Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course, now we know the June numbers were revised down, and new jobs of 195,000, dropped to only 104,000 jobs. How can their numbers be off by almost half, unless the government bureaucrats are really paying loose and free with the numbers and essentially lying to us??
The statisticians rely on the numbers coming in to do their jobs. If the numbers don't get there on time, they work with what they have and then refigure things later. I believe a while back California didn't get their stats in on time. Since California is the largest state, that's a huge chunk of numbers they didn't have when doing their calculations.
I would not put it past the government at all to manipulate the numbers to make them look better or worse, whichever pushed their agenda at the time. But in the case of the jobs numbers, there are legitimate reasons for why they keep coming out with corrections later.
Does anyone still think the U3 figure should be used for appraising the state of unemployment in this country, is it even valid anymore?
Our economy is stagnant, our labor force is disappearing, part-time jobs are the lion's share of all jobs being created, and our unemployment rate drops one point for a pathetic 170k jobs.
WEAK: +169,000 NEW JOBS, MASSIVE DOWNWARD REVISIONS... June was also revised down, from 172K to 188. The unemployment rate did, however, drop to 7.3%, but that's basically just due to continued exodus from the workforce. The participation rate fell from 63.2% from 63.4%.
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE DROPS TO 7.3%... The Bureau of Labor Statistics also said the unemployment rate dropped to 7.3 percent, its lowest since December 2008, but due primarily to fewer Americans in the labor force.
July's number got knocked down to 172,000 from 188,000, and June's tumbled all the way from 162,000 to 104,000.
So, we lost over 70,000 jobs when the June and July jobs numbers were revised, and unemployment still dropped one point?
Zero Hedge
September 6, 2013
As frequent readers know, for the past three years we have compiled data looking at the US unemployment rate assuming a realistic labor force participation rate, which is the trendline average of the past three decades, or in the mid-65% area. Using such an approach allows us to estimate what the true unemployment (U3, not U6 underemployment) rate is. We can report that as a result of the latest monthly collapse in the labor force whose only purpose was to lower the unemployment rate from 7.4% to 7.3%, the actual implied unemployment rate just rose from 11.2% to 11.4%.
This can be seen on the chart below. Also can be seen that the spread between the reported manipulated unemployment rate and the real rate accounting for a realistic labor force participation, just hit a record high 4.1%. In other words, unemployment data manipulation by the BLS was never been greater in the history of the US than in the past month.
Perhaps most ironic is that last month’s massive jobs revision was as we predicted based on the JOLTS breakdown of data, which showed that the Establishment survey was persistently overestimating what the underlying situation is. We said:
This means that either the JOLTS survey is substantially underrepresenting the net turnover of workers, or that once the part-time frenzy in the NFP data normalizes, the monthly job gains will plunge to just over 100K per month to “normalize” for what has been a very peculiar upward “drift” in the NFP “data.”
Zero Hedge
September 5, 2013
With ADP out of the way, and providing no guidance to an extreme NFP print one way or another, we once again turn to Gallup. As a reminder, a few days ago we showed that things are bad and getting worse for America’s job prospects following direct polling land as relates to unemployment on a seasonally unadjusted basis. Today, the polling group has released its seasonally adjustedunemployment number and how it compares to the BLS’ own estimation of the labor market. In a word: it is not pretty (which, again, is good for those who are hoping and praying St. Ben will keep the monetary Kool Aid running for a little bit longer): at 8.6% it is over 1% higher than the BLS’ reported print, and is the highest since the end of 2011. Source: Gallup Gallup tracks daily the percentage of U.S. adults, ages 18 and older, who are unemployed. “Unemployed” respondents are those who are not employed, even for one hour a week, but are available and looking for work. Unemployment is calculated as a percent of the workforce. Monthly results reflect an average of the calendar month, based on telephone interviews with approximately 30,000 adults. Gallup adjusts its unemployment rate using the seasonal adjustment the BLS used in the same month in the prior year.
Give me a break, 70% decline is due to an aging population? How can you can say that, as our population is growing? We have more people entering the workforce then are retiring from it. Our aging population is showing a higher rate of employment, they are choosing to keep working.
The participation rate was discussed at length in another thread, feel free to read it. No matter how you slice the data the older 50+ cohort grew faster than the younger crowd did and will continue to put downward pressure on the participation rate.
I addressed this in another thread.
"It doesn't sound like you want to accept anything that doesn't support your view. Here is a 2012 BLS prediction to 2020. Looking at '00-'10, the 16-24 yr old group grew by 1%, but the 55+ grew by 2.6%. The 18-24 yr old group is associated with higher learning though, so if we look at the 25-54 age group the growth rate was only .4%. From '00-' 10 the 55+ population grew by 17K and the under 55 group grew by 8K, in thousands of course, and if you look at the 25-54 cohort that group only grew by 5K.
America is getting older at a faster rate than we have young people entering their best working years."
Zero Hedge
September 6, 2013
As frequent readers know, for the past three years we have compiled data looking at the US unemployment rate assuming a realistic labor force participation rate, which is the trendline average of the past three decades, or in the mid-65% area. Using such an approach allows us to estimate what the true unemployment (U3, not U6 underemployment) rate is. We can report that as a result of the latest monthly collapse in the labor force whose only purpose was to lower the unemployment rate from 7.4% to 7.3%, the actual implied unemployment rate just rose from 11.2% to 11.4%.
This can be seen on the chart below. Also can be seen that the spread between the reported manipulated unemployment rate and the real rate accounting for a realistic labor force participation, just hit a record high 4.1%. In other words, unemployment data manipulation by the BLS was never been greater in the history of the US than in the past month.
Perhaps most ironic is that last month’s massive jobs revision was as we predicted based on the JOLTS breakdown of data, which showed that the Establishment survey was persistently overestimating what the underlying situation is. We said:
This means that either the JOLTS survey is substantially underrepresenting the net turnover of workers, or that once the part-time frenzy in the NFP data normalizes, the monthly job gains will plunge to just over 100K per month to “normalize” for what has been a very peculiar upward “drift” in the NFP “data.”
Zero Hedge
September 5, 2013
With ADP out of the way, and providing no guidance to an extreme NFP print one way or another, we once again turn to Gallup. As a reminder, a few days ago we showed that things are bad and getting worse for America’s job prospects following direct polling land as relates to unemployment on a seasonally unadjusted basis. Today, the polling group has released its seasonally adjustedunemployment number and how it compares to the BLS’ own estimation of the labor market. In a word: it is not pretty (which, again, is good for those who are hoping and praying St. Ben will keep the monetary Kool Aid running for a little bit longer): at 8.6% it is over 1% higher than the BLS’ reported print, and is the highest since the end of 2011.
Source: Gallup Gallup tracks daily the percentage of U.S. adults, ages 18 and older, who are unemployed. “Unemployed” respondents are those who are not employed, even for one hour a week, but are available and looking for work. Unemployment is calculated as a percent of the workforce. Monthly results reflect an average of the calendar month, based on telephone interviews with approximately 30,000 adults. Gallup adjusts its unemployment rate using the seasonal adjustment the BLS used in the same month in the prior year.
It would appear that the Gallup unemployment rate has a similar trend line as the BLS U3 declining unemployment trend, it just has greater monthly swings.
Since I don't follow zero hedge can you confirm that zero hedge's "realistic labor force participation rate" is just "trendline average of the past three decades"? I read that as the trendline of BLS labor force participation rate. If it is, I'm not clear why that is a meaningful number.
It is cutting hours down to 29 and giving two people a part time job instead of one with 40 hours with overtime. 1 job equals 2 part time jobs.. how to get the numbers down of the unemployed is hiring part time.
I think they are what they are as a measurement and you need to look at details of why. I don't see person wanting only a certain job and refusing all others same as people who do;for instance.
low wage and part time jobs,, big corp doing what they do best..
And then blame Obama for not single-handedly improving the economy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unemployment Drops To 7.3% - Does Anyone Trust These Numbers Anymore?
