Official Unemployment Numbers Off by 32% ?

by | Jan 1, 2010 | Headline News | 2 comments

Do you LOVE America?


    Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge took a close look at the Treasury Department’s money outflows and found some very interesting tidbits, to say the least, about money flowing out of the Treasury into unemployment insurance benefits. For some reason, the numbers the Bureau of Labor and Statistics is giving us in the form of U-3 unemployment, don’t seem to be adding up with the amount of money being paid by the Treasury – and it’s a significant discrepancy.

    Is The Government Misrepresenting Unemployment By 32%?

    There is an old saying, “when in doubt follow the money.” These days investors have lots of doubt about pretty much everything (if not so much money). And with data from the government increasingly bearing the Quality Control stamp of approval of the Beijing Communist Party, there is much doubt in store courtesy of an administration which will stop at nothing in its competition with China as to who can blow the biggest asset bubble the fastest, data integrity be damned. Undoubtedly, of all government released data, the most important is, and continues to be, anything relating to unemployment. This is precisely where the government’s propaganda armada is focused. Yet in matters of (un)employment, the ultimate authority is, luckily, the Treasury, and not the Fed. “Luckily,” because when it comes to making money “difficult to follow” Tim Geithner’s office still has much to learn. Which is why when we looked at the Daily Treasury Statement data we were very surprised: because it indicates that the government could be underrepresenting employment data by up to 32%!


    What becomes obvious is that a correlation which used to be almost 1.000 has diverged massively, and now the relative outlays surpass what the government highlights are the number of people actually collecting benefits by 32%! This implies two things: either the average unemployment monthly paycheck has surged, which is not the case, or there is some gray unemployment area which is not disclosed by the government, and which accounts for a shadow unemployed insurance economy. Because while the DOL indicates there are about 9.5 million total unemployed, for the correlation to return to its near 1.0 trendline the number of unemployed on benefits has to be 14 million.

    Read Zero Hedge’s full analysis of the Treasury Outflows and comparisons to official unemployment statistics…


    It Took 22 Years to Get to This Point

    Gold has been the right asset with which to save your funds in this millennium that began 23 years ago.

    Free Exclusive Report
    The inevitable Breakout – The two w’s

      Related Articles


      Join the conversation!

      It’s 100% free and your personal information will never be sold or shared online.


      1. OMG! What are they saying! OMG! The government *LYING* about numbers! No, no, NO, *NO*! It can’t be! Our government loves us and wants to take care of us. They would never lie to us about such important data, would they?

        :)  <— Cynical, satirical, sarcastic smile.

        If there is one thing the dishonest bastard thieves have down, it is lying. They do it even when its not necessary. You can be that when the truth is inconvienient, they’ll be burying it as deep as they can dig.

      2. Unemployment, both in the U.S. and the world as a whole, marches ever higher because the field of economics doesn’t account for the relationship between population density and per capita consumption.
        Following the beating the field of economics took over the seeming failure of Malthus’ theory, economists adamantly refuse to ever again consider the effects of population growth. If they did, they might come to understand that once an optimum population density is breached, further over-crowding begins to erode per capita consumption and, consequently, per capita employment.
        And these effects of an excessive population density are actually imported when a nation like the U.S. attempts to trade freely with other nations much more densely populated – nations like China, Japan, Germany, Korea and a host of others. The result is an automatic trade deficit and loss of jobs – tantamount to economic suicide.
        Using 2006 data, an in-depth analysis reveals that, of our top twenty per capita trade deficits in manufactured goods (the trade deficit divided by the population of the country in question), eighteen are with nations much more densely populated than our own. Even more revealing, if the nations of the world are divided equally around the median population density, the U.S. had a trade surplus in manufactured goods of $17 billion with the half of nations below the median population density. With the half above the median, we had a $480 billion deficit!
        If you‘re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit my web site at
        Pete Murphy
        Author, “Five Short Blasts”

      Commenting Policy:

      Some comments on this web site are automatically moderated through our Spam protection systems. Please be patient if your comment isn’t immediately available. We’re not trying to censor you, the system just wants to make sure you’re not a robot posting random spam.

      This website thrives because of its community. While we support lively debates and understand that people get excited, frustrated or angry at times, we ask that the conversation remain civil. Racism, to include any religious affiliation, will not be tolerated on this site, including the disparagement of people in the comments section.