• 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!

Trump's first Employment Situation Report.

pinqy

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
7,302
Reaction score
3,402
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Friday, February 3rd, will be the first Employment Situation Report issued under President Trump, who has been a vocal critic of...well...everything without his name on it.
Things to look out for:
  • The night before release, the BLS Commissioner can provide a pre-release copy of the Report to the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to give to the President. There is no Chairman, and BLS might be reluctant to give embargoed material to Trump as it would have major effects on the stock market and the economy if he leaked any of it. Note that this is not a new issue...I know that BLS has had to make sure that previous Presidents didn't divulge information early.
  • As happens for every January, the Population Controls have been changed. This means that the population number and therefore all other labor force statistics are subject to change independent of the survey responses. So there could be some odd changes from December to January.
  • For the other major survey, the Current Employment Survey (jobs gained/lost) the benchmark revisions will be implemented which means every jobs number for the last 2 years will be revised. The early estimate, from September 2016, showed that the March 2016 employment level estimate was 150,000 too high (that's 0.1% and is very good) But most people don't understand and it will look bad.
  • ADP estimates a gain of 246,000 nonfarm private sector jobs. So it is likely that the BLS number will be similarly high.

I am really curious about what the various reactions will be.
 
The next job release will have nothing to do with trump.
it will be the last job report on the Obama administration.

People fooling themselves that this is trumps first job report doesn't understand.
 
The next job release will have nothing to do with trump.
it will be the last job report on the Obama administration.

People fooling themselves that this is trumps first job report doesn't understand.
It happens VERY rarely, but I agree with you. No matter whether it is a good or bad, this is still Obama's job report, just like January 2009 was Bush's last job report. Certainly an incoming President can influence an economy, but ultimately, the actual President has the most say and Obama was President for 3/4 of the month.

Good or bad, it is Obama's job report, not Trump's.
 
The next job release will have nothing to do with trump.
it will be the last job report on the Obama administration.

People fooling themselves that this is trumps first job report doesn't understand.
It is the first employment report to come out under the Trump presidency. The first where he might have access to an early release, the first that was written under his presidency (entirely under his presidency).

That the report covers a period before the inauguration doesn't change the fact that the data were collected, analyzed and published under Trump and it ill be interesting to see his reaction to it.
 
It is the first employment report to come out under the Trump presidency. The first where he might have access to an early release, the first that was written under his presidency (entirely under his presidency).

That the report covers a period before the inauguration doesn't change the fact that the data were collected, analyzed and published under Trump and it ill be interesting to see his reaction to it.
It will be interesting to see his reaction, but I think most people can already predict his reaction. If the data is good, notably better than December, then Trump will take credit. If it's roughly the same or worse, he'll blame Obama. This isn't unique to Trump, I feel it would be true of any politician.

Question for you. I respect you opinion regarding these matters as much as anyone's on this forum. How many months do you think passes before it can realistically be considered Trump's economy, where Trump's actions and policies are directly affecting the employment situation? Obviously there are always caveats, but as a general guideline, knowing what we know at the moment, when do you think it fully becomes Trump's economy and not a mix of Obama and Trump?
 
It will be interesting to see his reaction, but I think most people can already predict his reaction. If the data is good, notably better than December, then Trump will take credit. If it's roughly the same or worse, he'll blame Obama. This isn't unique to Trump, I feel it would be true of any politician.
To a degree. But no other President has claimed the numbers were wrong and politically manipulated. While the DATA are from before the inauguration, the PROCESSING was all done under Trump. So while he can blame Obama for poor numbers, he cannot claim manipulation.

Question for you. I respect you opinion regarding these matters as much as anyone's on this forum. How many months do you think passes before it can realistically be considered Trump's economy, where Trump's actions and policies are directly affecting the employment situation? Obviously there are always caveats, but as a general guideline, knowing what we know at the moment, when do you think it fully becomes Trump's economy and not a mix of Obama and Trump?
That's entirely subjective. There really is no such point. Hell, people are still blaming Bush for the sluggish Obama economy.

It's extremely debatable to what degree the President is "responsible" for the economy. Some things can be due to his actions, orders, policies, but others are independent.

So, there will never be a real dividing point, unless Trump does something of major impact.
 
I truly hope they present actual and honest figures on the 'jobs' report. People have so eagerly bought into the spin re jobs creation over the last 8 years that its embarrassing. Yay! They created jobs! Sure...94% of them were temp, seasonal, part time, and low skill/low wage jobs...but...yay!!! Oh...and look. The unemployment numbers re going down! es...and the number of those no longer seeking employment are skyrocketing. But it looks great on paper!

Just be honest. This is a great opportunity to have a real new starting point.
 
I truly hope they present actual and honest figures on the 'jobs' report.
Who are "they?" BLS or the politicians?

People have so eagerly bought into the spin re jobs creation over the last 8 years that its embarrassing. Yay! They created jobs! Sure...94% of them were temp, seasonal, part time, and low skill/low wage jobs...but...yay!!!
You are getting that 94% number from The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995-2015 by Katz and Krueger.
They looked at 3 snapshots: 1995, 2005, and 2015. They found that "The percentage of workers engaged in alternative work arrangements – defined as temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract workers, and independent contractors or freelancers – rose from 10.1 percent in February 2005 to 15.8" and accounted for 94% of the job gains.

So you just made up "seasonal, part time, low skill/low wage." And it doesn't take an Economist to realize that while regular jobs crashed in 2008 and didn't start to recover until 2010, that alternative work jobs would not have been affected, and in fact would have increased while regular jobs dropped and then increased again.

Oh...and look. The unemployment numbers re going down! es...and the number of those no longer seeking employment are skyrocketing. .
Not seeking, or no longer seeking? Big difference. And since the numbers not in the labor force are mostly voluntary, I'm not sure why you think it's important.
 
It is the first employment report to come out under the Trump presidency. The first where he might have access to an early release, the first that was written under his presidency (entirely under his presidency).

That the report covers a period before the inauguration doesn't change the fact that the data were collected, analyzed and published under Trump and it ill be interesting to see his reaction to it.

What time period does this report cover. When you have that answer, then please tell me what data was collected under Trump.

Thanks
 
Who are "they?" BLS or the politicians?


You are getting that 94% number from The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995-2015 by Katz and Krueger.
They looked at 3 snapshots: 1995, 2005, and 2015. They found that "The percentage of workers engaged in alternative work arrangements – defined as temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract workers, and independent contractors or freelancers – rose from 10.1 percent in February 2005 to 15.8" and accounted for 94% of the job gains.

So you just made up "seasonal, part time, low skill/low wage." And it doesn't take an Economist to realize that while regular jobs crashed in 2008 and didn't start to recover until 2010, that alternative work jobs would not have been affected, and in fact would have increased while regular jobs dropped and then increased again.

Not seeking, or no longer seeking? Big difference. And since the numbers not in the labor force are mostly voluntary, I'm not sure why you think it's important.
Parse it however you like. The fact remains...


Is Part-Time and Temporary Employment the ‘New Normal’?
Suzanne Tucker/Shutterstock
Is Part-Time and Temporary Employment the ‘New Normal’?
By Staff
Dec 9, 2016 - 12:15pm

In a new report, the Economic Policy Institute finds that “an ongoing structural shift toward more intensive use of part-time employment by many employers is driving the elevated rate of involuntary part-time work” in the US, leaving 6.4 million American workers with part-time hours when they would prefer to be working full-time:

Not getting enough hours is the “time-related” type of underemployment, a phenomenon where people may be working but not up to their desired amount, and it is a sign of labor underutilization in the economy. The monthly rate of workers in the U.S. labor market who are working “part time for economic reasons”—who are considered “involuntary” part-timers because they want to and are available to work full time—is the most consistent indicator of such underemployment. That rate is higher now that it was before the Great Recession and during the depths of the early 2000s recession. That it remains stubbornly high indicates that there is more labor market slack than is captured by the unemployment rate alone. …

This report suggests that, in addition to cyclical forces (in this case, lingering effects of the recession), there is an ongoing structural shift in many businesses toward more intensive use of part-time employment, driving the elevated rate of involuntary part-time employment. Increased employer use of part-time positions is particularly evident in industries in which part-time jobs are already more prevalent, such as retail, and hotels and food service.

Dan Kopf at Quartz highlights some updated research from economists Alan Krueger and Lawrence Katz (whose work we’ve looked at before) finding that from 2005 to 2015, almost all of the new jobs created in the US economy were not traditional full-time jobs but rather temporary, contract, or “gig economy” work:

“We find that 94% of net job growth in the past decade was in the alternative work category,” said Krueger. “And over 60% was due to the [the rise] of independent contractors, freelancers and contract company workers.” In other words, nearly all of the 10 million jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were not traditional nine-to-five employment. …

Katz and Krueger found that each of the common types of alternative work increased from 2005 to 2015—with the largest changes in the number of independent contractors and workers provided by contract firms, such as janitors that work full-time at a particular office, but are paid by a janitorial services firm.

The decline of conventional full-time work has impacted every demographic. Whether this change is good or bad depends on what kinds of jobs people want. “Workers seeking full-time, steady work have lost,” said Krueger. “While many of those who value flexibility and have a spouse with a steady job have probably gained.”
 
What time period does this report cover. When you have that answer, then please tell me what data was collected under Trump.

Thanks

The reference week for the household survey was the week of January 8-14. The reference period for the establishment survey was the pay period that included January 12 (so that will vary by business depending on length of pay period and start and end dates).
Collection officially started January 15 and ended January 21. January 22-28 was a week of follow-ups and double checking and re-interviews etc. The actual report is being put together this week.

Note that I'm not saying Trump is actually responsible for anything here. He has zero knowledge or access of anything going into the report and he had no influence. Neither did Obama when he was President...or any other President.

My point is that Trump and others have claimed manipulation, but now, although the time period covered is for during the Obama administration, all the work going into the report (except for some collection) occurred under Trump. He cannot claim any manipulation.
 
Parse it however you like. The fact remains...
Parsing? True or False: In the Katz and Krueger study, do they say that 94% of the jobs increase was "temp, seasonal, part time, and low skill/low wage jobs?" (exact wording isn't necessary)

Is Part-Time and Temporary Employment the ‘New Normal’?
Suzanne Tucker/Shutterstock
Is Part-Time and Temporary Employment the ‘New Normal’?
By Staff
Dec 9, 2016 - 12:15pm

In a new report, the Economic Policy Institute finds that “an ongoing structural shift toward more intensive use of part-time employment by many employers is driving the elevated rate of involuntary part-time work” in the US, leaving 6.4 million American workers with part-time hours when they would prefer to be working full-time:

Not getting enough hours is the “time-related” type of underemployment, a phenomenon where people may be working but not up to their desired amount, and it is a sign of labor underutilization in the economy. The monthly rate of workers in the U.S. labor market who are working “part time for economic reasons”—who are considered “involuntary” part-timers because they want to and are available to work full time—is the most consistent indicator of such underemployment. That rate is higher now that it was before the Great Recession and during the depths of the early 2000s recession. That it remains stubbornly high indicates that there is more labor market slack than is captured by the unemployment rate alone. …

Part time for economic reasons as a percent of total employment:
fredgraph.png

Looks like it's steadily going down to me.


This report suggests that, in addition to cyclical forces (in this case, lingering effects of the recession), there is an ongoing structural shift in many businesses toward more intensive use of part-time employment, driving the elevated rate of involuntary part-time employment. Increased employer use of part-time positions is particularly evident in industries in which part-time jobs are already more prevalent, such as retail, and hotels and food service.
Except the rate is decreasing, not increasing.

[qutoe]Dan Kopf at Quartz highlights some updated research from economists Alan Krueger and Lawrence Katz (whose work we’ve looked at before) finding that from 2005 to 2015, almost all of the new jobs created in the US economy were not traditional full-time jobs but rather temporary, contract, or “gig economy” work:

“We find that 94% of net job growth in the past decade was in the alternative work category,” said Krueger. “And over 60% was due to the [the rise] of independent contractors, freelancers and contract company workers.” In other words, nearly all of the 10 million jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were not traditional nine-to-five employment. …[/quote] Which is NOT the same as "temp, seasonal, part time, and low skill/low wage jobs?"
 
To a degree. But no other President has claimed the numbers were wrong and politically manipulated. While the DATA are from before the inauguration, the PROCESSING was all done under Trump. So while he can blame Obama for poor numbers, he cannot claim manipulation.
I think if President Trump has shown anything, it's that he can claim nearly anything. ;)

But yes, I agree it wouldn't be true.

That's entirely subjective. There really is no such point. Hell, people are still blaming Bush for the sluggish Obama economy.

It's extremely debatable to what degree the President is "responsible" for the economy. Some things can be due to his actions, orders, policies, but others are independent.

So, there will never be a real dividing point, unless Trump does something of major impact.
Thanks for the answer. I agree it's very subjective and it's also very susceptible to world events.
 
Back
Top Bottom