Jobs Report: U.S. Adds 257,000 Jobs; Unemployment Ticks Up to 5.7%

[DA60]

'WASHINGTON—U.S. employers hired steadily last month and workers’ wages picked up, suggesting the labor market is moving closer to full health more than five years after the recession.

U.S. nonfarm payrolls grew by a seasonally adjusted 257,000 jobs in January, the Labor Department said Friday. And job creation was far stronger in prior months than previously estimated, with the government raising its estimates of new jobs in November and December by a combined 147,000. November’s reading of 423,000 jobs added marked the strongest month of private-sector hiring since 1997.

The unemployment rate, calculated from a separate survey of households, climbed to 5.7% in January, up from December’s 5.6%. The rate rose because the labor force grew as more Americans searched for jobs, a sign of growing confidence among households.'

Jobs Report: U.S. Adds 257,000 Jobs; Unemployment Ticks Up to 5.7% - WSJ

 

[DA60]

Looks like a great report, except the unemployment rate rose.

 

[DA60]

Oh...this was part of the report:

'Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. Also, household survey data for January 2015 reflect updated population estimates. See the notes at the end ot this news release for more information about these changes.'


Oh great...they are moving the goal posts yet again.

 

[Visbek]

Labor force participation increased to 62.9%, from 62.7%, hourly wage rate bumped up slightly. Strongest month of jobs growth since 1997. 3 best consecutive months since 1998. 12th month in a row with job growth over 200,000.

Lots of growth in health/education, professional services, retail, construction.

Unemployment rates rose slightly because more people are getting back into the job market, and looking for work.

 

[pinqy]

Labor force participation increased to 62.9%, from 62.7%, hourly wage rate bumped up slightly. Strongest month of jobs growth since 1997. 3 best consecutive months since 1998. 12th month in a row with job growth over 200,000.

Lots of growth in health/education, professional services, retail, construction.

Unemployment rates rose slightly because more people are getting back into the job market, and looking for work.

Because Census updates the Population controls (you'll note that the Population level went way up), the December-January changes are never reliable because previous months aren't revised. A lot of the changes were due only to the shift in population.

 

[pinqy]

Oh...this was part of the report:

'Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. Also, household survey data for January 2015 reflect updated population estimates. See the notes at the end ot this news release for more information about these changes.'


Oh great...they are moving the goal posts yet again.

How is smoothing out the curve to see the actual trend instead of regular seasonal changes moving goalposts? Which of the lines below better depicts the trend in Employment?

 

[imagep]

Looks like a great report, except the unemployment rate rose.

The labor force participation rate increased. Many conservatives claim that is more important than the U3.

 

[Visbek]

The labor force participation rate increased. Many conservatives claim that is more important than the U3.

Only when the President is a Democrat, and only when LFPR is going down.

 

[imagep]

How is smoothing out the curve to see the actual trend instead of regular seasonal changes moving goalposts? Which of the lines below better depicts the trend in Employment?

From that chart, it looks like we have gained nearly 11 million jobs. If the average rate of gain during the past three months continues, we will gain another 8 million jobs by the end of the Obama administration, for a total of 19 million minus the 5 million lost in 2009. If it werent for the huge job losses in 2009, the economy would have nearly matched Clintons job gains, and exceeded Reagan's. Still, a net game of 14 million aint bad when W only gained 1.1 million jobs. Imagine that, Obama being 12 times more successful than Bush.

 

[imagep]

Only when the President is a Democrat, and only when LFPR is going down.

That's right. Sorry, I forget the rules sometimes. Maybe because they change on a month by month bases.

 

[upsideguy]

The labor force participation rate increased. Many conservatives claim that is more important than the U3.

...which is where most conservatives have run and hid knowing the unemployment rates that are approaching full employment would otherwise mean they were completely wrong about the economic track of the country.

The Cons find solace in the Labor participation rate based on the fact very few people under stand its components. However, those of us the know the components of this, particularly the Not in the WorkForce component, realize it is almost entirely made up of retired persons, stay-at-home moms, students and disabled. The fact these people do not have to work is a sign of strength in the economy, not weakness.

In short, as to unemployment, the Cons can run, but they can not hide. The Cons will have to shift their criticism to income disparity, where they do have a case... as long as they are honest that income disparity is a 30 year problem, not something created by Obama.

 

[Slyfox696]

That's right. Sorry, I forget the rules sometimes. Maybe because they change on a month by month bases.

I think that's the biggest complaint I have with those who call themselves conservative...they have no convictions, no standards. Their only conviction, their only standard, is to criticize President Obama.

It just makes them look so damn stupid. A real conservative would be happy the economy is gaining so many private sector jobs. It just seems like most of those who call themselves "conservative" (at least those who shout the loudest) are actually upset when good news come from the jobs report, because all they can see is how it affects their team.

 

[DA60]

How is smoothing out the curve to see the actual trend instead of regular seasonal changes moving goalposts? Which of the lines below better depicts the trend in Employment?

When I want an opinion about the BLS from an ex-BLS bureaucrat (like you claim to be) who is INCREDIBLY biased and has shown time and time and time and time and time again to be GIGANTICALLY pro-BLS to the point of creepy (imo)...I will let you know.

P.S. I would not hold my breath.


Btw...I don't want the BLS 'smoothing' anything out. I want them to collect the data and post the raw data and keep their creative math and models to themselves.
But since, as the Head of Gallup stated, the U-3 is a 'big lie'...I am not holding my breath on that one either.

 

[pinqy]

When I want an opinion about the BLS from an ex-BLS bureaucrat (like you claim to be) who is INCREDIBLY biased and has shown time and time and time and time and time again to be GIGANTICALLY pro-BLS to the point of creepy (imo)...I will let you know.

P.S. I would not hold my breath.

I wasn't giving an opinion, I was asking a question. One you chose not to answer.

And yet you have never actually pointed out one single thing I've ever written that is biased.

And I note that you cannot actually back up your claim.

So let's try again....give us unbiased factual link that shows that seasonal adjustment is moving the goal posts rather than an acceptable statistical practice OR that is distorts the true picture.

 

[pinqy]

Btw...I don't want the BLS 'smoothing' anything out. I want them to collect the data and post the raw data and keep their creative math and models to themselves.
But since, as the Head of Gallup stated, the U-3 is a 'big lie'...I am not holding my breath on that one either.

You couldn't make sense of the raw data. Besides, it would be illegal as a violation of privacy rights and confidentiality agreements with respondents to release raw data.

But, luckily, you don't make policy, because most people aren't trained statisticians, as you apparently are, who can tell at a glance what is a seasonal component and what is an underlying change. I'm impressed...I don't know any other statisticians who could do that.

 

[DA60]

I wasn't giving an opinion, I was asking a question. One you chose not to answer.

And yet you have never actually pointed out one single thing I've ever written that is biased.

And I note that you cannot actually back up your claim.

So let's try again....give us unbiased factual link that shows that seasonal adjustment is moving the goal posts rather than an acceptable statistical practice OR that is distorts the true picture.

One) I did answer your question.

And Two) I already showed you the evidence - from the BLS themselves - that they are moving the goalposts again.

That is not good enough for you - and of course it won't be, no one can dare post negative about your precious BLS - I don't care.


Once again, and I have asked you this umpteen times, please stop wasting my time with your opinions (or questions) as I have no respect for your opinion on this subject. NONE.
Either post data/facts directly from the BLS or please leave me alone.
You are good for one thing to me...understanding how to find data on the BLS website.
You are otherwise just a useless ex-bureaucrat from a semi-treasonous part of the government that (Imo - and I cannot factually prove this) deliberately distorts the truth for the benefit of the government.

That you claim to have worked for this pathetic group AND you obsessively defend them makes you nothing more in my eyes then a little, trained, government minion who is contributing to the continued decline of this once great country called America through (in this case) the lies and disinformation the BLS continues to post.


Now please leave me alone before I get so animated that I get banned.

 

[pinqy]

One) I did answer your question.

No you didn't. I asked HOW it was moving the goal posts and which line better depicted the trend. You did not answer either question.

And Two) I already showed you the evidence - from the BLS themselves - that they are moving the goalposts again.

No you did not.

That is not good enough for you - and of course it won't be, no one can dare post negative about your precious BLS - I don't care.

I find it interesting that you are completely incapable of even considering that you might be wrong. If I correct you, then it can't be that I'm right...I'm just biased and partisan. This is like you presenting your opinions or others' opinions, but demanding everyone else give unbiased facts (and of course anything that disagrees with you is biased).

Once again, and I have asked you this umpteen times, please stop wasting my time with your opinions (or questions) as I have no respect for your opinion on this subject. NONE.

You're under no obligation to reply, so I'm not wasting your time. You can always put me on ignore.

Now leave me alone before I get so animated that I get banned.

You're funny.

 

[DA60]

You couldn't make sense of the raw data. Besides, it would be illegal as a violation of privacy rights and confidentiality agreements with respondents to release raw data.

But, luckily, you don't make policy, because most people aren't trained statisticians, as you apparently are, who can tell at a glance what is a seasonal component and what is an underlying change. I'm impressed...I don't know any other statisticians who could do that.

Ahhh...there it is.

We the public should not be shown the raw data because we could not make sense of it.

Therefore, we should trust bureaucrats like you to mold the data and turn it into a form that we the ignorant masses can understand.

There we have it...the arrogance of the bureaucracy. Telling us what we can and cannot understand. Treating us like children.

Only the BLS is righteous enough to have access to the raw data. For if we the public were to gaze upon it...we would surely turn to dust.


Whatever Mr. Minion.

 

[Declan]

I wasn't giving an opinion, I was asking a question. One you chose not to answer.

And yet you have never actually pointed out one single thing I've ever written that is biased.

And I note that you cannot actually back up your claim.

So let's try again....give us unbiased factual link that shows that seasonal adjustment is moving the goal posts rather than an acceptable statistical practice OR that is distorts the true picture.

The seasonal adjustments likely distorted the numbers some for the first three years after the recession because it hit in winter and would have been carried through for the lookback in the models upon which those seasonal adjustments are made. We are beyond that window now though, Now your trend argument is a valid one, but unfortunately, the fed makes its related monetary policy decisions mostly on a month to month basis I think.

 

[DA60]

No you didn't. I asked HOW it was moving the goal posts and which line better depicted the trend. You did not answer either question.

No you did not.

I find it interesting that you are completely incapable of even considering that you might be wrong. If I correct you, then it can't be that I'm right...I'm just biased and partisan. This is like you presenting your opinions or others' opinions, but demanding everyone else give unbiased facts (and of course anything that disagrees with you is biased).


You're under no obligation to reply, so I'm not wasting your time. You can always put me on ignore.



You're funny.

So, I am asking you to leave me alone and you refuse to stop harassing me?

fine...then I will put you on my Ignore list.


Good day.

 

[Erod]

The harsher reality is.....

Gallup CEO: Number of Full-Time Jobs as Percent of Population Is Lowest It’s Ever Been (Video) | The Gateway Pundit

 

[DA60]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-06/did-bls-forget-count-thousands-energy-job-losses

 

[pinqy]

Ahhh...there it is.

We the public should not be shown the raw data because we could not make sense of it.

He really doesn't get it, does he? Besides ignoring the legal requirements (does anyone think any business would respond to the BLS survey if their answers on total employees, payroll, and hours were made public?)
But no one could make sense of the raw data. It's meaningless until you actually process it. If out of a sample of 60,000 households, 40,000 individuals report being employed, then what is the National number given that each person represents a different number of others, ranging from a few hundred to a few thousand. It takes dozens of professionals and lots of software to make sense out the raw data, yet DA60 thinks he could understand it straight.

 

[Mr. Invisible]

Here is a link to the jobs report: Employment Situation Summary


" The labor force participation rate rose by 0.2 percentage point to 62.9 percent, following a decline of equal magnitude in the prior month." So really, there isn't a change in the LFPR as we were at 62.9 back in December. So that really doesn't mean much.

"Job gains occurred in retail trade, construction, health care, financial activities, and manufacturing." The largest industry in which new jobs occur is retail, jobs which we know are low-paying.

 

[Slyfox696]

I think it's funny how people pout when they've been shown to be wrong and less informed than others. Egos are so important, I guess...

So, I am asking you to leave me alone and you refuse to stop harassing me?

fine...then I will put you on my Ignore list.


Good day.

He really doesn't get it, does he?

He gets it. He knows you know way more about this than he does, but your constant use of facts derail his intent to criticize.