\/strong>.<\/p>\n