Lou Uchitelle of the New York Times has made a career of writing passionately about the plight of laid-off workers. This is not journalistically challenging. Even at the peak of economic booms, it is never difficult to find troubled, laid-off workers who are delighted to tell reporters what they think about the boss.

Mr. Uchitelle recently wrote “The end of the line as Detroit workers know it.” For any reporter determined to find bad news in the labor market, Michigan was definitely the place. February’s unemployment rate was 4? percent for the nation but 6.6 percent for Michigan, which had lost 55,300 jobs in a year. For the nation, payroll employment was 2 million higher than a year before. No other state lost jobs.

“The end of the line” noted that 42,300 people left Michigan last year, which sounds like a sensible thing to do since every other state was adding jobs. To Mr. Uchitelle, however, nothing and nobody should ever move. Change is just too scary. “The exodus,” in his wild imagination, “is reminiscent of the Dust Bowl migration from the Prairie States in the 1930s.”

Michigan’s Dust Bowl experience cannot be blamed entirely on the auto industry, now mainly located in states like Tennessee, Kentucky, California, Texas and Missouri. Before the recent layoffs, Michigan accounted for only 22 percent of all jobs in motor vehicles and parts. Employment in motor vehicles and parts was 1,023,000 this February, down 54,100 from 1,077,100 in February 2006. That is, Michigan lost more jobs than were lost in the nationwide auto and parts industry.

Mr. Uchitelle is determined to convert Michigan’s unique job woes into what he has called a “festering national crisis.” To do that, he simply had to do what New York Times economic journalists do best — make up numbers.

“Across America,” wrote Mr. Uchitelle, “more than 30 million people have been forced out of jobs since the early 1980s, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, and regaining lost incomes has not been easy. Nearly 50 million new jobs have been created over that same period, according to the bureau, so there are always new opportunities, but more often than not at lower pay.”

Comparing nearly 50 million new jobs with “more than 30 million” lost implies a net job gain of less than 20 million since 1984 (the first year these data about displaced workers were collected). In reality, employment rose from 105 million in 1984 to 144.4 million in 2006 — a net gain of 39.4 million.

If new jobs actually involved lower wages and benefits “more often then not,” then real compensation per hour would have fallen dramatically since 1984. On the contrary, the BLS index for real hourly compensation rose from 91.1 in 1984 to 111.5 in 2000, or 1.4 percent per year. Real wages and benefits rose by 1.6 percent a year since 2000, to 120.8 in 2006.

Mr. Uchitelle claims that “among those who have lost work, only a third held new jobs two years later that paid as well as those that were lost, according to the bureau’s surveys of displaced workers. Another third of those displaced were in jobs that paid, on average, 15 to 20 percent less than their previous employment — while the final third had dropped out of the labor force entirely.”

The ominous remark about dropping out of the labor force is ironic because he began by explaining how GM, Ford and Chrysler are offering six-figure checks to departing workers, many of them in their 60s. “Many who left or are leaving were eligible for retirement,” he wrote, “having already worked the necessary 30 years.” When people retire, they drop out of the labor force entirely.

In the most recent report on the current status of workers displaced within the last three years, the bureau found 30 percent were not working or seeking work during the survey month of January. That was 12 percent of those under the age of 55; 27 percent of those between 55 and 64; and 64 percent of those over age 65. Combine those figures, and 30 percent appear to have “dropped out of the labor force entirely,” which means most retired.

The claim “only a third held new jobs two years later that paid as well as those that were lost” is deceptive because about one-third accepted buyouts to retire early, go to college or start their own business. The article mentions one man who is using his $100,000 buyout to finish college. It notes that such a “lump-sum payment… could be used to start a small business or to buy into a franchise.”

Lou Uchitelle of the New York Times has made a career of writing passionately about the plight of laid-off workers. This is not journalistically challenging. Even at the peak of economic booms, it is never difficult to find troubled, laid-off workers who are delighted to tell reporters what they think about the boss.

Mr. Uchitelle recently wrote “The end of the line as Detroit workers know it.” For any reporter determined to find bad news in the labor market, Michigan was definitely the place. February’s unemployment rate was 4? percent for the nation but 6.6 percent for Michigan, which had lost 55,300 jobs in a year. For the nation, payroll employment was 2 million higher than a year before. No other state lost jobs.

“The end of the line” noted that 42,300 people left Michigan last year, which sounds like a sensible thing to do since every other state was adding jobs. To Mr. Uchitelle, however, nothing and nobody should ever move. Change is just too scary. “The exodus,” in his wild imagination, “is reminiscent of the Dust Bowl migration from the Prairie States in the 1930s.”

Michigan’s Dust Bowl experience cannot be blamed entirely on the auto industry, now mainly located in states like Tennessee, Kentucky, California, Texas and Missouri. Before the recent layoffs, Michigan accounted for only 22 percent of all jobs in motor vehicles and parts. Employment in motor vehicles and parts was 1,023,000 this February, down 54,100 from 1,077,100 in February 2006. That is, Michigan lost more jobs than were lost in the nationwide auto and parts industry.

Mr. Uchitelle is determined to convert Michigan’s unique job woes into what he has called a “festering national crisis.” To do that, he simply had to do what New York Times economic journalists do best — make up numbers.

“Across America,” wrote Mr. Uchitelle, “more than 30 million people have been forced out of jobs since the early 1980s, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, and regaining lost incomes has not been easy. Nearly 50 million new jobs have been created over that same period, according to the bureau, so there are always new opportunities, but more often than not at lower pay.”

Comparing nearly 50 million new jobs with “more than 30 million” lost implies a net job gain of less than 20 million since 1984 (the first year these data about displaced workers were collected). In reality, employment rose from 105 million in 1984 to 144.4 million in 2006 — a net gain of 39.4 million.

If new jobs actually involved lower wages and benefits “more often then not,” then real compensation per hour would have fallen dramatically since 1984. On the contrary, the BLS index for real hourly compensation rose from 91.1 in 1984 to 111.5 in 2000, or 1.4 percent per year. Real wages and benefits rose by 1.6 percent a year since 2000, to 120.8 in 2006.

Mr. Uchitelle claims that “among those who have lost work, only a third held new jobs two years later that paid as well as those that were lost, according to the bureau’s surveys of displaced workers. Another third of those displaced were in jobs that paid, on average, 15 to 20 percent less than their previous employment — while the final third had dropped out of the labor force entirely.”

The ominous remark about dropping out of the labor force is ironic because he began by explaining how GM, Ford and Chrysler are offering six-figure checks to departing workers, many of them in their 60s. “Many who left or are leaving were eligible for retirement,” he wrote, “having already worked the necessary 30 years.” When people retire, they drop out of the labor force entirely.

In the most recent report on the current status of workers displaced within the last three years, the bureau found 30 percent were not working or seeking work during the survey month of January. That was 12 percent of those under the age of 55; 27 percent of those between 55 and 64; and 64 percent of those over age 65. Combine those figures, and 30 percent appear to have “dropped out of the labor force entirely,” which means most retired.

The claim “only a third held new jobs two years later that paid as well as those that were lost” is deceptive because about one-third accepted buyouts to retire early, go to college or start their own business. The article mentions one man who is using his $100,000 buyout to finish college. It notes that such a “lump-sum payment… could be used to start a small business or to buy into a franchise.”