Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 90

Thread: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    The Jobs Committee is hard at work. I hear they are meeting regularly discussing how to simulate industry and economic growth.
    Obama uses secure White House bunker to fight Obamacare battle

  2. #32
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    Undoubtedly a sub-par report, but you're plainly incorrect in your wording. The 866k figure you cite is the cumulative number of those discouraged from seeking employment due to labor market conditions, not a month over month increase.



    Employment Situation Summary
    Discouraged workers is cumulative, it is a monthly number and discouraged workers aren't counted in the unemployment calculation that is reported but is in the U-6 number.

  3. #33
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Discouraged workers is cumulative, it is a monthly number and discouraged workers aren't counted in the unemployment calculation that is reported but is in the U-6 number.
    The changes are reported upon monthly. The 866k figure is culmulative, not a monthly gain as you claim.

  4. #34
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    The changes are reported upon monthly. The 866k figure is culmulative, not a monthly gain as you claim.
    Better tell that to BLS because they disagree with you.

  5. #35
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Better tell that to BLS because they disagree with you.
    No they do not. Under the subsection of Marginally attached individuals, you'll find the total amount of those not in the work force due to poor job prospects is 866,000, up slightly from 844,000 at the same time last year, hence the BLS terming of the year over year difference as "virtually unchanged".

    http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.pdf

  6. #36
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Better tell that to BLS because they disagree with you.
    Last time I argued this with you, I was a BLS employee, so you're wrong. The monthly number of discouraged, like all other figures published that don't explicitly say "change" is the total number.
    Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
    And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
    I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.

  7. #37
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    No they do not. Under the subsection of Marginally attached individuals, you'll find the total amount of those not in the work force due to poor job prospects is 866,000, up slightly from 844,000 at the same time last year, hence the BLS terming of the year over year difference as "virtually unchanged".

    http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.pdf
    I had this same argument with another poster here and believed as you did so I wrote BLS and got an answer stating that discouraged workers were a monthly report. Year over year means the same month last year as this year. Not one month did GW Bush ever have over 800k in discouraged workers and there were many months when Obama had over a million. Those people aren't counted as unemployed and the more discouraged workers the better the unemployment percentage is going to be.

  8. #38
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    Last time I argued this with you, I was a BLS employee, so you're wrong. The monthly number of discouraged, like all other figures published that don't explicitly say "change" is the total number.
    Does it really make a difference? The number is too high, the number isn't counted in the official unemployment rate, and never did GW Bush have any numbers as high as Obama.

  9. #39
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I had this same argument with another poster here and believed as you did so I wrote BLS and got an answer stating that discouraged workers were a monthly report. Year over year means the same month last year as this year. Not one month did GW Bush ever have over 800k in discouraged workers and there were many months when Obama had over a million. Those people aren't counted as unemployed and the more discouraged workers the better the unemployment percentage is going to be.
    Yes, it is a monthly report...that doesn't mean the number of new discouraged. People can, and will be, discouraged for months. Look at the numbers: A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex. see how they add up? It would make no sense if that were new discouraged.
    Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
    And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
    I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.

  10. #40
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

    Re: U.S. Employers Add 169k jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    Yes, it is a monthly report...that doesn't mean the number of new discouraged. People can, and will be, discouraged for months. Look at the numbers: A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex. see how they add up? It would make no sense if that were new discouraged.
    That was never the point, of course some people remain discouraged for months which is why it isn't a cumulative number, it is a monthly number and last month it was over 800k and is ignored when talking about Obama performance.

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •