Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: andreisdaman on February 03, 2012, 09:34:00 AM
-
Jobless rate is going down.....economy improving....Obama is kicking 3333's ass as usual...economy is really creating jobs at a much faster rate..we added 243,000 jobs last month....better than economists predicted...unemployment rate now at 8.3% and falling..unemployment has fallen for five straight months...the first time this has happened since 1994.....
the Obama re-election train is rolling!!!!
http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/03/10309295-jobless-rate-drops-to-lowest-level-in-almost-three-years
-
power of the incumbency. it's very real.
Prez in power can manupulate events, massage numbers, and lie his ass off to keep the job. And it usually works. Except for 92, when a 3rd party stole 18% of total vote mostly from the sitting republican.... No sitting prez has been defeated in 32 years. And even Reagan needed a little help from Bush1's Iran october surprise to win that one...
-
power of the incumbency. it's very real.
Prez in power can manupulate events, massage numbers, and lie his ass off to keep the job. And it usually works. Except for 92, when a 3rd party stole 18% of total vote mostly from the sitting republican.... No sitting prez has been defeated in 32 years. And even Reagan needed a little help from Bush1's Iran october surprise to win that one...
No lying here 240....the numbers are non-partisan..prez doesn't control these stats......if he did we would ALWAYS have 5% Unemployment :) the statistics speak for themselves..give the prez his due
-
How Fraudulent Was the January Unemployment Number? Unemployment Actually Went UP last month
http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/2012/02/how-fraudulent-was-january-unemployment.html ^ |
I've written about this quite a few times before (most recently here). Essentially, the unemployment number reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics is complete fiction as millions of workers have been thrown out of the labor force, artificially lowering the unemployment rate. If you look at the labor force participation rate, it is now at multi-decade lows:
As you can see, the labor force participation rate is now down over 2% since Obama has taken office. Some would argue that this is due to demographics, as baby boomers leave the labor force as they reach retirement. The problem with this argument is that if you look at the participation rate for those 55 and up, it is slightly up since Obama has taken office. All the decline in due to those who would be considered to be in their peak working years. If you keep the rate at 66%, where it was at right before Obama was elected it appears that there are 5 million people missing from the unemployment data, and it seems to be spiking right now:
What does this mean for the unemployment rate itself? By my calculations, if you keep the missing people in, it is 11.4% right now, up 0.1% from last month when it ws 11.3%. The whole thing about it being down to 8.3% is absolute hogwash. Below you can see the striking difference between the real unemployment rate and the official one:
It's really a striking divergence isn't it? While the official rate seems to show a 1.7% improvement in the unemployment rate since the peak, the improvement is really a paltry 0.4%! And if you don't believe me, check out the government's own employment to population ratio which is also at multi-decade lows:
-
The bad news behind the January jobs report
Fox ^ | February 3, 2012 | John Lott
The number of unemployed Americans last month fell by 339,000, the fifth largest drop since January 2009. But there was an even much more shockingly large number -- almost 1.2 million additional Americans were classified in January as not being in the labor force (see figure here). Unfortunately, that has been the consistent story that has made this “recovery” unique as more and more Americans have just given up looking for work.
This last number not only means that the official unemployment number is misleading, but it will also likely determine where the unemployment rate ultimately goes. Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office just last week released its projected unemployment rate for the next couple of years. They predicted that the unemployment rate will be at 8.9 percent during the last quarter of 2012 and rise to 9.2 percent for the last quarter of 2013. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
No lying here 240....the numbers are non-partisan..prez doesn't control these stats......if he did we would ALWAYS have 5% Unemployment :) the statistics speak for themselves..give the prez his due
Are you saying that the non-partisan CBO didn't go from honest to shady on Jan 21, 2009?
This is what bothers me... People who accepted Bush's low numbers, used these numbers to shit on obama when they were at 9%...
Suddenly they call these numbers bogus when the numbers are showing improvement for Obama.
You can't call a method valid for decades, then suddenly rule is biased/partisan/bullshit... can you?
And before we all agree with a hypothesis from sites like obamasucks.bushrocks.rom ney2012.blogspot.com, why isn't FOX calling them out on it, if it's false? Why isn't Romney?
-
Are you saying that the non-partisan CBO didn't go from honest to shady on Jan 21, 2009?
This is what bothers me... People who accepted Bush's low numbers, used these numbers to shit on obama when they were at 9%...
Suddenly they call these numbers bogus when the numbers are showing improvement for Obama.
You can't call a method valid for decades, then suddenly rule is biased/partisan/bullshit... can you?
And before we all agree with a hypothesis from sites like obamasucks.bushrocks.rom ney2012.blogspot.com, why isn't FOX calling them out on it, if it's false? Why isn't Romney?
WHAT IMPROVEMENT? LESS PEOPLE ARE WORKING!
-
Are you saying that the non-partisan CBO didn't go from honest to shady on Jan 21, 2009?
This is what bothers me... People who accepted Bush's low numbers, used these numbers to shit on obama when they were at 9%...
Suddenly they call these numbers bogus when the numbers are showing improvement for Obama.
You can't call a method valid for decades, then suddenly rule is biased/partisan/bullshit... can you?
And before we all agree with a hypothesis from sites like obamasucks.bushrocks.rom ney2012.blogspot.com, why isn't FOX calling them out on it, if it's false? Why isn't Romney?
well...you're right on, 240....every time I present this same argument to 3333, Dario, Fury, Whorewell, Kazan, they don't answer the question and scream about something else.....the numbers are right and honest when they make Obama look bad...they are bogus and manipulated by Obama when they show good news for the Prez....
their hypocrisy is unbelievable...which I have always said is the weakness of this board,,,no one calls them out except us when they are caught hypocritically with their pants down....
-
The jobLESS rate is not at a three year low, it is at a thirty year high:
(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/01/Participation%20Rate.jpg)
-
-1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force. That's a drop of 2% in a month.
-The LFPR is at fresh 30 year low.
-113k of those 234k jobs were "Low Wage" jobs.
Now as yourself, what new jobs are being "created"? What types? In what fields? How much do they pay? Are they temporary jobs? Full-time? Part-time?
Those aren't good statistics, and those statistics matter.
-
well...you're right on, 240....every time I present this same argument to 3333, Dario, Fury, Whorewell, Kazan, they don't answer the question and scream about something else.....the numbers are right and honest when they make Obama look bad...they are bogus and manipulated by Obama when they show good news for the Prez....
their hypocrisy is unbelievable...which I have always said is the weakness of this board,,,no one calls them out except us when they are caught hypocritically with their pants down....
The answer has been given to you, but you cannot accept it because of your blind faith in Obummer. The unemployment rate has been falling because the BLS has defined away the vast majority of the long-term unemployed known as "discouraged workers." That is why the fall in the unemployment rate has been correlated with a shrinking labor force.
-
The answer has been given to you, but you cannot accept it because of your blind faith in Obummer. The unemployment rate has been falling because the BLS has defined away the vast majority of the long-term unemployed known as "discouraged workers." That is why the fall in the unemployment rate has been correlated with a shrinking labor force.
This has ALWAYS been done...whats your point???????????????????????..accept the good news and move on to fight another day...JESUS
-
This has ALWAYS been done...whats your point???????????????????????..accept the good news and move on to fight another day...JESUS
You fail at reading comprehension, don't you?
HAVING LABOR STATISTICIANS DEFINE AWAY THOSE WHO CAN'T FIND JOBS SHRINKS THE "OFFICIAL" UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, WHEN IN REALITY THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS INCREASING AND WORSENING.
-
You fail at reading comprehension, don't you?
HAVING LABOR STATISTICIANS DEFINE AWAY THOSE WHO CAN'T FIND JOBS SHRINKS THE "OFFICIAL" UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, WHEN IN REALITY THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS INCREASING AND WORSENING.
and again....the Government has been doing the statistics this way for decades...why the problem now???????
-
and again....the Government has been doing the statistics this way for decades...why the problem now???????
And again - as has been stated time and time again - it's been a problem! And if we calculate unemployment using the older methods, the unemployment rate is at a multi-decade high!!
Also, the BLS originally defined away discouraged workers since during good times it is easy to find a job - but during difficult times, people are finding themselves to be unemployed for longer and longer periods. And, unfortunately, the longer you're unemployed the more likely you are to fall out of the statistics. So during a weak economy, this new BLS measure of unemployment is even less reliable than it is during better economic times.
-
You fail at reading comprehension, don't you?
HAVING LABOR STATISTICIANS DEFINE AWAY THOSE WHO CAN'T FIND JOBS SHRINKS THE "OFFICIAL" UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, WHEN IN REALITY THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS INCREASING AND WORSENING.
Well explained and thought out, howard. I totally understand what you are saying. It's totally clear.
Most rational people would agree.
-
;D. Andre - give it up.
-
And again - as has been stated time and time again - it's been a problem! And if we calculate unemployment using the older methods, the unemployment rate is at a multi-decade high!!
Also, the BLS originally defined away discouraged workers since during good times it is easy to find a job - but during difficult times, people are finding themselves to be unemployed for longer and longer periods. And, unfortunately, the longer you're unemployed the more likely you are to fall out of the statistics. So during a weak economy, this new BLS measure of unemployment is even less reliable than it is during better economic times.
You can also add the CPI and core/non-core inflation calculations to the list of stuff that hides the true nature.
-
Wow, did this thread ever backfire. On one hand, we have the two morons andreisadouche and 240 spouting off talking points and then we have Team "3-digit IQ" shutting them down hard.
1.2 million people fell off the rolls and these morons are celebrating it. LOL!!
-
Yes Andre they have been doing it for a long time they have also been keeping track of real unemployment since that time....real Unemployment is higher now then before Obama took office if you want to cheerlead that's fine but at least understand that we actually have less ppl employed today...
-
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/if-the-economy-is-improving
If the economy is getting better, then why did new home sales in the United States hit a brand new all-time record low during 2011?
If the economy is getting better, then why are there 6 million less jobs in America today than there were before the recession started?
If the economy is getting better, then why is the average duration of unemployment in this country close to an all-time record high?
If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of homeless female veterans more than doubled?
If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of Americans on food stamps increased by 3 million since this time last year and by more than 14 million since Barack Obama entered the White House?
If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of children living in poverty in America risen for four years in a row?
If the economy is getting better, then why is the percentage of Americans living in “extreme poverty” at an all-time high?
If the economy is getting better, then why is the Federal Housing Administration on the verge of a financial collapse?
If the economy is getting better, then why do only 23 percent of American companies plan to hire more employees in 2012?
If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of self-employed Americans fallen by more than 2 million since 2006?
If the economy is getting better, then why did an all-time record low percentage of U.S. teens have a job last summer?
If the economy is getting better, then why does median household income keep declining? Overall, median household income in the United States has declined by a total of 6.8% since December 2007 once you account for inflation.
If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of Americans living below the poverty line increased by 10 million since 2006?
If the economy is getting better, then why is the average age of a vehicle in America now sitting at an all-time high?
If the economy is getting better, then why are 18 percent of all homes in the state of Florida currently sitting vacant?
If the economy is getting better, then why are 19 percent of all American men between the ages of 25 and 34 living with their parents?
If the economy is getting better, then why does the number of “long-term unemployed workers” stay so high? When Barack Obama first took office, the number of “long-term unemployed workers” in the United States was approximately 2.6 million. Today, that number is sitting at 5.6 million.
-
-1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force. That's a drop of 2% in a month.
-The LFPR is at fresh 30 year low.
-113k of those 234k jobs were "Low Wage" jobs.
Now as yourself, what new jobs are being "created"? What types? In what fields? How much do they pay? Are they temporary jobs? Full-time? Part-time?
Those aren't good statistics, and those statistics matter.
your argument has some merit...but this argument is NEVER made when the numbers make Obama look bad.,..they are just accepted without question
-
You fail at reading comprehension, don't you?
HAVING LABOR STATISTICIANS DEFINE AWAY THOSE WHO CAN'T FIND JOBS SHRINKS THE "OFFICIAL" UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, WHEN IN REALITY THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS INCREASING AND WORSENING.
thats your opinion.....other people look at the statistics and see job growth.......I'm going by what the gov't defines the stats as being...as everyone always has
-
Well explained and thought out, howard. I totally understand what you are saying. It's totally clear.
Most rational people would agree.
Actually most rational and UNBIASED people would accept the statistics and move on to fight another day...the stats say UE is down to 8.5.....when they were at 10, I accepted it and said if it kept up at that pace, Obama was in trouble...no one quibbled then, including you...now all of a sudden, everyone is a statistician and pulling out graphs and stuff to show that the stats are wrong...
THE HYPOCRISY IS AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
thats your opinion.....other people look at the statistics and see job growth.......I'm going by what the gov't defines the stats as being...as everyone always has
actually andre its not his opinion, its unadulterated fact bro.
again they have been keeping track of real unemployment since they started defining away those that drop out of the labor market. Go look up those stats for yourself to see the trend and where we stand now.
-
Actually most rational and UNBIASED people would accept the statistics and move on to fight another day...the stats say UE is down to 8.5.....when they were at 10, I accepted it and said if it kept up at that pace, Obama was in trouble...no one quibbled then, including you...now all of a sudden, everyone is a statistician and pulling out graphs and stuff to show that the stats are wrong...
THE HYPOCRISY IS AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL really bro, if you understood how they calculated the numbers you might get an idea of why ppl might have been doing that.
its possible that the ppl that have fallen off the roles b/c they quit looking where included in the 10% number. Now that they have fallen off, what do you think happens to the UE number?
it goes down...
did you know the UE number can go down without one person being hired?
-
Wow, did this thread ever backfire. On one hand, we have the two morons andreisadouche and 240 spouting off talking points and then we have Team "3-digit IQ" shutting them down hard.
1.2 million people fell off the rolls and these morons are celebrating it. LOL!!
LOL at the "TEAM 3 Digit IQ Team".....you guys are the biggest losers I have ever seen......you can't give Obama his place in the sun.....again for the 20th time..accept the stats and move on
-
Yes Andre they have been doing it for a long time they have also been keeping track of real unemployment since that time....real Unemployment is higher now then before Obama took office if you want to cheerlead that's fine but at least understand that we actually have less ppl employed today...
Your argument has merit....Real unemployment will always keep going up because our population keeps getting larger.....thats no secret..just accept the stats as favorable for Obama and move on.....why is it so hard for you to do that???..you need to ask yourself that...thats where the bias lies
-
actually andre its not his opinion, its unadulterated fact bro.
again they have been keeping track of real unemployment since they started defining away those that drop out of the labor market. Go look up those stats for yourself to see the trend and where we stand now.
again..all that is understood..and I gave you props and said your argument has merit....but the stats are what they are....they show a favorable trend for Obama...accept it and move on..you look like a cry-baby
-
Job Gains at U.S. Factories Show Manufacturers Driving Expansion
By Timothy R. Homan
Feb. 3 (Bloomberg) -- American factories added the most jobs in a year as they stayed at the forefront of the expansion, boosting employment opportunities in the rest of the economy.
Manufacturing payrolls increased 50,000 last month, exceeding the most optimistic forecast in a Bloomberg News survey and capping the largest two-year gain since 1985, Labor Department figures released today showed. Total employment across the economy jumped 243,000 in January as the jobless rate unexpectedly dropped to 8.3 percent.
- more -
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-03/job-gains-at-u-s-factories-show-manufacturers-driving-expansion.html
-
:D. Blackass do you realize there are still millions less even in the labor pool despite a growing pop?
-
thats your opinion.....other people look at the statistics and see job growth.......I'm going by what the gov't defines the stats as being...as everyone always has
1.2 million people leave the work force
200k jobs are created
And you call that "job growth?"
-
1.2 million people leave the work force
200k jobs are created
And you call that "job growth?"
People leave the workforce all the time for whatever reason...whats so evil about that?...I myself have taken off a few months from the workforce to raise children, go back to school, etc....my wife has taken off for years at a time three times when we had children.....plus she dropped out of the workforce at other times to start her own business and work from home....whats so sinister about that???
My point is people drop out of the workforce all the time and are not actively looking for work..or is that Obama's fault as well??????????????????????????????
in a population of over three hundred million people its not unreasonable that 1.2 million would drop out of the workforce.....
sorry to destroy your argument
-
when the economy is bad, people leave the workforce and get educated.
when the economy is good, people leave school and work to make that $$$.
If the economy is shitty and I can settle for a low-paying job I don't like, or I can go to school, then I leave the workforce to return to school.
This point can't be ignored. When work is scarce, people decide to do soemthing else for a year.
Also - it's true that clinton, bush, and everyone else removed the 'not looking for work' people from their lists as well - is this correct?
-
when the economy is bad, people leave the workforce and get educated.
when the economy is good, people leave school and work to make that $$$.
If the economy is shitty and I can settle for a low-paying job I don't like, or I can go to school, then I leave the workforce to return to school.
This point can't be ignored. When work is scarce, people decide to do soemthing else for a year.
Also - it's true that clinton, bush, and everyone else removed the 'not looking for work' people from their lists as well - is this correct?
totally correct
-
;D. Go figure. The two biggest obamabots :-\ making excuses for obamas fraudulent misrepresentation about the data.
-
again..all that is understood..and I gave you props and said your argument has merit....but the stats are what they are....they show a favorable trend for Obama...accept it and move on..you look like a cry-baby
Ill give you they do show a favorable trend to ppl that are uneducated and dont understand why the numbers move.
Now if you understand the reasons behind the moving of the numbers, they arent favorable...
Do you understand that andre?
-
People leave the workforce all the time for whatever reason...whats so evil about that?...I myself have taken off a few months from the workforce to raise children, go back to school, etc....my wife has taken off for years at a time three times when we had children.....plus she dropped out of the workforce at other times to start her own business and work from home....whats so sinister about that???
My point is people drop out of the workforce all the time and are not actively looking for work..or is that Obama's fault as well??????????????????????????????
in a population of over three hundred million people its not unreasonable that 1.2 million would drop out of the workforce.....
sorry to destroy your argument
::)
You are a pathetic individual. The job work force is at a low not seen in decades. But its cause theyre all going to school, or raising kids right?
When are you going to admit Obama is a piece of shit, and all his "success" are actually failures that have made shit worse?
Or, thats right, you wont, youre too emotionally involved. Youre going to go down with the ship cause you cant possibly admit you were wrong.
-
Ill give you they do show a favorable trend to ppl that are uneducated and dont understand why the numbers move.
Now if you understand the reasons behind the moving of the numbers, they arent favorable...
Do you understand that andre?
I understand that when the numbers were unfavorable to Obama you didn't mention the above
-
I understand that when the numbers were unfavorable to Obama you didn't mention the above
Why were the numbers unfavorable andre?
1. the number increases b/c more ppl are unemployed and looking for jobs, thats bad.
2. the number decreases b/c ppl drop off the roles, thats bad.
3. the number decreases b/c ppl actually get jobs, thats good
If its number 1 or 2 its bad...
thats why it wasnt mentioned, again you need to understand the reasons why the numbers are moving.
-
Why were the numbers unfavorable andre?
1. the number increases b/c more ppl are unemployed and looking for jobs, thats bad.
2. the number decreases b/c ppl drop off the roles, thats bad.
3. the number decreases b/c ppl actually get jobs, thats good
If its number 1 or 2 its bad...
thats why it wasnt mentioned, again you need to understand the reasons why the numbers are moving.
Jesus Goddamn Christ..can you read???????...did you see what I wrote above?????..does that not sound logical to you??????...I said that people drop out of the work force for different reasons..not only because they can't find a job,.....they drop out due to pregnancy....going back to school...to focus on children.....because they prefer to work part-time....because they get married and don't have to work any more due to their spouse making enough to support the family.....because they need a break.....there are a number of reasons...you make the assumption that all those people dropped out due to not being able to find a job because it fits into your biased thinking that Obama is not providing enough jobs....
this is why as much as I try to respect you, I can't...because your bias shows through every single time....
Sorry I had to destroy you again.....its becoming a habit
-
And many of those being added to the job rolls are part-timers and/or temp workers. Let us not also forget the numbers of those that are underemployed...down in South Florida, there are a lot of construction workers and those in real estate working jobs that are rather far beneath them. On top of that, with all the economic uncertainty and many local and state governments running deficits, I wonder what it must feel that your job is likely on the chopping block at any time?
-
And many of those being added to the job rolls are part-timers and/or temp workers. Let us not also forget the numbers of those that are underemployed...down in South Florida, there are a lot of construction workers and those in real estate working jobs that are rather far beneath them. On top of that, with all the economic uncertainty and many local and state governments running deficits, I wonder what it must feel that your job is likely on the chopping block at any time?
points well taken.....
-
Why the official 8.3% unemployment rate is phony — and what it means for Obama’s reelection
The American ^ | 02/06/2012 | James Pethoukoukis
Posted on February 6, 2012 11:01:57 AM EST by SeekAndFind
The January jobs report is out and it seems pretty strong, at least superficially. The unemployment rate fell to 8.3 percent from 8.5 percent, the lowest rate since February 2009. And the economy added 243,000 jobs, the most since April 2011.
But does anyone believe an "official" unemployment rate of 8.3 percent really gives an accurate picture of the U.S. labor market? Even though the unemployment rate fell, so did the labor force participation rate (as more Americans became discouraged and gave up looking for work). Here’s what that means:
1. If the size of the U.S. labor force as a share of the total population was the same as it was when Barack Obama took office—65.7 percent then vs. 63.7 percent today—the U-3 unemployment rate would be 11.0 percent.
2. But let’s not go all the way back to January 2009. In January 2011, the unemployment rate was 9.1 percent with a participation rate of 64.2 percent. If that were the participation rate today, the unemployment rate would be 8.9 percent, instead of 8.3 percent. As an analysis from Hamilton Place Strategies concludes, “Most of the shift of the past year is due not to the improvement in the labor market, but the continued drop in participation in the labor force.”
3. Now, to be fair, some of the decline in the participation rate is aging Baby Boomers dropping out of the labor force. But taking that into account still doesn’t get us very far, as HPS notes:
Demographic projections expect that participation rate to be at 65.3 percent. If that full participation rate is the goal, our economy is “missing” 3.8 million workers, up from the 3.4 million we noted in the white paper. The unemployment rate in that context has not budged at 10.4 percent.
4. Then there’s the broader, U-6 measure of unemployment which includes the discouraged plus part-timers who wish they had full time work. That unemployment rate is still a sky-high 15.1 percent.
5. If the participation rate does level off at its current rate, according to HPS, the economy would need to generate 231,000 jobs per month to get below 8 percent unemployment by Election Day. If the participation rate continues its downward slide, however, that number would be much lower—perhaps as low as 131,000 jobs a month (see below chart). But such a decline wouldn’t necessarily be good news.
Why is that? Because the unemployment rate would be falling because the economy remained weak with not many jobs created. That also means weak income growth, which is even more influential on presidential election results than the unemployment rate. If people don’t sense their own economic situation improving very much, it won’t matter what some distorted statistic from a government agency says about the economy. Or what Obama says, either.
One of the most accurate election forecasting models doesn’t even look at the unemployment rate. It looks at per person GDP growth, which correlates with income growth. If you plug a 2 percent GDP forecast for 2012 into the model of Yale’s Ray Fair, the algorithm predicts a close election, but still an Obama defeat with the incumbent president getting just 47.8 percent of the two-party vote.
Bottom line: The unemployment rate is dropping because economic growth continues to be so anemic that nearly 4 million Americans have quit looking for work and have been disappeared by the Labor Department. This still isn’t much of a recovery.
-
And again - as has been stated time and time again - it's been a problem! And if we calculate unemployment using the older methods, the unemployment rate is at a multi-decade high!!
Also, the BLS originally defined away discouraged workers since during good times it is easy to find a job - but during difficult times, people are finding themselves to be unemployed for longer and longer periods. And, unfortunately, the longer you're unemployed the more likely you are to fall out of the statistics. So during a weak economy, this new BLS measure of unemployment is even less reliable than it is during better economic times.
no you are wrong, the fact thats its always been done indicates that the statistic is precise not accurate, hence it should be accepted. You mistake precision for accuracy, if they are using a false formula to create this number then they always have thus any reflection of change in said number is either a real thing, or completely useless or a mixture of both. Apparently a mixture of both is what you have been doing, but now its completely useless, sorry cant have it both ways friend. Either is always been shit thus it all has to be thrown out, or it is accurate and to be accepted. If you suggest its a mixture of both i would agree, now its time to tease apart what those variables are.
i dont accept your conclusion, show me the formula for the calculation and show how this good economy variable affects outcome. If you are taking a mathmatical abstract concept and applying it concretely like they have done, it is useless to talk about the concrete unless you adress the abstract math its based on, if you have done this then please show me how, id like to learn or understand how you reached this conclusion.
you have to show the degree of effect a bad economy has on this variable, is it even significant? show me.
-
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/5/curl-obamas-made-up-jobless-numbers/print
Busted. Obama is lying snake.
-
I said that people drop out of the work force for different reasons..not only because they can't find a job,.....they drop out due to pregnancy....going back to school...to focus on children.....because they prefer to work part-time....because they get married and don't have to work any more due to their spouse making enough to support the family.....because they need a break.....there are a number of reasons...you make the assumption that all those people dropped out due to not being able to find a job because it fits into your biased thinking that Obama is not providing enough jobs....
this is why as much as I try to respect you, I can't...because your bias shows through every single time....
Sorry I had to destroy you again.....its becoming a habit
You didn't destroy anything.
Is it your contention, based on what you wroteabove, that the dropout in the workforce is just routine drop off as you mentioned, and there is no problem?
Also, to your last sentence, I highly doubt tony expects Obama to provide jobs - expanding gov't isn't the answer.
-
no you are wrong, the fact thats its always been done indicates that the statistic is precise not accurate, hence it should be accepted. You mistake precision for accuracy, if they are using a false formula to create this number then they always have thus any reflection of change in said number is either a real thing, or completely useless or a mixture of both. Apparently a mixture of both is what you have been doing, but now its completely useless, sorry cant have it both ways friend. Either is always been shit thus it all has to be thrown out, or it is accurate and to be accepted. If you suggest its a mixture of both i would agree, now its time to tease apart what those variables are.
i dont accept your conclusion, show me the formula for the calculation and show how this good economy variable affects outcome. If you are taking a mathmatical abstract concept and applying it concretely like they have done, it is useless to talk about the concrete unless you adress the abstract math its based on, if you have done this then please show me how, id like to learn or understand how you reached this conclusion.
you have to show the degree of effect a bad economy has on this variable, is it even significant? show me.
Excellent post....this is what I have been screaming about,,,,that you can't have it both ways...the UE number is accepted by Obama haters WHEN THE UE NUMBER IS HIGH...but when it begins to drop, THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE NUMBERS ARE BOGUS, DOCTORED BY OBAMA AND ARE NOT A TRUE INDICATOR OF THE UE.....the Obama haters have difficulty seeing the hypocrisy here....the UE has always been calculated THE SAME WAY.....SO EITHER ITS ACCURATE ALL THE TIME OR WRONG ALL THE TIME....as you mentioned above, you can't have it both ways when it suits you to do so...
wonderful post...you are definitely a voice of reason and have great critical thinking skills
-
You didn't destroy anything.
Is it your contention, based on what you wroteabove, that the dropout in the workforce is just routine drop off as you mentioned, and there is no problem?
Also, to your last sentence, I highly doubt tony expects Obama to provide jobs - expanding gov't isn't the answer.
yes...I'm saying that many of the people who dropped out are routine drop-offs....some people leave for the reasons I stated above, some even leave the country and go back to their homeland when the economy goes bad...drop-off is normal....people try to read something sinister into the drop-off figure....as if Obama sits up at night and cooks up his own figures..WOW!!!
-
1.2 million people leave the work force
200k jobs are created
And you call that "job growth?"
no you incredible moron, you are looking at it as two static numbers, ever hear of trends, JESUSSUSUSUSUS.
if 1.1 mill leave next month and 300k are created that is an improvment, its called a recovery. What do you expect it to flip over immediately, no jobs lost and only jobs created? its going to go up and down until the those leaving are less then made, its the trend we are interested in.
Fuck go to school.
-
Lol!!! Using the same metHodology as Obama used when he was first selected the UE today is at least 11 percent.
-
no you incredible moron, you are looking at it as two static numbers, ever hear of trends, JESUSSUSUSUSUS.
if 1.1 mill leave next month and 300k are created that is an improvment, its called a recovery. What do you expect it to flip over immediately, no jobs lost and only jobs created? its going to go up and down until the those leaving are less then made, its the trend we are interested in.
Fuck go to school.
No it's not! That is utter horseshit since a smaller and smaller work force can't keep up w the increasing demands of those not working.
-
Ill give you they do show a favorable trend to ppl that are uneducated and dont understand why the numbers move.
Now if you understand the reasons behind the moving of the numbers, they arent favorable...
Do you understand that andre?
if both numbers are moving in desired directions thats favorable, its less favorable then some outcomes, obviously, but you cant reach that endpoint until you get there.
Its like morons and evolution, they see a monkey and a human and cant fathom the gradual steps that were required to get there, you guys see more jobs lost then made and exclude the trend or how much that matters.
so are you guys suggesting that the numbers which have always been calculated this way are somehow in favor of obama uniquely? if thats what you are suggesting then prove it, with more the complex fabrications and propaganda. Show me the formula used to calculate this and prove your point, otherwise you sound like hypocrites, which of course you are.
-
No it's not! That is utter horseshit since a smaller and smaller work force can't keep up w the increasing demands of those not working.
yes that a variable, you are retarded and think only in absolutes, there are a multitude of factors to complex for your little brain to hold in consciousness concurrently. If you think automation has no role then you are a moron. If you think a shrinking work force is the sole reason you are a moron, if you think that its a mix and that its not a simple as a shrinking workforce and would like to examine the etiology then i agree. I know you don't you want more PROPAGANDA, OBAMA is from kenya, obama blames all of the worlds prolems on ATM's , citing them as evil automatons.
get the fuck outta here and please dont vote.
-
yes that a variable, you are retarded and think only in absolutes, there are a multitude of factors to complex for your little brain to hold in consciousness concurrently. If you think automation has no role then you are a moron. If you think a shrinking work force is the sole reason you are a moron, if you think that its a mix and that its not a simple as a shrinking workforce and would like to examine the etiology then i agree. I know you don't you want more PROPAGANDA, OBAMA is from kenya, obama blames all of the worlds prolems on ATM's , citing them as evil automatons.
get the fuck outta here and please dont vote.
A recovery is what again???? We still have not even come close to recovering the jobs lost, let alone have jobs for new entrants in the work force.
-
no you incredible moron, you are looking at it as two static numbers, ever hear of trends, JESUSSUSUSUSUS.
if 1.1 mill leave next month and 300k are created that is an improvment, its called a recovery. What do you expect it to flip over immediately, no jobs lost and only jobs created? its going to go up and down until the those leaving are less then made, its the trend we are interested in.
Fuck go to school.
again...great post
-
again...great post
Why are they leaving? When are they coming back? Who is paying for them now?
Do you communists supporting obama realize how absurd your position is? We could have 100 million on food stamps and welfare and 4 percent UE and you idiots would cheer that right?
-
Why are they leaving? When are they coming back? Who is paying for them now?
Do you communists supporting obama realize how absurd your position is? We could have 100 million on food stamps and welfare and 4 percent UE and you idiots would cheer that right?
why they are leaving, when they are coming back, and who is paying for them now is really none of the government's business...its a free society..how can all of that be determined?...we have the right to go and come as we please and choose to be unemployed if we want to...
no one is a communist...I do support Obama but I try to be as objective as possible......I try to be a voice of reason....I don't support Obama blindly but I do point out when he is being treated unfairly...you unabashedly have an agenda against him..at least you are open about that hence your dozens of anti-Obama threads....but you don't have any credibility due to your lack of objectivity
the trend of more and more people being on food stamps has been going up for years..but all of a sudden thats Obama's fault???
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/12/chart-of-day-food-stamp-recssion-curve.html
-
no you incredible moron, you are looking at it as two static numbers, ever hear of trends, JESUSSUSUSUSUS.
if 1.1 mill leave next month and 300k are created that is an improvment, its called a recovery. What do you expect it to flip over immediately, no jobs lost and only jobs created? its going to go up and down until the those leaving are less then made, its the trend we are interested in.
Fuck go to school.
Fine.
But the trend is also showing that more and more and more people are leaving the workforce. That's a bigger deal than 250k jobs created. Another trend would be many of those jobs being temporary and low wage.
-
95er please. It spiked under Obama and is still increasing.
-
This isn't as much a recovery as it is a transition.
-
Fine.
But the trend is also showing that more and more and more people are leaving the workforce. That's a bigger deal than 250k jobs created. Another trend would be many of those jobs being temporary and low wage.
I think more and more people are leaving due to lots of people trying to start up their own businesses...going back to school....etc....some are even working off the books.....
but your point about the creation of low-wage jobs temp positions, and part-time work is well taken
-
95er please. It spiked under Obama and is still increasing.
yes it probably did spike under Obama but it coincided with the worse recession we have ever had...so thats normal..look at the chart in the article I posted
-
I think more and more people are leaving due to lots of people trying to start up their own businesses...going back to school....etc....some are even working off the books.....
Hahahahah. Whatever helps you sleep at night, you embarrassingly stupid and pathetic drone.
-
Hahahahah. Whatever helps you sleep at night, you embarrassingly stupid and pathetic drone.
obviously you didn't read the entire thread....when are you going to stop being an idiot???
-
obviously you didn't read the entire thread....when are you going to stop being an idiot???
So how many of those 1.2 MILLION do you think went back to school or started their own businesses? I read the first few posts and didn't bother with any others as we all know you're retarded.
-
I think more and more people are leaving due to lots of people trying to start up their own businesses...going back to school....etc....some are even working off the books.....
but your point about the creation of low-wage jobs temp positions, and part-time work is well taken
Ok, I'm sure some of them are doing just that but not enough to account for record low levels of LFPR which I would argue goes somewhat hand in hand with the ever increasing Food Stamp usage and such. I will look for hard numbers about new businesses starting up but I swear I saw some numbers not to long ago and it didn't show a spike or an elevated level, I'll double check. And off the books work is something people do but, again, probably not in the numbers to justify the steep drop in LFP. It spiked 2% in one month, that's not good.
The trend that I see is one to gigantic, omniscient, surveillance oriented govt, a govt. that has more and more of a hand in running an already centrally planned economy....lower standards of living, stagnant/declining wages, a temp. focused workforce and general national stagnation.
-
obviously you didn't read the entire thread....when are you going to stop being an idiot???
Andre - I really don't see too many new businesses popping up on Webster ave if you feel me on that.
-
Ok, I'm sure some of them are doing just that but not enough to account for record low levels of LFPR which I would argue goes somewhat hand in hand with the ever increasing Food Stamp usage and such. I will look for hard numbers about new businesses starting up but I swear I saw some numbers not to long ago and it didn't show a spike or an elevated level, I'll double check. And off the books work is something people do but, again, probably not in the numbers to justify the steep drop in LFP. It spiked 2% in one month, that's not good.
The trend that I see is one to gigantic, omniscient, surveillance oriented govt, a govt. that has more and more of a hand in running an already centrally planned economy....lower standards of living, stagnant/declining wages, a temp. focused workforce and general national stagnation.
We are headed down Japan's road. Two lost decades for them because they're too pussy to make the hard decisions.
-
We are headed down Japan's road. Two lost decades for them because they're too pussy to make the hard decisions.
Two lost decades and counting.
-
That is obamas entire plan! Not make us richer, but make us poorer so we are more like the third world which he comes from.
-
So according to andre, the large amount of labor participation drop off is all business as usual, because he's thought some additional reasons why people might drop off.
Is this you andre?:
(http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/07-minister.jpg)
-
So how many of those 1.2 MILLION do you think went back to school or started their own businesses? I read the first few posts and didn't bother with any others as we all know you're retarded.
well..every time I try to have some respect for you, you revert back to being a fucktard.....I will restate for you since you are too intellectually lazy to read the entire 3 page thread....I wrote that out of the 1.2 million that supposedly left the rolls, its possible that many of them went back to school to sharpen their skills, went back to school to get another degree, got married and no longer had to work due to spouse making enough money to cover family expenses, went back to their country of origin to visit or look for work, are working off the books, are starting their own business due to their being tired of being in the rat race, are living off of savings and don't want to work right now, etc.......doesn't mean that all of those people can't find a job....
my point is neither you nor I can make the claim as to exactly what happened to those who dropped off the rolls...you want to make the assumption that they are all discouraged from looking for work because it fits into your anti-Obama stance.... the numbers are what they are....LIVE WITH IT
-
my point is neither you nor I can make the claim as to exactly what happened to those who dropped off the rolls...you want to make the assumption that they are all discouraged from looking for work because it fits into your anti-Obama stance.... the numbers are what they are....LIVE WITH IT
No, but you could look for past data to compare it to, and see if it's consistent, rather than make up reasons that you can't back up.
-
No it's not! That is utter horseshit since a smaller and smaller work force can't keep up w the increasing demands of those not working.
there are actually more people than ever working today..its just that our POPULATION has greatly increased...we were at 200 million in the 1980's now we are at over 300 million and counting.....should we have created another 100 million jobs to cover that extra 100 million people???..not possible...so the work force population is relatively smaller and having to take care of more people
-
yes that a variable, you are retarded and think only in absolutes, there are a multitude of factors to complex for your little brain to hold in consciousness concurrently. If you think automation has no role then you are a moron. If you think a shrinking work force is the sole reason you are a moron, if you think that its a mix and that its not a simple as a shrinking workforce and would like to examine the etiology then i agree. I know you don't you want more PROPAGANDA, OBAMA is from kenya, obama blames all of the worlds prolems on ATM's , citing them as evil automatons.
get the fuck outta here and please dont vote.
you make a good point that I did not think of.....automation, technology and better efficiency can often have an affect on the UE....keeping it higher than we would like.....corporations have admitted that they don't need as many people any more due to their realizing that they can still get the same amount of work done with less workers...thus increasing the productivity of the average worker and the efficiency and the worker and company as a whole....so many people are being displaced by the fact that the nation is becoming MORE EFFICIENT.....is that Obama's fault as well???..are these displaced workers unemployed due to Obama's mishandling of the economy???...no......
so there are a myriad of reasons for the UE number..thats the point I am making.many of you on here would rather believe that all of these ex-workers are begging on the streets due to Obama's bungling of the economy.
-
Ok, I'm sure some of them are doing just that but not enough to account for record low levels of LFPR which I would argue goes somewhat hand in hand with the ever increasing Food Stamp usage and such. I will look for hard numbers about new businesses starting up but I swear I saw some numbers not to long ago and it didn't show a spike or an elevated level, I'll double check. And off the books work is something people do but, again, probably not in the numbers to justify the steep drop in LFP. It spiked 2% in one month, that's not good.
The trend that I see is one to gigantic, omniscient, surveillance oriented govt, a govt. that has more and more of a hand in running an already centrally planned economy....lower standards of living, stagnant/declining wages, a temp. focused workforce and general national stagnation.
I do agree with some of what you said here concerning trends....I do think we as Americans are headed in a downward spiral in terms of our standard of living.....and actually I think this is the real reason for the upward trend of food stamp usage..the fact is, Obama and the gov't are not giving out food stamps willy-nilly...3333 and others would have you believe that the gov't has representatives on every corner just giving food stamps away....
the problem is that MORE AND MORE PEOPLE ARE QUALIFYING FOR FOOD STAMPS due to lack of wages....we are not getting the cost of living wages we used to get automatically.....starti ng pay is decreasing.....food is becoming very expensive....and NAFTA and the Chinese plus other emerging countries are killing us with their cheap workforces and suppressing our wages...not to mention the big trend of U.S. corporations manufacturing more and more over seas and then not bringing the profits home....all of these things the president has no control over.....yet we want to blame Obama due to ideology
-
Andre - I really don't see too many new businesses popping up on Webster ave if you feel me on that.
but you have to admit that the Bronx has come back tremendously over all in terms of housing and businesses
-
We are headed down Japan's road. Two lost decades for them because they're too pussy to make the hard decisions.
may I ask you what hard decisions do you think should be made here in America??
-
That is obamas entire plan! Not make us richer, but make us poorer so we are more like the third world which he comes from.
you see?..this is why you have no credibility
-
Two lost decades and counting.
Japan is being hit with certain trends just like we are.....an aging population....a shrinking population as well....not as innovative as we and the Chinese have become.....shrinking exports due to the recession....and that sunami thing sure didn't help...also they are victims of their own xenophobia..they need to let more immigrants in but they have a slogan "Japan for the Japanese"
-
So according to andre, the large amount of labor participation drop off is all business as usual, because he's thought some additional reasons why people might drop off.
Is this you andre?:
(http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/07-minister.jpg)
hahaha..funny! :)
-
No, but you could look for past data to compare it to, and see if it's consistent, rather than make up reasons that you can't back up.
didn't make up anything..I cited perfectly good EXAMPLES..not reasons..all of those things I cited are plausible..I am quite sure you yourself have known people who fit into all of those categories
-
there are actually more people than ever working today..its just that our POPULATION has greatly increased...we were at 200 million in the 1980's now we are at over 300 million and counting.....should we have created another 100 million jobs to cover that extra 100 million people???..not possible...so the work force population is relatively smaller and having to take care of more people
Jesus Christ... Our workforce is at a 30 year low (actual numbers, not percentage) despite a population that is millions bigger, and yet you say stupid shit like this?
Not to mention your bullshit excuses on how people are leaving the workforce because they're all going to school, working under the table or trying to start new business' (2 fucking million in one month)
And you have the balls to tell 333 he's biased and had an agenda, fucking epic Lulz.
No wonder fury has no respect for you, Obama could cut off your balls with a pair of scissors and you'd have a fucking excuse ready why it was such a great thing for him to do.
Remove your head.from your ass or GTFO and take your retarded excuses.with you.
-
Andre does have a point about the LFP rate. It also went down under Bush and never went back up, and no one had a problem with it back then. I guess you could make the argument that the low levels it has gotten to now is truly unhealthy for the economy and therefore it now matters. It would be interesting to see how many of the people who left the labor force under Bush were babyboomers. That number has actually gone up under Obama.
The better argument that the Republicans have is that (Phil Gramm said it best), even if we had this same amount of job creation for every month until the end of Obama's first term, this would still be considered the most tepid recovery since the Great Depression. Democrats like to come back with the argument that this recovery is taking longer because of the financial crisis, but history simply doesnt support that. We have had financial crisises before and have bounced back fairly quickly. This recovery and the Great Depression are the most tepid in history. Its even more tepid than recoveries that came after tepid downturns. Unemployment stayed near the 10% range for nearly a year, in the same spot, which is unaceptable. If you are going to blame Bush for the economy going bad in his last year after he had 5% unemployment for roughly 5 years (which is the equivalent of blaming Clinton for the dotcom bust), expect to be blamed for having a 8%+ unemployemnt rate for 4 years.
Oh, I almost forgot. Let's see if the LFP rate goes back up. Then the unemployment rate will go back up. Also, we will most likely be getting atleast $4 gas this summer. If I were Democrats, I wouldnt be bringing out the champagne just yet.
-
Jesus Christ... Our workforce is at a 30 year low (actual numbers, not percentage) despite a population that is millions bigger, and yet you say stupid shit like this?
Not to mention your bullshit excuses on how people are leaving the workforce because they're all going to school, working under the table or trying to start new business' (2 fucking million in one month)
And you have the balls to tell 333 he's biased and had an agenda, fucking epic Lulz.
No wonder fury has no respect for you, Obama could cut off your balls with a pair of scissors and you'd have a fucking excuse ready why it was such a great thing for him to do.
Remove your head.from your ass or GTFO and take your retarded excuses.with you.
Dude..I will try to talk to you in a calm sane manner...whether Fury hates me or not has nothing to do with the price of beans..no one cares about that....the United States employs between 140-150 million people..which historically is the most people we have ever had working give or take a few million...you are right to say that as a PERCENTAGE it is at a historical low..but at the same time we have a larger population....
I never stated the reasons for people possibly being out of work as excuses..I said they were possible REASONS......we will never know for sure unless you and I go door to door and survey all those who dropped out of the workforce.....that was the point I was trying to make...we can't say that those who dropped out of the workforce did so due to not being able to find a job...nor can we say it is because of all the reasons I cited...thats the whole point..the Obama haters are trying to say it is due to Obama's bad handling of the economy that people dropped out of the labor force...HOW DO THEY KNOW THIS FOR SURE???....it is speculation.....just as the reasons I gave are speculation..I don't see you criticizing 3333 or fury for THEIR speculation as well...I WONDER WHY NOT???
Stop calling people names and THINK
-
Free Republic
Browse · Search Pings · Mail News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
The Smallest Workforce Since Carter
Townhall.com ^ | February 6, 2012 | Bob Beauprez
Posted on February 6, 2012 8:55:50 AM EST by Kaslin
The recent labor reports certainly have some encouraging news. New jobs in January estimated at 243,000 and a decline in unemployment to 8.3 percent suggests that the economy might be headed in the right direction. But, another key indicator that doesn’t get the attention of the jobs number or the unemployment rate shows that all is definitely not well.
As the following graph courtesy of the Labor Department demonstrates, the Labor Participation Rate (LPR) continues to decline. The LPR measures the number of people employed or looking for work compared to the total of age eligible population. As the graph indicates, the LPR has been on decline since the recession began, and it made another significant move downward to just 63.7 percent in January. That is the lowest since Carter era recession year of 1981.
The declining LPR is a clear indication that more Americans continue to give up on even finding employment as the failed economic policies of Barack Obama infect the market place with anxiety and uncertainty. A higher LPR indicates more people bringing home a paycheck and greater economic output. Until there is a sustained turnaround in the LPR, any talk of “recovery” is premature.
Labor Participation Rate
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
-
DAVID STOCKMAN: It's True, The BLS Data Is Made Up
Gus Lubin | 23 minutes ago | 595 | 2
After countless attempts to discredit or defend Friday's jobs report, we can all agree on one thing: The data is complicated. So complicated that the BLS could make the economy look better than it was and no one would be sure.
Former Reagan budget director David Stockman said as much in an email to Bruce Krasting, in response to Krasting's criticism of the jobs report.
Stockman writes: "If you spend a little time with these numbers you will know that they are being made up."
Here's the email (via Wall Street Examiner):
Bruce– Great job on the Summers catch, but I’m wondering if this goes much deeper. I don’t particularly believe in tin foil hats, but all of these mainstream economists treat the BLS and BEA data like it’s holy writ—when it’s evident that the reports are so massaged, estimated, deemed, revised, re-bench marked and seasonally adjusted that any month-to-month change has a decent chance of being noise. What deep secret might they be hiding?
So on the labor force participation rate they say, “No it didn’t go down in January because the 2012 numbers are re-bench marked for the 2010 census,” but for some reason the BLS didn’t bother to update the 2011 civilian population numbers, including December. Thus, the BLS published apples-to-oranges numbers on this particular variable and the footnote says the December participation rate would have been the same as January, if they had revised it!
Yet on another variable— the establishment survey jobs count—they were also busy re-benchmarking–but here they did update the originally reported numbers for every month of 2011. Even then, it is hard to say what got updated because the originally reported numbers each month are then revised during the next two reporting months—with any excess or shortfall reallocated to earlier months outside the three month window, which are not published on a revised basis, even though they have been revised! This reflects a wacko thing called the concurrent seasonal adjustment method.
Anyway, like Summers did in his TV riff, you can always pick and choose a half dozen noise points in every monthly report to support your favored trend. But obviously, your point is that the longer-term trend of the labor force participation rate is really bad, and this truth is absolutely validated by the January report. Except it would have been equally bad in December had it been reported with the new census data. As Gartman says, the trend is from the “upper left to the lower right”, and it’s heading off the page.
But the mainstream narrative never gets to the trend. In this case, the plain fact is that we are warehousing a larger and larger population of adults who are one way or another living off transfer payments, relatives, sub-prime credit, and the black market. My suspicion is that this negative trend and many others like it get buried by the monthly change chatter from mainstream economists and on bubble vision, and that these monthly deltas are so heavily manipulated as to be almost a made-up reality. Call it the economists’ Truman Show.
The attached series for the “raw” or unadjusted establishment survey employment change for January goes back to the 1980s and makes me wonder. Since 2000, the January job loss against a December payroll of between 130 and 135 million has varied within a tiny range of about 150,000. Other than January 2009 when the economy was being smacked by the post-Lehman melt-down in the financial markets, this means that the unadjusted January payroll count declined within a super-tight range of 2.00% to 2.20% of the December payroll.
Really? Granted the U.S. economy is a regular fellow, but how could there be such astounding uniformity every January, year after year in the raw numbers, as in the following sequence for January 2001 thru January 2012, respectively: 2.16%, 2.19%, 2.05%, 2.03%, 2,03%, 1.96%, 2.03% 2.19%, 2.73% (2009 outlier), 2.20%, 2.18% and 2.02%.
After all, you have weather aberrations, huge fluctuations in year to year economic conditions, the weak, random nature of the establishment survey, the constant fiddling with the birth-death adjustment which is carried in the raw numbers, the Christmas shopping season variation from red hot-to-punk across the years, the timing of the survey week and much more. And the dice always lands on almost exactly a 2.03% change from December. Right.
This is meant to be a long-winded encouragement to you to apply your patented numbers forensic skills to the monthly BLS reports or any of the other market movers. In the last 7 years, for example, the Christmas shopping season has been all over the lot and presumably, retail hiring, too. But the unadjusted retail jobs reduction in January vs. December has not varied by much more than 150,000 from a base count of 15 million. That’s a 1% variation, notwithstanding the huge shopping season differences they report on bubble vision.
In short, if you spend a little time with these numbers you will know that they are being made up. Funny thing that I remember during the depths of the 1982 recession Reagan read in Human Events one night that the seasonally adjusted numbers were being manipulated and one should look at the unadjusted numbers, instead. The next morning during an economic update briefing Reagan said, he wanted to talk about the ”unadjusted” unemployment rate. Marty Feldstein turned white as a ghost, and then talked him out of it. Hmmm!
Please follow Money Game on Twitter and Facebook.
Follow Gus Lubin on Twitter.
Ask Gus A Question >
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/david-stockman-its-true-the-bls-data-is-made-up-2012-2#ixzz1lhwSuDd0
-
Illusion Of Economic Recovery - Feelings And Facts
Tmo ^ | 2-7-2011 | James Quinn
Illusion Of Economic Recovery - Feelings And Facts
Economics / US Economy
Feb 07, 2012 - 07:17 AM
By: James Quinn
"There is no means of avoiding a final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as the final and total catastrophe of the currency involved." - Ludwig von Mises
The last week has offered an amusing display of the difference between the cheerleading corporate mainstream media, lying Wall Street shills and the critical thinking analysts like Zero Hedge, Mike Shedlock, Jesse, and John Hussman. What passes for journalism at CNBC and the rest of the mainstream print and TV media is beyond laughable. Their America is all about feelings. Are we confident? Are we bullish? Are we optimistic about the future? America has turned into a giant confidence game.
The governing elite spend their time spinning stories about recovery and manipulating public opinion so people will feel good and spend money. Facts are inconvenient to their storyline. The truth is for suckers. They know what is best for us and will tell us what to do and when to do it.
The false storyline last week was the dramatic surge in new jobs. This fantastic news was utilized by the six banks that account for 80% of the stock market trading to propel the NASDAQ to an eleven year high and the Dow Jones to a four year high. The compliant corporate press did their part with blaring headlines of good cheer.
The entire sham was designed to make Joe the Plumber pull out one of his 15 credit cards and buy a new 72 inch 3D HDTV for this weekend's Super Bowl. When you watch a CNBC talking head interviewing a Wall Street shyster realize you have the 1% interviewing the .01% about how great things are.
What you most certainly did not hear from the MSM is that the NASDAQ is still down 42% from its 2000 high of 5,048. None of the brain dead twits on CNBC pointed out the S&P 500 is trading at the exact same level it reached on April 8, 1999. Twelve or thirteen years of zero or negative returns are meaningless when a story needs to be sold.
On Friday the hyperbole utilized by the media mouthpieces was off the charts, leading to an all-out brawl between the critical thinking blogosphere and the non-thinking "professionals" spouting the government sanctioned propaganda.
Accusations flew back and forth about who was misinterpreting the data. I found it hysterical that anyone would debate the accuracy of BLS (Bureau of Lies & Swindles) data.
The drones at this government propaganda agency relentlessly massage the data until they achieve a happy ending. They use a birth/death model to create jobs out of thin air, later adjusting those phantom jobs away in a press release on a Friday night. They create new categories of Americans to pretend they aren't really unemployed. They use more models to make adjustments for seasonality. Then they make massive one-time adjustments for the Census.
Essentially, you can conclude that anything the BLS reports on a monthly basis is a wild ass guess, massaged to present the most optimistic view of the world. The government preferred unemployment rate of 8.3% is a terrible joke and the MSM dutifully spouts this drivel to a zombie-like public. If the governing elite were to report the truth, the public would realize we are in the midst of a 2nd Great Depression.
The unemployment rate during the Great Depression reached 25%. Without the BLS "adjustments" the real unemployment rate in this country is 23%. Cheerleading and packaging the data in a way to mislead the public does not change the facts:
There are 242 million working age Americans. Only 142 million Americans are working. For the math challenged, such as CNBC analysts, that means 100 million working age Americans (41.5%) are not working. But don't worry, the BLS says the unemployment rate is only 8.3%. Things are going so swimmingly well in this country the other 33.2% are kicking back enjoying the good life.
The labor force participation rate and employment to population ratio are at 30 year lows. The number of Americans supposedly not in the labor force is at an all-time record of 87.9 million. A corporate MSM pundit like Steve Liesman would explain this away as the Baby Boomers beginning to retire. Great storyline, but the facts prove that old timers are so desperate for cash they have dramatically increased their participation in the labor market.
The data being dished out by the government on a daily basis does not pass the smell test. The working age population since 2000 has grown by 30 million people. The number of people working has grown by only 4.7 million. A critical thinker would conclude the unemployment rate should be dramatically higher than the reported 8.3%. But the government falsely reports the labor force has only increased by 11.8 million in the last eleven years.
They have the gall to report that 17.9 million Americans just decided to leave the workforce. The economy was booming in 2000. It sucks today. Don't more people need jobs when times are tougher? The Boomers retiring storyline has already proven to be false. The fact that 46 million (15% of total population) people are on food stamps is a testament to the BLS lie. A look at history proves how badly the current figures reek to high heaven:
* 2000 to 2011 - Not in Labor Force increased by 17.9 million.
* 1990's - Not in Labor Force increased by 5 million.
* 1980's - Not in Labor Force increased by 1.7 million.
The Not in the Labor Force category is utilized to hide how bad the employment situation in this country really is. They conclude that 17 million out of 38 million Americans between the ages of 16 and 24 are not in the labor force. That is complete bullshit. From the time I turned 16, I worked. Everyone I knew worked. I worked through high school and college.
It is a lie that 45% of these people don't want a job. If you dig into their data, you realize the horrific state of employment in this country:
* 74% of 16 to 19 year olds are not employed
* 85% of black 16 to 19 year olds are not employed
* 31% of black 25 to 54 year old men are not employed
* 40% of 20 to 24 year olds are not employed
* 22% of 25 to 29 year old males are not employed
* 22% of 50 to 54 year old males are not employed
* According to the BLS, 11% of men between 25 and 54 are not in the labor force
Not only is real unemployment at Depressionary levels, but those that do have jobs are falling further and further behind. Wages have gone up less than 2% in the last year and have been rising at an annual rate below 3% for the last four years.
According to our friends at the BLS, inflation has risen 3% in the last year. This is almost as ludicrous as their unemployment rate. Anyone living in the real world, as opposed to the BLS model world, knows that inflation on the things we need to live has been rising in excess of 10%. It is a fact that if you measure CPI exactly as it was measured in 1980, at the outset of our great debt inflation, it exceeds 10% versus the fake 3% reported without question by the MSM to a non-thinking public.
A poor schmuck making the median salary of $25,000 who gets a 2% raise thinks he has $500 more to spend when in reality he has lost $2,000 of purchasing power. Federal Reserve created inflation is an insidious hidden tax that destroys the 99%, while enriching the 1%.
Until Debt Do Us Part
“Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results.” - Albert Einstein
The recovery storyline being touted by the oligarchy of politicians, bankers and media is designed to make consumers feel better. This is a key part of their master plan. Any honest assessment of the financial disaster that struck in 2008 would conclude it was caused by too much debt peddled to too many people incapable of paying it back, too few banks having too much power, the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates too low for too long, and that same Federal Reserve doing too little regulating of the Too Big To Fail Wall Street mega-banks.
I wonder what Albert Einstein would think about the "solutions" rolled out to fix our debt problem. Would he find it insane that total credit market debt has actually risen to an all-time high of $53.8 trillion, up $533 billion from the previous 2008 peak? Our leaders have added $6.1 trillion to our National Debt in the last four years, a mere 66% increase. This unprecedented level of borrowing certainly did not benefit the American people, as real GDP has risen by $96 billion, or 0.7%, over the last four years.
Would Einstein find it insane that the governing elite would encourage the 4 biggest banks, that were the main culprits in creating a worldwide financial collapse, to actually get bigger. The largest banks in the U.S. now control 72% of all the deposits in the country versus 68.5% in 2008.
The Too Big To Fail are now Too Bigger To Fail. Rather than liquidating the bad debts, breaking up the insolvent banks, selling off the good assets to well-run banks, firing the executives, and wiping out the shareholders & bondholders foolish enough to invest in these badly run casinos, the powers that be chose to protect their fellow .01% brethren and throw the 99% under the bus.
Ben Bernanke, in conjunction with Tim Geithner and his masters on Wall Street, implemented a zero interest rate policy designed to enrich the Wall Street banks, force investors into the stock market, and encourage Americans to borrow and spend like it was 2005 again. Rather than accepting that our economy has been warped for decades, with over-consumption utilizing debt as the driving force, and allowing a reset, the Federal Reserve insanely encouraging banks and consumers to do the same thing again.
We do know Bernanke has stolen $450 billion of interest income going to savers and senior citizens and handed it to Jamie Dimon, Vikrim Pandit, Lloyd Blankfein and the rest of the Wall Street cabal.
The "austerity is bad" storyline is pounded home on a daily basis by the politicians, corporate chieftains, Wall Street billionaires, and MSM pundits. The definition of austere is "practicing great self-denial". Did you see the mob scenes on Black Friday? Americans are incapable of any self-denial, let alone great self-denial, and the masters of our country will not allow it to happen. One look at our GDP figures confirms the non-austerity occurring in this country.
In 2007, prior to the collapse, consumer spending accounted for 69.7% of GDP. Today, consumer spending accounts for 71% of GDP, with investment accounting for 12.7% of GDP. In the good old days of 1979 prior to the epic debt bubble, when the financial industry do not run this country, consumer spending accounted for 62% of GDP and investment accounted for 19% of GDP. What an insane concept.
You spend less than you make and save the difference. You then invest that money where you can get a reasonable return (.15% in a money market account is not exactly reasonable).
As Ludwig von Mises pointed out, a false boom created by credit expansion will ultimately collapse. We had the chance in 2008 - 2009 to voluntarily abandon the Wall Street induced credit expansion and allow our country to reset. The pain and misery would have been great, especially for the 1% who own most of the stocks, bonds and peddle the debt to the ignorant masses.
As you can see in the chart below, the powers that be need debt per employed American to grow at an ever increasing rate to maintain their power and wealth. The miniscule reduction in debt from 2009 to 2011 was unacceptable. The governing powers will not be satisfied until von Mises' final currency catastrophe is achieved.
Bernanke and his Wall Street puppet masters' plan is actually quite simple. It's essentially a confidence game. A confidence game (also known as a con, flim-flam, gaffle, grift, hustle, scam, scheme, or swindle) is an attempt to defraud a group by gaining their confidence. The people who commit such tricks are often known as con men, con artists, or grifters. The con man often works with one or more accomplices called shills, who help manipulate the mark into accepting the con man's plan.
In a traditional confidence game, the mark is led to believe that he will be able to win money or some other prize by doing some task. The accomplices may pretend to be random strangers who have benefited from successfully performing the task. Bernanke and the 1% are the con men. They are attempting to defraud the 99% by convincing them their "solutions" will benefit them.
The shills acting as accomplices are Wall Street bankers, bought off econom
ists, politicians, journalists, and mainstream media pundits. You are the mark. The game has multiple facets but is based on more freely flowing low interest easy debt. The con man has reduced interest rates to zero at the behest of his puppet masters. The Wall Street accomplices offer enticing financing to the marks for big ticket items like automobiles, furniture and electronics. As the marks go further into debt, the Wall Street shills report record earnings ($26 billion from loan loss reserve accounting entries), consumer spending rises and GDP goes higher. The mainstream media accomplices dutifully report an improving economy.
The government accomplices massage the employment and inflation data and declare a jobs recovery with no inflation. The marks are supposed to feel better about the future and spend even more borrowed money. This is what is considered a self-sustaining recovery by the psychopaths running this country.
All you have to do is open your daily paper to see the confidence game in full display. Last week the MSM reported another surge in automobile sales. Our beloved American automobile manufacturers are back baby!!! Automobile sales are now pacing above 14 million on an annual basis. This is up from the depths of the recession in 2009 when the annual rate was below 10 million.
We've breached the Cash For Clunkers level and there is nowhere to go but up. The storyline is that Obama was right to save GM and Chrysler with your tax dollars. They are now making splendid vehicles (except for the exploding Chevy Volts) and employing millions of Americans. This is a true American comeback success story. Clint Eastwood should do a commercial about it.
There is one little problem with this storyline. It's bullshit. Remember GMAC? You bailed them out when all their subprime auto and mortgage loans went bad in 2009. They have a brand new business plan. Change your name to Ally Bank and start making as many subprime auto loans as possible. You will be happy to know that according to Experian, 45% of all auto loans being made today are to subprime borrowers.
What could possibly go wrong? In addition, the average loan term has grown to almost 6 years. Executives at Ally Financial said that subprime car lending had become "very attractive" because profit margins on the loans more than cover the cost of expected losses from borrowers who fail to repay what they owe.
I'm sure they have everything completely under control. Gina Proia, a company spokeswoman, said the company places "greater emphasis on the higher end of the nonprime spectrum" and only lends to people who show they can pay. I can't believe they are restricting their loans to only people who they think can pay. I'm surprised Obama isn't condemning them for such restrictive loan terms.
If you open your paper to the auto section you will see financing offers of $0 down-payment, and 0% interest for 7 years across the board on most models. But why buy, when you can lease a luxury automobile for $300 per month? It is simply amazing how many vehicles you can "sell" when "credit challenged" Americans can rent them for seven years. I wonder if this explains why I see dozens of $40,000 luxury autos parked in front of $25,000 dilapidated hovels during my daily commute through West Philadelphia.
It also seems the Big Three are "selling" a few extra vehicles to their dealers in January as pointed out by Zero Hedge. No need to let a few facts get in the way of a feel good story.
* Ford month-end inventory 86-day supply at end of Jan. (492k vehicles) vs 60-day supply (466k) as of Dec. 31
* Chrysler had 83-day supply (349k units) end of Jan. vs 64-day (326k units) as of Dec. 31
* GM month-end inventory 89-day supply (619k units) vs 67-day supply (583k) Dec. 31
The facts prove the issuance of billions in easy credit is creating the illusion of recovery. Non- revolving (auto & student loans) consumer credit outstanding is now at an all-time high of $1.7 trillion.
Even with billions in bad debt write-offs since 2009 the amount outstanding has risen by $100 billion. Does this sound like austerity is gripping the nation? The Federal government is dishing out student loans like candy, as hundreds of thousands of students get worthless degrees from for-profit diploma mills like the University of Phoenix and its ilk.
By keeping them occupied in school, the government is able to keep them in the Not in the Labor Force category. Not to be outdone, our friends at GE Capital, Wells Fargo and the other too big to fail entities have been doing their part on the revolving credit side of the scam. I've recently been seeing an ad by the largest U.S. furniture retailer, Ashley Furniture, offering 0% interest with no payments for 7 years.
I don't know about you, but my kids destroy a couch in less than 7 years. Wells Fargo Credit doesn't seem too worried. A critical thinker might ask, how can Wells Fargo possibly make money offering these terms? But there is the rub. Ben Bernanke is loaning Wells Fargo money at 0% so they can perpetuate the confidence game. These insane bankers truly believe they can kick start this moribund debt saturated economy by issuing billions more in debt to people incapable of repaying them. Einstein would be amused.
The McKinsey Group put out a report a couple weeks ago analyzing the amount of American household debt and optimistically concluding that it could be back on a sustainable path by 2013. Mike Shedlock pointed out that sustainable is in the eye of the beholder. It seems the bright fellows at McKinsey haven't grasped the concept of regression to the mean.
First of all their analysis is flawed because real disposable personal income is actually declining and Ben Bernanke's master scam is working and Americans are now adding to their household debt. The little blue line has turned upwards since they gathered their data.
Secondly, as Mish so accurately points out, the sustainable level of household debt is really at the levels prior to the debt bubble that began in the early 1980s. That is a debt level of approximately 70% of disposable personal income, as opposed to the current level of 110%.
The implications of household debt levels regressing to their long-term mean would be catastrophic to the 1%. Their kingdom of debt would come crashing down. Their power and wealth would be swept away. This is why it is so vital for them to create the illusion of recovery. Their confidence game is built upon an ever increasing flow of credit expansion. It will not work.
There is no avoiding the final collapse of a boom created solely by credit expansion. Those in power will never voluntarily relinquish their grand game of pillaging the wealth of the nation, so economic collapse will be the ultimate result. They will continue to use propaganda, printing presses, and half-truths to further their agenda. But those who examine the facts will come to a logical conclusion that we are being sold a great lie.
“Half the truth is often a great lie.” – Benjamin Franklin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
didn't make up anything..I cited perfectly good EXAMPLES..not reasons..all of those things I cited are plausible..I am quite sure you yourself have known people who fit into all of those categories
Got it. You gave possible reasons as why the labor participation rate may have dropped outside the economy, did not prove it, and claimed this destroyed the poster you were debating. I think I get it now.
-
Dude..I will try to talk to you in a calm sane manner...whether Fury hates me or not has nothing to do with the price of beans..no one cares about that....the United States employs between 140-150 million people..which historically is the most people we have ever had working give or take a few million...you are right to say that as a PERCENTAGE it is at a historical low..but at the same time we have a larger population....
I never stated the reasons for people possibly being out of work as excuses..I said they were possible REASONS......we will never know for sure unless you and I go door to door and survey all those who dropped out of the workforce.....that was the point I was trying to make...we can't say that those who dropped out of the workforce did so due to not being able to find a job...nor can we say it is because of all the reasons I cited...thats the whole point..the Obama haters are trying to say it is due to Obama's bad handling of the economy that people dropped out of the labor force...HOW DO THEY KNOW THIS FOR SURE???....it is speculation.....just as the reasons I gave are speculation..I don't see you criticizing 3333 or fury for THEIR speculation as well...I WONDER WHY NOT???
Stop calling people names and THINK
Epic failure of comprehension... I SAID IT IS AT AN ABSOULTE LOW, NOT A PERCENTAGE LOW. ::)
We have less people in the workforce today than it was 30 years ago.... LESS ACTUAL WORKERS, despite the population being 1437189x larger. Not less percentage working, less ACTUAL people working.
-
Got it. You gave possible reasons as why the labor participation rate may have dropped outside the economy, did not prove it, and claimed this destroyed the poster you were debating. I think I get it now.
yes exactly smart guy...where do you think all those 1.2 million people went???...whatever guess you make is just as good as mine....thats my whole point
-
yes exactly smart guy...where do you think all those 1.2 million people went???...whatever guess you make is just as good as mine....thats my whole point
They are not working cause there are no jobs!
-
They are not working cause there are no jobs!
okay..and you know this exactly how????....did you go door to door and take a survey???
-
okay..and you know this exactly how????....did you go door to door and take a survey???
LOL! Go look at the rate of applications per job offering!
I swear - you obamabots are so freaking blind to reality its not funny.
-
LOL! Go look at the rate of applications per job offering!
I swear - you obamabots are so freaking blind to reality its not funny.
look whose talking...he whose every post is anti-Obama....wow..Jesus Fuck you're nuts
-
Jesus Christ... Our workforce is at a 30 year low (actual numbers, not percentage) despite a population that is millions bigger, and yet you say stupid shit like this?
Not to mention your bullshit excuses on how people are leaving the workforce because they're all going to school, working under the table or trying to start new business' (2 fucking million in one month)
And you have the balls to tell 333 he's biased and had an agenda, fucking epic Lulz.
No wonder fury has no respect for you, Obama could cut off your balls with a pair of scissors and you'd have a fucking excuse ready why it was such a great thing for him to do.
Remove your head.from your ass or GTFO and take your retarded excuses.with you.
oh brother the participation rate has increased overall in the united states that is the number of people willing to work has increased. Why unemployment is still high is a multifaceted thing, automation clearly has an effect, if you replace human jobs with efficient self automated machines then there are less jobs. The fact that the participation rate is increasing yet the workforce is decreasing or not budging is because there are not enough jobs, or people are taking to much for themselves at the top, cutting out lower middle class.
your understanding of the concepts is so fucked up. How do you explain as rising participation rate in the labor force of the US versus a shrinking workforce?
you are in a recovery from an epic recession, what do you want obama to waive his fucking wand and turn it around, see how that worked out for those in the great depression? wait what helped, war, whats this about iran??????
good luck with thinking they are fucking you so hard. I realize how obama thinks, people are too stupid to run themselves, the majority, i agree in a sense, after witnessing some of the reasoning from people on this board.
imagine if 33 was let loose, this dude believes obama is from a 3rd world country and is purposely ruining the country, yet apparently the valiant GOP are powerless to stop his clear destruction of america. He is trying to fix your fucking stupid problems. This church thing for example, tell them to fuck off. Obey the constitution fucks, why are churchs tax exempt? is it all churchs, scientology gets tax breaks for fucks sakes.
greed ruined your health care, greed ruined wall street, greed is what will turn your country into a shithole. Watch it happen, vote in hypocrites like newt who fuck woman while there wife has cancer and then calls for clinton to be removed for the same things he is doing. That nugget of information should exclude this fucking scumbag from election, but stupid americans fucking eat it up and can't see that the country is being stolen and ripped off by the greedy.
neo-cons will kill you.
-
The makers of the horse and buggy complained about the same bullshit obama and you do.
Automation does not kill jobs.
It results in lower costs to consumers and freeing up capital to start new businesses and endeavors.
-
The makers of the horse and buggy complained about the same bullshit obama and you do.
Automation does not kill jobs.
It results in lower costs to consumers and freeing up capital to start new businesses and endeavors.
are you out of your mind???..you are saying automation DOES NOT KILL JOBS???...this statement is amazing in its utter stupidity....everyone knows this is true....just look at your horse and buggy comment...where are all the horse and buggies today???....when the car was introduced it destroyed the horxe and buggy industry..Automation plus innovation hurts jobs in certain industries,,,does it create jobs in other industries?..yes oftentimes it does.....but sometimes not
-
Understanding Unemployment Statistics
By Chris W. Bell
It may come as a surprise that according to the federal government, an out-of-work person who put in an application at every place in town more than thirty days ago, who scours every available newspaper's want ads every morning, and who visits every job search website on the web with no luck is not counted as unemployed. Indeed, he would not be considered member of the labor force because he is not actively searching for a job.
Each month, the media report unemployment figures for the previous month. Much attention is paid to these figures, and many public and private decisions are based on them. Often terms like public-sector jobs added, labor force participation rate, civilian labor force, and not in the labor force are used. But what bearing do these terms have on the published rate, and how is the rate calculated?
Unemployment figures are calculated by a part of the department of labor called the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The actual data on unemployment is gathered by the Census Bureau. The calculation of unemployment rates using modern concepts dates back to the 1930s, but at that time, there was no standard for how the figures were calculated. The first national survey of unemployment began in 1940 and was called the Monthly Report of Unemployment, which was later renamed the Current Population Survey (CPS), still in use today.
The unemployment rate is calculated not by adding up those who are on unemployment, nor by examining tax records to determine who is not working. On the contrary, the information is gathered from the Current Population Survey (CPS), which interviews a probability sample of 60,000 households that vary by location, vocation, sex, race, etc. The BLS has calculated that this specially selected sample of the population yields results that are close enough to the actual value "as not distort the total employment picture." If 10% of the 60,000 respondents are unemployed, then the BLS will estimate that about 10% of the total workforce is unemployed (with some adjustments, such as seasonal).
Households are surveyed for four consecutive months and then are not surveyed for eight months. They are then surveyed for one additional four-month period. There are new households entering and old households leaving the survey at all times.
The CPS survey does not ask whether or not the person being interviewed is unemployed; it asks a series of questions regarding recent work-related activity, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics later classifies that person's employment status.
The civilian noninstitutional population consists of Americans aged 16 years or more who are not institutionalized and are not inmates. Each American is classified as employed, unemployed, or not in the labor force.
The sum of the employed and unemployed persons is called the civilian labor force. If people who do not have a job are reclassified from unemployed to not in the labor force, the advertised unemployment rate goes down.
The labor force participation rate is the percentage of employable Americans in the civilian labor force. If people are reclassified from unemployed to not in the labor force, the participation rate goes down.
Those who would like to work but have not actively looked for a job in the last four weeks, but have looked within the last year, are called marginally attached to the labor force and are not counted in the unemployment rate.
Those who have given up looking for work because they feel it is futile are called discouraged workers and are not counted in the unemployment rate.
The unemployment rate is the number of unemployed persons as a percent of the civilian labor force.
Employed and unemployed are defined as you would imagine -- by contrast, it is the classification not in the labor force that is not intuitive.
Those who are under 16, institutionalized in some form, students, retired persons, members of the armed forces, or not actively looking for work are not considered participants in the labor force and are not included in the unemployment rate.
A person is not considered actively looking for work unless he has taken direct action to seek employment in the last four weeks. Direct action includes contacting an employer directly through filling out an application, sending a resume, going to interviews, contacting friends or relatives for leads, or using an employment agency of some kind. A person who reads want-ads in the paper or checks online job search sites, even if he does so daily, is passively looking for work and is not counted as unemployed.
Reducing or increasing the number of people who are no longer in the labor force changes the unemployment rate accordingly. If people are reclassified to not in the labor force, the unemployment rate will go down.
In a similar manner, a select number of businesses are surveyed using the Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey. From this data, statistics on wages and occupations are calculated. When you see data about the number of jobs added in the public sector, or the number added in retailing, and so on, the OES is the source.
In the future, when unemployment data is released, look at all of these figures in order to get the understandable information about employment that is hidden in the statistics. The BLS issues a monthly report called "The Employment Situation" that contains all of the employment data.
(References: The BLS Handbook of Methods, Chapters 1 and 3, and How the Government Measures Unemployment)
Chris W. Bell is a freelance writer; he can be reached at chriswb2008@yahoo.com.
Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/02/understanding_unemployment_statistics.html
at February 08, 2012 - 10:18:12 AM CST
-
are you out of your mind???..you are saying automation DOES NOT KILL JOBS???...this statement is amazing in its utter stupidity....everyone knows this is true....just look at your horse and buggy comment...where are all the horse and buggies today???....when the car was introduced it destroyed the horxe and buggy industry..Automation plus innovation hurts jobs in certain industries,,,does it create jobs in other industries?..yes oftentimes it does.....but sometimes not
So? Some businesses need to fail. Do you think the Govt should have bailed out the horse and buggy industry? LMFAO!
If the cotton gin were not created . . . . . .
-
oh brother the participation rate has increased overall in the united states that is the number of people willing to work has increased. Why unemployment is still high is a multifaceted thing, automation clearly has an effect, if you replace human jobs with efficient self automated machines then there are less jobs. The fact that the participation rate is increasing yet the workforce is decreasing or not budging is because there are not enough jobs, or people are taking to much for themselves at the top, cutting out lower middle class.
your understanding of the concepts is so fucked up. How do you explain as rising participation rate in the labor force of the US versus a shrinking workforce?
you are in a recovery from an epic recession, what do you want obama to waive his fucking wand and turn it around, see how that worked out for those in the great depression? wait what helped, war, whats this about iran??????
good luck with thinking they are fucking you so hard. I realize how obama thinks, people are too stupid to run themselves, the majority, i agree in a sense, after witnessing some of the reasoning from people on this board.
imagine if 33 was let loose, this dude believes obama is from a 3rd world country and is purposely ruining the country, yet apparently the valiant GOP are powerless to stop his clear destruction of america. He is trying to fix your fucking stupid problems. This church thing for example, tell them to fuck off. Obey the constitution fucks, why are churchs tax exempt? is it all churchs, scientology gets tax breaks for fucks sakes.
greed ruined your health care, greed ruined wall street, greed is what will turn your country into a shithole. Watch it happen, vote in hypocrites like newt who fuck woman while there wife has cancer and then calls for clinton to be removed for the same things he is doing. That nugget of information should exclude this fucking scumbag from election, but stupid americans fucking eat it up and can't see that the country is being stolen and ripped off by the greedy.
neo-cons will kill you.
Good post...and I agree with you that greed is destroying America....greed is good up to a certain point because its a motivating factor in terms of working hard to succeed...but we are now seeing uncontrolled and unchecked greed where the rich want the whole pie and don't want to pay taxes for anything....oh but the rich do want the government to subsidize them with "incentives"..."tax breaks"...and "subsidies"....and guys like the conservatives on this board don't say anything yet if the gov't gives a guy $100 who is unemployed everyone cries about "welfare"...amazing......
-
Good post...and I agree with you that greed is destroying America....greed is good up to a certain point because its a motivating factor in terms of working hard to succeed...but we are now seeing uncontrolled and unchecked greed where the rich want the whole pie and don't want to pay taxes for anything....oh but the rich do want the government to subsidize them with "incentives"..."tax breaks"...and "subsidies"....and guys like the conservatives on this board don't say anything yet if the gov't gives a guy $100 who is unemployed everyone cries about "welfare"...amazing......
SAME BULLSHIT - DIFFERENT DECADE FROM THE LEFTISTS. WATCH AND LEARN MORON!
-
http://www.businessinsider.com/18-staggering-charts-on-the-rise-of-government-dependence-2012-2
Andre and Necro - please tell he how you can square your claims that the economy is improving with these charts.
-
yes exactly smart guy...where do you think all those 1.2 million people went???...whatever guess you make is just as good as mine....thats my whole point
So it's a guess? How does a guess constitute "destroying" another poster?
-
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-07/bernanke-says-8-3-unemployment-understates-weakness-in-u-s-labor-market.html
Even Bernake is saying the figure is a joke.
-
http://www.boston.com/jobs/news/articles/2012/02/08/more_than_5_million_people_missing_from_the_us_labor_force/?p1=News_links
-
So it's a guess? How does a guess constitute "destroying" another poster?
it destroys another poster by pointing out that their theory about where the 1.2 million people went is a guess as well.....
-
it destroys another poster by pointing out that their theory about where the 1.2 million people went is a guess as well.....
LOL, only in the mind of a shady, shifty, scheming, thug does this economy look good.
-
LOL, only in the mind of a shady, shifty, scheming, thug does this economy look good.
no one said it looked good you dick...its getting better
-
are you out of your mind???..you are saying automation DOES NOT KILL JOBS???...this statement is amazing in its utter stupidity....everyone knows this is true....just look at your horse and buggy comment...where are all the horse and buggies today???....when the car was introduced it destroyed the horxe and buggy industry..Automation plus innovation hurts jobs in certain industries,,,does it create jobs in other industries?..yes oftentimes it does.....but sometimes not
Automation does not kill a NET amount of jobs. In other words, the amount of efficiency that automation creates through lower costs creates way more jobs than it kills. With all due respect Andre, you almost made me fall out of my chair when I read that post.
-
it destroys another poster by pointing out that their theory about where the 1.2 million people went is a guess as well.....
So youre saying that you WILDLY guessing about something based on whatever ideas you can come up with in that sad little head to somehow explain why things arent REALLY as bad as they seem somehow destroys someone guess based on statistics and articles hes read?
Yeah, you fail.
-
So youre saying that you WILDLY guessing about something based on whatever ideas you can come up with in that sad little head to somehow explain why things arent REALLY as bad as they seem somehow destroys someone guess based on statistics and articles hes read?
Yeah, you fail.
what stats did you come up with or did anyone else come up with???...the only stats that anyone came up with is that 1.2 million people left the rolls....the argument is WHERE DID THEY GO???...the conservatives on here were trying to paint a picture of all of these people not being able to find a job due to Obama's economic policies....I disputed that claim pointing out that NOT EVERYONE WHO LEAVES THE WORKFORCE IS ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR A JOB OR WANTS ONE.....
what is it that you don't understand???....I stated that many people who dropped off the rolls could have done so due to pregnancy, marriage, wanting to take a break from working (I have done this), many people take the opportunity to leave the country and travel or vacation, go back to college or a training program, start their own businesses, etc...
its really funny that you readily accept the conservative argument that EVERY SINGLE ONE of those workers left the rolls due to being discouraged about finding a job...I say my reasons could be just as valid
WEIRD........THINK!!!!!! ..again...please go to the sex board where you do not have to hurt your brain by thinking.....masturbate, relax, and take a nap.
-
what stats did you come up with or did anyone else come up with???...the only stats that anyone came up with is that 1.2 million people left the rolls....the argument is WHERE DID THEY GO???...the conservatives on here were trying to paint a picture of all of these people not being able to find a job due to Obama's economic policies....I disputed that claim pointing out that NOT EVERYONE WHO LEAVES THE WORKFORCE IS ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR A JOB OR WANTS ONE.....
what is it that you don't understand???....I stated that many people who dropped off the rolls could have done so due to pregnancy, marriage, wanting to take a break from working (I have done this), many people take the opportunity to leave the country and travel or vacation, go back to college or a training program, start their own businesses, etc...
its really funny that you readily accept the conservative argument that EVERY SINGLE ONE of those workers left the rolls due to being discouraged about finding a job...I say my reasons could be just as valid
WEIRD........THINK!!!!!! ..again...please go to the sex board where you do not have to hurt your brain by thinking.....masturbate, relax, and take a nap.
Don't argue semantics. Nobody said every single one.
Let's frame it a different way - we know the economy has been struggling for some time. Everyone accepts that. So, that being said, what's more plausible - active participation is declining because of people are giving up, or active participation is declining because more people are voluntarily leaving the workforce for the reasons you stated.?
-
Don't argue semantics. Nobody said every single one.
Let's frame it a different way - we know the economy has been struggling for some time. Everyone accepts that. So, that being said, what's more plausible - active participation is declining because of people are giving up, or active participation is declining because more people are voluntarily leaving the workforce for the reasons you stated.?
lol!!!!!
-
lol!!!!!
He's basically saying if a mortar shell hit an outpost, every victim found might not have been killed by the shell, since it's possible a few of them OD'd on heroin right before it hit.
-
Andreisadouche makes 240, blacken and co. look like Nobel laureates.
-
Automation does not kill a NET amount of jobs. In other words, the amount of efficiency that automation creates through lower costs creates way more jobs than it kills. With all due respect Andre, you almost made me fall out of my chair when I read that post.
that is a hypothesis there old man, care to prove it. Logically it isn't even evident. So improving machines that improve efficiency for more machines somehow improves human activity?
what the fuck do you have NET capitalized for lol? what is NET implying that net doesn't. NET doesn't even make fucking sense in the way you used it, for fuck sakes another fucking internet intellect.
NET is meant that improved efficiency may reduce job numbers but increase the amount of benefits people receive from them. Ya, we live in a bubble, where people who create technologies give the same amount to those who operate the machines, what are you a fucking commie to?
-
that is a hypothesis there old man, care to prove it. Logically it isn't even evident. So improving machines that improve efficiency for more machines somehow improves human activity?
what the fuck do you have NET capitalized for lol? what is NET implying that net doesn't. NET doesn't even make fucking sense in the way you used it, for fuck sakes another fucking internet intellect.
NET is meant that improved efficiency may reduce job numbers but increase the amount of benefits people receive from them. Ya, we live in a bubble, where people who create technologies give the same amount to those who operate the machines, what are you a fucking commie to?
Its really common fucking sense bro. Bring back the automobile instead of the horse. See where that will get us. The automobile is probably one of the most wealth producing inventions in history. Gets people to places faster. Allows people to buy more things at once because they dont have to carry them, which increases economies of scale for grocers, which allows them to decrease costs, which gives people more disposable income, which creates more jobs because they spend more. Jobs and prosperity depends on allocating resources efficiently. Automation allows that.
-
Its really common fucking sense bro. Bring back the automobile instead of the horse. See where that will get us. The automobile is probably one of the most wealth producing inventions in history. Gets people to places faster. Allows people to buy more things at once because they dont have to carry them, which increases economies of scale for grocers, which allows them to decrease costs, which gives people more disposable income, which creates more jobs because they spend more. Jobs and prosperity depends on allocating resources efficiently. Automation allows that.
You mean you don't long for the days of paying to feed, house, train, and equip the horses for your transportation?
-
He's basically saying if a mortar shell hit an outpost, every victim found might not have been killed by the shell, since it's possible a few of them OD'd on heroin right before it hit.
what a dick you are..you know what I mean
-
Andreisadouche makes 240, blacken and co. look like Nobel laureates.
different name...same dumbass ::)
-
bump