One has nothing to do with the other. Unemployed who lost their coverage is taken out of the equation. You should look up how they derive at both the employment numbers and unemployed. In fact if the unemployment extension lapses by December 31st there will be a huge drop in the unemployment number. It is all above board and the formula is a known entity. it certainly doesn't reflect the true nature of unemployed, but it never has. We are comparing data using the same formula.
the point is everything that is done is above board, even if it is under counting the real figure. the Fed 85 billion is also a know entity. I don't argue the merits of it, just the fact that it certainly affects the economy and profits. The FED always manipulates by controlling rates, loosen or tighten, pass more restrictive lending rules, etc...
You play by their rules and determine if it is beneficial to the market or not, or if it is working or not.
If you think that number was fixed than you must believe all the other numbers are fixed like, confidence numbers, GDP, housing, consumer credit, bank willingness to lend, bond yields, profits, and sales.
Let me put it to you this way. Why would the government want a continued rise in an already very high return year? Are they suicidal? If anything they should dumb down the numbers to prevent another bubble developing. I know I would if I had total control. Just look at the last 3 spike tops followed by massive retraces. Are you suggesting this too was orchestrated? makes no sense.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
