Dear John: I thought your column warning about the Labor numbers was appropriate.
Of course, I don’t believe any numbers the Labor Department puts out. I have a cousin who works there, and he says it’s a laughable joke . . . manufactured hokum!
That aside, the other item that folks seem to not get is the “weeds” in the job numbers. That is, what are these jobs? What do they pay ? Are they full-time jobs?
A family’s disposable income is what will drive part of the economy, and we know there is none — PERIOD! C.P.
Dear C.P.: Yes, the quality of jobs is poor. And income increases are lousy. But to be fair, there has been job growth. And that’s a good thing.
Tell your cousin I’d like to talk with him in confidence. I will forward you my phone number in an email.
Dear John: The interesting — OK, not interesting, perhaps mind-numbing — thing about you disgruntled, idea-less Republican weenies is [the way] nothing matters (especially the facts) except your relentless attacks on President Obama.
Never mind that it was your guy who left us in a sinkhole David Copperfield could not have figured his way out of. Never mind that we have now added jobs 45 consecutive months or that the stock market has rebounded to all-time highs.
Doesn’t matter — you will find a way to diminish everything Obama [does], since that appears to be the only “idea” Republicans bring to the party. Shame on you. M.V.
Dear M.V.: Here’s the problem with your attack on me.
First, I’m not a Republican. Nor am I a Democrat. In fact, I voted for Obama the first time around. And, in an effort at full disclosure, I would have voted for Mitt Romney in 2012 if I had been able to get to my polling place in the aftermath of a hurricane.
If you had bothered to take the time, you would have noted that I’ve done the same sort of analysis of the economy during the Bush, Clinton and Bush II administrations. And it has served me well: I’ve predicted economic and stock market activity very accurately over the last two decades or so.
But enough about me.
The trouble with you strident Democrats is that you refuse to analyze anything.
Even the president is smart enough not to blow his horn over the recent job-market activity.
In the first place, there are several ongoing investigations about whether the unemployment rate is rigged.
In the other important part of the jobs report — the number of new jobs created — the country is still 1.2 million jobs short of what they were at our peak. And that doesn’t even count the millions of jobs that would have been created during a normal economy over the past six years.
That 1.2 million shortfall is — as I said in my Saturday column — much better than the 8 million jobs lost at the peak of the economic downturn. But it’s still not enough.
And of the jobs created over the past few years, 90 percent are part time. The Labor Department doesn’t distinguish between part- and full-time jobs when it counts creation.
Fact: The labor-force participation rate right now is the lowest in 35 years. You can call Keith Hall, former head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and now a fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, if you don’t believe me.
Yes, George Bush dug this country a big hole. Blame that economic criminal Alan Greenspan as well. And Osama bin Laden for goading our stupid leaders into an expensive war on terror on too many fronts.
But I know this: You can’t blame me for giving unbiased, critical analysis during the past two decades. If others had done the same, perhaps the leaders of this country — of both parties — would have made better decisions.
So if you are looking for bias, perhaps you should look in the mirror.
And if you want thin analysis, there are plenty of other news organizations that’ll give you that.
Thanks for letting me get this off my chest.
Send your questions to Dear John, The NY Post, 1211 Ave. of the Americas, NY, NY 10036, or john.crudele@nypost.com.