Page 10 of 19 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 189

Thread: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

  1. #91
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,374

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by BringIt View Post
    The author of this article does NOT make any such claim. It appears that you are trying to obfuscate the premise through distraction.
    Oh? How do you interpret his claim that the only "hard numbers" are jobs and the population and that manipulating the participation rate changes the number of unemployed?

    Wrong! Your summation is incomplete and thus invalid.
    It was summarized, but nothing was inaccurate. Which you know, or you would have pointed it out.

    So much so that it could be considered intentional misinformation strategically presented to to discredit the author of the article.
    And yet you don't point out any misinformation.

    IN REALITY, please refer to the indisputable facts found at: US Department of Labor> Bureau of Labor Statistics> Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey> How the Government Measures Unemployment [http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm]

    In short this document validates author DANIEL AMERMAN CFA and all the information provided in his article dated 13 March 2012.
    How? His claim was that BLS could change the participation rate and "vanish" numbers of the unemployed. There's nothing in the BLS brief that validates this.

    A quick review of this official document will show that you have conveniently disregarded an important sector of the population.
    Because they're not part of the calcualtions for the unemployment rate, and therefore not relevant for the specific comments I was making.

    Who is not in the labor force? [http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm]

    As mentioned previously, the labor force is made up of the employed and the unemployed. The remainder—those who have no job and are not looking for one—are counted as not in the labor force. Since the mid-1990s, typically fewer than 1 in 10 people not in the labor force reported that they want a job.

    A series of questions is asked each month of persons not in the labor force to obtain information about their desire for work, the reasons why they had not looked for work in the last 4 weeks, their prior job search, and their availability for work. These questions include the following (the bolded words are emphasized when read by the interviewers).
    These questions form the basis for estimating the number of people who are not in the labor force but who are considered to be marginally attached to the labor force. These are individuals without jobs who are not currently looking for work (and therefore are not counted as unemployed), but who nevertheless have demonstrated some degree of labor force attachment.

    Specifically, to be counted as marginally attached to the labor force, they must indicate that they currently want a job, have looked for work in the last 12 months (or since they last worked if they worked within the last 12 months), and are available for work.

    Discouraged workers are a subset of the marginally attached. Discouraged workers report they are not currently looking for work for one of the following types of reasons:
    How do you think that contradicts what I said? The people respond to the questions and are categorized by set definitions as Employed, Unemployed, (together the Labor Force) and Not in the Labor force. The UE rate is Unemployed/labor force and the labor force participation rate is Labor force / population. The BLS analyst can't arbitrarily assign categories..its' all based on what the people say.
    By adding and then modifying the new Discouraged Workers category, the Administration has used these loose rules to dump millions of truly unemployed off of the roles to improve their visuals.
    How? If someone says they were looking for work, BLS can't just decide to classify him as discouraged. You'll have to walk me through the steps you think happen, because right now, you're not making any sense.
    Ths sample is surveyed. Responses are collected. Individuals are classified by category based on response. Everything is aggregated. Where do you see any "technique" to add or modify anything?

    If, IF, IF your statement is valid, then how do you explain the Sept. 2012 Change In Participation Rate anomaly that coincides with the abnormally large decrease in the U3 Unemployment Rate ? How do you explain the recent increase and spikes in CWP that has a long history of remaining almost static?
    How is this a long history of remaining almost static?
    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.

  2. #92
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,584

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    ...
    How is this a long history of remaining almost static?
    First, if you put the baseline percentage at zero, the graph wouldn't look as nearly dramatic. And from the peak to todays rate, that's only about a 4% difference, we saw a much larger difference between the time I was born and the time that I graduated high school. The LFPR when my son turned 21 was about the same as it was when I turned 21.

    Secondly, the reason that it increased about 8% was mostly due to women entering the workforce, which means that they were no longer productive at home. We tend to assume that only people who are employed outside of the home are productive, but of course that's not true. What's the difference between someone staying at home and growing and preparing food, and making their own cloths, vs producing those items outside the home and then using the money that they made to purchase them? Either way, we are still productive.

    If we wanted to measure productivity of our country, a much better measurement would be GDP/citizen.
    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    ...I'm not interested in debating someone who is trolling for an argument....
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I see a big problem with the idea that whatever the majority wants is OK.

  3. #93
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,374

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by imagep View Post
    First, if you put the baseline percentage at zero, the graph wouldn't look as nearly dramatic. And from the peak to todays rate, that's only about a 4% difference, we saw a much larger difference between the time I was born and the time that I graduated high school. The LFPR when my son turned 21 was about the same as it was when I turned 21.
    Unfortunatley, I don't think I can do that on FRED. But the main point was that the change in Sept 2012 was not some huge abnormal variation.

    Secondly, the reason that it increased about 8% was mostly due to women entering the workforce, which means that they were no longer productive at home.
    Correct.
    We tend to assume that only people who are employed outside of the home are productive, but of course that's not true. What's the difference between someone staying at home and growing and preparing food, and making their own cloths, vs producing those items outside the home and then using the money that they made to purchase them? Either way, we are still productive.
    It's not a question of productivity...the Labor Force stats are meant to measure the Labor Market. Doing housework is not competing in the labor market.

    If we wanted to measure productivity of our country, a much better measurement would be GDP/citizen.[/QUOTE]
    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.

  4. #94
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,584

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    ...
    It's not a question of productivity...the Labor Force stats are meant to measure the Labor Market. Doing housework is not competing in the labor market....
    I agree that the stats are what they are, and that they should be used appropriately. Trying to measure our productivity, or how robust our economy is, or our standard of living by using the LFPR isn't an appropriate use. The only thing that the LFPR tells is is what percentage of people 16 years old or older and who aren't institutionalized, are working or seeking work. It's not entirely a bad thing if an individual chooses to be a full time student, or to retire, or to be a homemaker. If those people have the ability to exist without an income from work, then more power to them.

    Until the Obama administration, few people have ever even heard of or thought about the lfpr. But Obama bashers are using it as a way to "prove" that our economy isn't doing well, and of course in reality, Obama and the strength of our economy has less to do with the lfpr than demographics and sociology does.

    "Homemaking" does compete with the labor market indirectly. If I stay home and prepare my meals, then I am competing with paid food preparation.
    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    ...I'm not interested in debating someone who is trolling for an argument....
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I see a big problem with the idea that whatever the majority wants is OK.

  5. #95
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,114

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged
    this is terrible somehow, i bet.


  6. #96
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,584

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    this is terrible somehow, i bet.

    Terrible for people who are looking to bash our economy.

    And terrible for people who would have preferred that this 321,000 remain on unemployment and welfare.
    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    ...I'm not interested in debating someone who is trolling for an argument....
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I see a big problem with the idea that whatever the majority wants is OK.

  7. #97
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,114

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by imagep View Post
    Terrible for people who are looking to bash our economy.

    And terrible for people who would have preferred that this 321,000 remain on unemployment and welfare.
    i always enjoy watching posters play "debunk the jobs report." it's the same thing every month. i'm wondering how a Republican congress will change the interpretation on both sides. i'm guessing that some posters will have a tough time deciding whether to laud the numbers or debunk them.

  8. #98
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,374

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by imagep View Post
    I agree that the stats are what they are, and that they should be used appropriately. Trying to measure our productivity, or how robust our economy is, or our standard of living by using the LFPR isn't an appropriate use. The only thing that the LFPR tells is is what percentage of people 16 years old or older and who aren't institutionalized, are working or seeking work. It's not entirely a bad thing if an individual chooses to be a full time student, or to retire, or to be a homemaker. If those people have the ability to exist without an income from work, then more power to them.

    Until the Obama administration, few people have ever even heard of or thought about the lfpr. But Obama bashers are using it as a way to "prove" that our economy isn't doing well, and of course in reality, Obama and the strength of our economy has less to do with the lfpr than demographics and sociology does.

    "Homemaking" does compete with the labor market indirectly. If I stay home and prepare my meals, then I am competing with paid food preparation.
    I agree.
    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.

  9. #99
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    this is terrible somehow, i bet.

    No, it's a great number, potentially

    But when the household survey says that only 4,000 more Americans are employed - that raises serious doubts about the numbers' legitimacy.

    And when the household survey also says that 150,000 fewer Americans are working full time AND (the NOT seasonally adjusted household survey) says there were actually 270,000 FEWER Americans employed in November compared to October.

    Plus a whopping (again NOT seasonally adjusted) 735,000(!) FEWER Americans were employed full time in November compared to October.

    How anyone can rationally take all that in and still say this was a great or even a good report, is beyond me.


    And btw, I am neither rep nor dem, neither con nor lib...so (unlike most on here it seems) I have no agenda and I have an open mind in this. My bias is to the truth.
    Last edited by DA60; 12-08-14 at 01:43 PM.

  10. #100
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,114

    Re: Payroll employment increases by 321,000 in November; unemployment rate unchanged

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    No, it's a great number, potentially

    But when the household survey says that only 4,000 more Americans are employed - that raises serious doubts about the numbers' legitimacy.

    And when the household survey also says that 150,000 fewer Americans are working full time AND (for the NOT seasonally adjusted household survey) there were actually 270,000 FEWER Americans employed in November compared to October.

    Plus a whopping (again NOT seasonally adjusted) 735,000(!) less Americans employed in November compared to October.

    How you can take all that in and still say this was a great or even a good report, is beyond me.


    And btw, I am neither rep nor dem, neither con nor lib...so (unlike most on here it seems) I have no agenda and I have an open mind in this. My bias is to the truth.
    like i said, i'm sure that 321,000 jobs is terrible somehow. just out of curiosity, how long have you been debunking job reports? i think i've noticed you in the monthly threads before, but i wanted to know a little more about your personal debunking history.

Page 10 of 19 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... 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
  •