• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Payrolls Gain More-Than-Expected 200,000; Jobless Rate Falls to 8.5%

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,862
Reaction score
10,300
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From Bloomberg.com:

U.S. employers added more workers to payrolls than forecast in December and the jobless rate declined to an almost three-year low, showing that the labor market gained momentum heading into 2012.
The 200,000 increase last month followed a revised 100,000 gain in November that was smaller than initially estimated, Labor Department figures showed in Washington. The median projection in a Bloomberg News survey called for a December gain of 155,000. The unemployment rate unexpectedly fell to 8.5 percent, the lowest since February 2009, while hours worked and earnings climbed.

U.S. Unemployment Falls to 8.5% as Jobs Gain - Bloomberg

The complete report can be found at: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_01062012.pdf

This report is the latest evidence that the economy is gaining a little strength. Should these trends persist, they will have implications for the 2012 Presidential election, increasing prospects for the President's re-election.
 
Good news. Probably still somewhat of a holiday effect, like last year, but good news.
 
Available workforce population increased by 143k, active available to work decreased by 50k, employed increased by 175k, unemployed decreased by 250k, and 194k left the workforce.
 
this bodes well for the "unexpected" drinking game.

:lol:
 
Available workforce population increased by 143k, active available to work decreased by 50k, employed increased by 175k, unemployed decreased by 250k, and 194k left the workforce.


hmmm. I am a simply guy so let's see if I have this straight....Last report we heard that some 300K dropped out of the work force, this report shows an additional 200K dropped out, and over the two we added about 300K jobs...Now I am no math wizzard but...

500,000 dropped out
- 300,000 jobs added
_________
200,000 Net Loss


Looks like some real funny business is going on here.


j-mac
 
hmmm. I am a simply guy so let's see if I have this straight....Last report we heard that some 300K dropped out of the work force, this report shows an additional 200K dropped out, and over the two we added about 300K jobs...Now I am no math wizzard but...

500,000 dropped out
- 300,000 jobs added
_________
200,000 Net Loss


Looks like some real funny business is going on here.


j-mac

If there was a net loss in jobs, why did the unemployment rate fall? In other words how can less people be employed if there are less jobs in the economy?
 
If there was a net loss in jobs, why did the unemployment rate fall? In other words how can less people be employed if there are less jobs in the economy?


See, that's the fishy thing here...You tell me how it is a jobs gain when 500K people drop out of the numbers counted and you only add 300K jobs?


j-mac
 
See, that's the fishy thing here...You tell me how it is a jobs gain when 500K people drop out of the numbers counted and you only add 300K jobs?


j-mac

The number of people that stopped looking for work outnumbered those that started looking for more work. The "new jobs", the net gains mainly reported, are being being offset directly by new job entrants( population expansion ) and those that gave up looking for work returning to look. Because of these factors, the unemployment level dropped.

Please note, they changed the calculation again with this report. The last 4 years of unemployment numbers have actually been adjusted up.

And, they will be making a further modifications that will affect numbers going forward.
 
Aren't the people who leave the workforce calculated into the figure of jobs added? I thought that itself was the net figure.

It's the people who stop looking for work that aren't calculated into into the unemployment figures.
 
If there was a net loss in jobs, why did the unemployment rate fall? In other words how can less people be employed if there are less jobs in the economy?

Dropped out of the work force means that they aren't looking for jobs. Someone who is retired, or in college, for example, is not unemployed.
 
See, that's the fishy thing here...You tell me how it is a jobs gain when 500K people drop out of the numbers counted and you only add 300K jobs?


j-mac

You are absolutely correct, this has to be put into context and have to look at the total picture. It is rather frustrating to see victory laps being taken by someone who is implementing policy totally contradictory to the foundation upon which this country was built and to see numbers skewed because of accounting practices.

We have a growing population and a declining labor force, how is that positive?
We have people dropping off the unemployment roles because theya re discouraged, how is that positive?
We have almost 24 million unemployed/under employed Americans, how is that positive?
We have more unemployed today than when Obama took office by over a million, how is that positive when the debt has increased by 4.5 trillion dollars?

Liberals are going to take the December report as a positive as once again they ignore the data that went into that report. Obama supporters will read the headlines and ignore the total story.
 
You are absolutely correct, this has to be put into context and have to look at the total picture. It is rather frustrating to see victory laps being taken by someone who is implementing policy totally contradictory to the foundation upon which this country was built and to see numbers skewed because of accounting practices.

We have a growing population and a declining labor force, how is that positive?
We have people dropping off the unemployment roles because theya re discouraged, how is that positive?
We have almost 24 million unemployed/under employed Americans, how is that positive?
We have more unemployed today than when Obama took office by over a million, how is that positive when the debt has increased by 4.5 trillion dollars?

Liberals are going to take the December report as a positive as once again they ignore the data that went into that report. Obama supporters will read the headlines and ignore the total story.

No good news goes unpunished, eh Con? :lol:
 
The number of people that stopped looking for work outnumbered those that started looking for more work. The "new jobs", the net gains mainly reported, are being being offset directly by new job entrants( population expansion ) and those that gave up looking for work returning to look. Because of these factors, the unemployment level dropped.

Please note, they changed the calculation again with this report. The last 4 years of unemployment numbers have actually been adjusted up.

And, they will be making a further modifications that will affect numbers going forward.


So, I am correct in feeling that these numbers are pure trash, and mean nothing.

j-mac
 
See, that's the fishy thing here...You tell me how it is a jobs gain when 500K people drop out of the numbers counted and you only add 300K jobs?

I'm guess the article already factors it in as a net loss/gain, rather than giving the reader the gross gains/losses without identifying them as such. Otherwise if there was a net loss, the unemployment rate would have risen. Unemployment obviously fell according to the article so therefore one would assume that meant jobs were added rather than lost. So either your math is wrong, because what you assume is a gross change is actually a net change, or the article is lying?
 
Dropped out of the work force means that they aren't looking for jobs. Someone who is retired, or in college, for example, is not unemployed.

So, 500K people retired or enrolled in collage in the last two months? Bull!


j-mac
 
For those who are interested, the methodology behind the two surveys utilized in the Employment Situation Report can be found at: http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ces_cps_trends.pdf

What should be noted is that since 1994 Discouraged workers have not been counted as unemployed in the official unemployment number whereas prior discouraged workers were. In addition a reduction in the labor force should be of concern to everyone especially with a growing population.
 
Distorted facts, always distorted facts from this Administration...never a mention of those who fell waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off the chart because unemployment ran out. Typical.
 
Distorted facts, always distorted facts from this Administration...never a mention of those who fell waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off the chart because unemployment ran out. Typical.

Discouraged workers in thousands by month, 945,000 discouraged workers in the Month of December dropped off the unemployment roles because of unemployment running out or they just stopped looking for a job


2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642
2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929
2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219 1282 1318
2011 993 1020 921 989 822 982 1119 977 1037 967 1096 945
 
So, 500K people retired or enrolled in collage in the last two months? Bull!


j-mac

No, that's not what I said. A lot of people retired, and a lot of people started attending college or trade school. And a lot of people also decided that it was too much work to look for work.
 
Distorted facts, always distorted facts from this Administration...never a mention of those who fell waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off the chart because unemployment ran out. Typical.
Is there something this administration is doing other administrations have not done in regards to recording unemployment?
 
While an improving unemployment number is always a great talking point for an incumbent President, I think presidential popularity is much more dependent on an overall improving employment picture. Voters aren't encouraged by seeing a statistic on the news improve, they are encouraged when they are gainfully employed and able to earn a sufficient income to provide for their families.

That said, recent numbers do show a positive shift in trend. Remember that using the same shrinking denominator just months ago, the unemployment number was increasing. Payroll data and jobless claims numbers are showing gains instead of losses.
 
Is there something this administration is doing other administrations have not done in regards to recording unemployment?

Prior to 1994 discouraged workers were counted as officially unemployed but changed and since then it has been that way. Discouraged workers are unemployed so when a discouraged worker is eliminated from the unemployment count that improves the percentage. Here are the discouraged workers since 2008 in thousands

Discouraged workers
2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642
2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929
2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219 1282 1318
2011 993 1020 921 989 822 982 1119 977 1037 967 1096 945
 
Back
Top Bottom