Page 9 of 19 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 189

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

  1. #81
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:08 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,309

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

    You have to realize that "confidence" generated by statistics, real or imagined, are what supports the "faith" in fiat currency and the words "full faith and trust." Do you or I think the gov't, via the BLS, would massage statistical data to maintain an illusion of "confidence?" Does a cat have an ass?

  2. #82
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BringIt View Post
    The only number that change affected was median duration of unemployment.
    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.

  3. #83
    User BringIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    08-12-15 @ 10:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    114

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

    Quote Originally Posted by imagep View Post
    The lfpr has little to do with anything. ... The lfpr is what it is, and it's a flawed metric that is based on the expectation that my 99 year old grandmother should be working, and that all 16 year old high school kids should be working. This country existed for 202 years with a lower labor force participation rate than what we have now. It's a non-issue.
    Quote Originally Posted by imagep View Post
    the unemployment rate is what it is. The way it is computed today is identical to the way it was computed under Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc.

    Once again... Wrong On Both Counts...

    --------------------------

    Understanding Workforce Participation & Unemployment

    Source: Poof! The Government’s 9 Million Jobless Vanishing Act

    When we look at broad measures of jobs and population, then the beginning of 2012 was one of the worst months in US history, with a total of 2.3 million people losing jobs or leaving the workforce in a single month. Yet, the official unemployment rate showed a decline from 8.5% to 8.3% in January - and was such cheering news that it set off a stock rally.

    How can there be such a stark contrast between the cheerful surface and an underlying reality that is getting worse?

    The true unemployment picture is hidden by essentially splitting jobless Americans up and putting them inside one of three different "boxes": the official unemployment box, the full unemployment box, and the most obscure box, the workforce participation rate box.



    As we will explore herein, a detailed look at the government's own data base shows that about 9 million people without jobs have been removed from the labor force simply by the government defining them as not being in the labor force anymore. Indeed - effectively all of the decreases in unemployment rate percentages since 2009 have come not from new jobs, but through reducing the workforce participation rate so that millions of jobless people are removed from the labor force by definition.


    See the full report--> HERE
    Wake Up America!

  4. #84
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BringIt View Post
    Once again... Wrong On Both Counts...

    --------------------------

    Understanding Workforce Participation & Unemployment

    Source: Poof! The Government’s 9 Million Jobless Vanishing Act

    When we look at broad measures of jobs and population, then the beginning of 2012 was one of the worst months in US history, with a total of 2.3 million people losing jobs or leaving the workforce in a single month. Yet, the official unemployment rate showed a decline from 8.5% to 8.3% in January - and was such cheering news that it set off a stock rally.

    How can there be such a stark contrast between the cheerful surface and an underlying reality that is getting worse?

    The true unemployment picture is hidden by essentially splitting jobless Americans up and putting them inside one of three different "boxes": the official unemployment box, the full unemployment box, and the most obscure box, the workforce participation rate box.



    As we will explore herein, a detailed look at the government's own data base shows that about 9 million people without jobs have been removed from the labor force simply by the government defining them as not being in the labor force anymore. Indeed - effectively all of the decreases in unemployment rate percentages since 2009 have come not from new jobs, but through reducing the workforce participation rate so that millions of jobless people are removed from the labor force by definition.


    See the full report--> HERE
    God, that idiocy has been around for a while. Let's go to their basic claim:
    The secret to our miracle is that we have two "hard" numbers and one "soft" number. The "hard" numbers are the total working age population and the number of actual jobs. The "soft" number is the definition of what percentage of the working age population wants a job. And a government which desires to control public perceptions can, by manipulating that obscure definition, make the reported unemployment rate "sit, roll over or bark like a dog" at will, almost regardless of what is actually happening with jobs.
    In other words, he's claiming that the government only collects data on the population and jobs, then arbitrarily decides what the Labor Force participation rate will be, and uses that to come up with an unemployment rate.

    The problem is that that bears no resemblance to reality. In reality, the population is estimated by the Census Bureau, and then, every month, they interview 60,000 households and ask if the person works, looked for work work, if they want a job etc.
    If the person worked, s/he is classified as employed, if s/he didn't work, is available to work, looked for work in last 4 weeks, s/he is unemployed. The number of employed and unemployed are added together to find the Labor Force, and the Labor Force is divided by the population to get the participation rate and the number of unemployed is divided by the Labor Force to get the unemployment rate.

    So no, the government doesn't change the Labor Force participation rate… it's a dependent variable.
    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.

  5. #85
    User BringIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    08-12-15 @ 10:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    114

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

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    Let's go to their basic claim:
    ... he's claiming that the government only collects data on the population and jobs, then arbitrarily decides what the Labor Force participation rate will be, and uses that to come up with an unemployment rate.
    The author of this article does NOT make any such claim. It appears that you are trying to obfuscate the premise through distraction.

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    The problem is that that bears no resemblance to reality.

    In reality, the population is estimated by the Census Bureau, and then, every month, they interview 60,000 households and ask if the person works, looked for work work, if they want a job etc. If the person worked, s/he is classified as employed, if s/he didn't work, is available to work, looked for work in last 4 weeks, s/he is unemployed. The number of employed and unemployed are added together to find the Labor Force, and the Labor Force is divided by the population to get the participation rate and the number of unemployed is divided by the Labor Force to get the unemployment rate.
    Wrong! Your summation is incomplete and thus invalid. So much so that it could be considered intentional misinformation strategically presented to to discredit the author of the article.

    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.

    A quick review of this official document will show that you have conveniently disregarded an important sector of the population.

    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).

    1 Do you currently want a job, either full or part time?
    2 What is the main reason you were not looking for work during the last 4 weeks?
    3 Did you look for work at any time during the last 12 months?
    4 Last week, could you have started a job if one had been offered?
    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:

    • They believe no job is available to them in their line of work or area.
    • They had previously been unable to find work.
    • They lack the necessary schooling, training, skills, or experience.
    • Employers think they are too young or too old, or
    • They face some other type of discrimination.
    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.

    By using this questionable technique, the Administration is able to claim improvements in the unemployment rate when, IN REALITY, they have just removed large numbers of individuals from the unemployment roles by definition only.

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    So no, the government doesn't change the Labor Force participation rate… it's a dependent variable.

    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?
    Wake Up America!

  6. #86
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,420

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

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post

    What do you suggest would be more accurate?
    One whose result fit his preconceived notions..
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  7. #87
    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 DaveFagan View Post
    You have to realize that "confidence" generated by statistics, real or imagined, are what supports the "faith" in fiat currency and the words "full faith and trust." Do you or I think the gov't, via the BLS, would massage statistical data to maintain an illusion of "confidence?" Does a cat have an ass?
    It is amazing how ignorant/naive the masses (and people on this site) can be.

    Many people do not trust their politicians, but they just automatically trust the bureaucrats that allow these corrupt governments to function.

    Like these bureaucrats are above it all, like they never receive or give into pressure from the politicians to come up with ways to alter the statistics so as to a) make the government look better and b) cover the bureaucrats legal asses while they do it.

    If you are going to (rightly) question the ethics of politicians then you are a staggering ignoramus to not also question the ethics of the bureaucrats who carry out the wishes of the politicians.

    They are all in it together.

  8. #88
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

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

    At this rate we'll be at negative unemployment by the time Obama leaves. We could actually have enough openings to lower the unemployment rate of other countries.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  9. #89
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

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

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    Like these bureaucrats are above it all, like they never receive or give into pressure from the politicians to come up with ways to alter the statistics so as to a) make the government look better and b) cover the bureaucrats legal asses while they do it..
    While that can happen in some agencies...those that are mostly policy and put out some statistics, I have never seen nor heard of it happening with any dedicated statistical agency such as Census, BEA, BLS, NASS, etc. There is no incentive. Anecdotaly I heard that Newt Gingrich did try to get Katerherine Abraham to massage the numbers when she was BLS Commissioner and she refused. I know Reagan tried to get a BLS analyst fired when his response to a press inquiry contradicted Reagan's remarks, but any real pressure? No.

    How do you think it could work? It's almost impossible to do as there are too many people and too much oversight to succeed. No one in the administration gets the data for principle federal economic indicators until the night before release. There's no way to change anything.
    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. #90
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

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

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    It is amazing how ignorant/naive the masses (and people on this site) can be.

    Many people do not trust their politicians, but they just automatically trust the bureaucrats that allow these corrupt governments to function.

    Like these bureaucrats are above it all, like they never receive or give into pressure from the politicians to come up with ways to alter the statistics so as to a) make the government look better and b) cover the bureaucrats legal asses while they do it.

    If you are going to (rightly) question the ethics of politicians then you are a staggering ignoramus to not also question the ethics of the bureaucrats who carry out the wishes of the politicians.

    They are all in it together.
    There was, of course, the allegation by that NY Post writer last year that at least 2 Census workers in the Philadelphia region were pressured to fake interviews. But that's not politicians, and there were no claims that any specified result was desired. And the IG report found no evidence of anyone being asked to fake reports. And they noted that the reports that were faked had no effect on the Labor Force data. The guy caught faking reports was fired.

    So....what process are you claiming is used to manipulate the reports and what is your evidence that this occurs?
    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.

Page 9 of 19 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... 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
  •