• 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!

May employment report: Economy adds 175K jobs

a351

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
May employment report: Economy adds 175K jobs - CBS News

The U.S. economy added 175,000 jobs in May, a gain that shows employers are hiring at a still-modest but steady pace.

The Labor Department said Friday that the unemployment rate rose to 7.6 percent from 7.5 percent in April. The increase occurred because more people began looking for work, a healthy sign. About three-quarters found jobs. The rest added to the ranks of the unemployed.

The government revised the job figures for the previous two months. April's gains were lowered to 149,000 from 165,000. March's figure was increased slightly to 142,000 from 138,000. The net loss was 12,000 jobs.

Employers have added an average of 155,000 jobs in past three months, below the average of 237,000 created from November through February.
Click to expand...

A modest figure, but one that exceeded expectations by a slight amount. Also important to note is the loss of 14,000 positions at the federal level, reflecting budget cuts, and a sizable decline in manufacturing employment (8k). The full and official report can be found here:

Employment Situation Summary
 
Last edited:
So unemployment went up but we like headlines that will make people believe it went down???
 
Fisher said:
So unemployment went up but we like headlines that will make people believe it went down???
Click to expand...
First Google result from an applicable news source bud. I'll do you a solid and bold the portion of my quote that specifically references the uptick in the rate though.
 
a351 said:
First Google result from an applicable news source bud. I'll do you a solid and bold the portion of my quote that specifically references the uptick in the rate though.
Click to expand...

Where do you think I got the info from? I just find CBS's headline misleading.
 
As long as MacDonalds and Walmart stay in business, there will be excellent jobs for everyone. This is a good illustration of why we need a minimum wage or manufacturing would have added quite a few $2 an hour jobs.
 
CalGun said:
Are you suggesting "bias" in a jobs report?
September jobs report: Unemployment rate tumbles - Oct. 5, 2012

Say it aint so? This was under 30 days prior to the election of course and someone "needed" it pretty bad to keep his job.
Click to expand...

Well the jobs report has always been a bit of a snapshot through a filtered lens with blinders in place, but I am more pointing out CBS's headline on the piece, while factually accurate, will lead people to the wrong conclusion if they do not pay much attention to the details.
 
a351 said:
Absurd. If Presidents could influence employment figures with such ease, one would think the unemployment rate would reside at a significantly lower rate.
Click to expand...

Dept of Labor is becoming a laughingstock.
 
pinqy said:
The headline was about new jobs, not unemployment
Click to expand...

While millions lose their jobs, we create 175,000. WOW, let's party. :roll:
 
Amserican said:
Dept of Labor is becoming a laughingstock.
Click to expand...
Among conspiratorial crackpots perhaps. No evidence exists that suggests political gamesmanship or a shift in practices in accordance with Administration changes.
 
American said:
While millions lose their jobs, we create 175,000. WOW, let's party. :roll:
Click to expand...
There aren't job losses in the millions or losses at all for that matter. The headline figure is in net form.
 
American said:
Dept of Labor is becoming a laughingstock.
Click to expand...

And nobody has ever shown any evidence of any manipulation of the economic data. people like to talk out of their ads like there is, but somehow c a n't show any evidence, let alone proof. And since 99% of the complaints I've heard show gross ignorance of how the data is calculated, the laughingstock among economists are the rabid BLS detractors.
 
Might you take a look at the 2011 presentations and say that again with a straight face? Please show me where the Dept. of Labor decided it was time for such adjustments at the same time the previous year? Or maybe a year or so before that? Its not like I am accusing a government agency of looking out for obama - they wouldn't do that - would they? Oh well maybe they would.


a351 said:
Absurd. If Presidents could influence employment figures with such ease, one would think the unemployment rate would reside at a significantly lower rate.
Click to expand...
 
CalGun said:
Might you take a look at the 2011 presentations and say that again with a straight face? Please show me where the Dept. of Labor decided it was time for such adjustments at the same time the previous year? Or maybe a year or so before that? Its not like I am accusing a government agency of looking out for obama - they wouldn't do that - would they? Oh well maybe they would.
Click to expand...
If you'd like to treat seasonal adjustments as a shadowy plot that's on you man. It should be noted however, that the unadjusted unemployment rate is three tenth's lower than the published rate.
 
CalGun said:
Might you take a look at the 2011 presentations and say that again with a straight face? Please show me where the Dept. of Labor decided it was time for such adjustments at the same time the previous year? Or maybe a year or so before that? Its not like I am accusing a government agency of looking out for obama - they wouldn't do that - would they? Oh well maybe they would.
Click to expand...
There were no special adjustments before the election. What exactly are you referring to?
 
Yes there was click on the link provided. Your assertion is false. There was no adjustment the year before. It was "sprung" upon us in October of 2012 - shocking - and its claim was a 3/10ths of a point drop just before the election.


pinqy said:
There were no special adjustments before the election. What exactly are you referring to?
Click to expand...
 
I always find it amusing how upset Republicans always seem to get when the jobs report comes out with more jobs added to the economy. They hate the idea of more people going back to work, I suppose.
 
CalGun said:
Yes there was click on the link provided. Your assertion is false. There was no adjustment the year before. It was "sprung" upon us in October of 2012 - shocking - and its claim was a 3/10ths of a point drop just before the election.
Click to expand...
Employment reports are accompanied by a revised, more accurate assessment of the prior two months worth of data. The March and April figures, for example, were revised downward in this instance:

Employment Situation Summary

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for March was revised from +138,000 to
+142,000, and the change for April was revised from +165,000 to +149,000. With these
revisions, employment gains in March and April combined were 12,000 less than previously
reported.
Click to expand...

What you've pointed to here as political influence and conspiratorial is in fact a monthly occurrence, which speaks to Pinqy's claim that most who cry conspiracy don't have the first clue as to what they're talking about.
 
Another month of the Obama malaise. Five freakin' years in, and the left still can't admit that these job numbers and high unemployment are a complete failure by this administration. FIVE YEARS!!! As I've said all along, he is not interested in job creation, he is interested in big government. And his main concern now is not the crappy job creation, but the loss of government jobs. Forget what he says, it's his actions that count. And it's five years of government growth, and screw the people.
 
Anthony60 said:
Another month of the Obama malaise. Five freakin' years in
Click to expand...
Uhh, it has not been five years, you need to check your math again. 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013.

and the left still can't admit that these job numbers and high unemployment are a complete failure by this administration.
Click to expand...
The unemployment rate hit its peak at 10.0 and is now at 7.6. We have gained 6.3 million jobs since 2010.

Just what exactly is the left supposed to be admitting?

FIVE YEARS!!!
Click to expand...
Not even four and a half.

As I've said all along, he is not interested in job creation, he is interested in big government.
Click to expand...
An amusing quote, considering government continually is cutting jobs and the private sector is continually creating them...almost 7 million private sector jobs created.

Like I've said all along, you don't seem to have very good facts.

And his main concern now is not the crappy job creation, but the loss of government jobs.
Click to expand...
Uhh...so Obama is interested in big government, but is cutting government jobs. This makes sense to you?

Forget what he says, it's his actions that count.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I'll take 6.3 million jobs created in 3 and a half years.
 
It's a good thing that Obama hasn't succeeded in shutting down land drilling, too, because it was North Dakota that lead the way in job creation.
 
CalGun said:
Yes there was click on the link provided. Your assertion is false. There was no adjustment the year before. It was "sprung" upon us in October of 2012 - shocking - and its claim was a 3/10ths of a point drop just before the election.
Click to expand...
The only mention of any adjustments made was seasonal adjustments which are made every month. And looking at the unadjusted rates, the unadjusted rate went from 8.2 to 7.6, while the adjusted rate went from 8.1 to 7.8

Are you really going to claim the rate was deliberately manipulated to be lower and with a smaller change? check the data yourself:
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
And for Aug-Sep 2011, the unadjusted rate went from 9.1 to 8.8 while the adjusted rate stayed flat at 9%

So where are you getting the idea of a special adjustment?
 
Of course 'new jobs' were created... tourist season is upon us..... :wink:

And they'll go away come mid-August......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom