Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-02-2015, 07:38 PM
 
1,820 posts, read 1,653,990 times
Reputation: 1091

Advertisements

Just as an FYI, the jobs numbers cited by the OP do not come from the same data as the labor force and unemployment data. Jobs numbers are from the Current Establishment Survey which each month reviews the payroll records of about 143,000 non-farm businesses covering some 588,000 worksites. These correspond to about one-third of all non-farm employees. Each month, the data for the prior two months are revised on two accounts -- first, the receipt of payroll information that a respondent was unable to provide on a timely basis, and second, the application of new seasonal adjustment factors calculated using the current month's data. These are the sources of in-year changes. There aren't any others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-02-2015, 08:17 PM
 
Location: Spain
12,722 posts, read 7,567,076 times
Reputation: 22633
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Theres a lot of data showing that our job growth is primarily in the lower paid jobs. Poster probably stated it as the data is out there, and fairly well known by those interested in economics.
Poster stated:

Quote:
Good and even not so good jobs are still hard to find
What data supports this? Job growth primarily being in any area doesn't support it since poster said all. Even if data did show certain job types growing faster you still can't prove something is "hard to find" or "good" since those are subjective terms.

There are always people who have a hard time finding jobs, and others who find it relatively easy. A blanket statement one way or the other is pointless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2015, 08:30 PM
 
Location: cary, nc
609 posts, read 505,553 times
Reputation: 670
Shouldn't these numbers correlate with the states numbers? Everyone blames the federal government, but nobody really says anything about the states. I live in NC, currently run by Republicans. Every month, they take all the credits they can get from the improving job numbers. I don't see trolls going there and telling us how these numbers don't match. Or maybe, the lies only come from those states run by Democrats?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2015, 01:37 AM
 
Location: U.S.A., Earth
5,511 posts, read 4,472,347 times
Reputation: 5770
In response to how many folks at a company we were at were lowballing IT candidates, a coworker said to me that the IT unemployment is only 1%, and that they were most certainly being unrealistic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2015, 04:31 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
3,022 posts, read 2,272,347 times
Reputation: 2168
This probably does not count people who have just given up looking for jobs. It is probably a lot higher then that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2015, 04:43 AM
 
1,820 posts, read 1,653,990 times
Reputation: 1091
Like full-time students and stay-at-home moms? People who don't look for work have NEVER been counted as unemployed. For obvious reasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2015, 04:53 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
3,022 posts, read 2,272,347 times
Reputation: 2168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Major Barbara View Post
Like full-time students and stay-at-home moms? People who don't look for work have NEVER been counted as unemployed. For obvious reasons.
Not talking about full time students or stay at home moms I am talking about people who had jobs but can not find one so they gave up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2015, 05:30 AM
 
1,820 posts, read 1,653,990 times
Reputation: 1091
So they expect a job to come find them? You can be considered "marginally attached" to the workforce by looking for work as rarely as once a year. Asking your cousin whether there is anything open down at the filling station would count as looking for work Do you think that's too high a bar to set for people who claim that they want to work? If you can't or won't lift a finger on your own behalf, you are NOT looking for a job, and you can't describe yourself as unemployed. Jobless of course, but not unemployed. Not if your behavior can't be distinguished from that of jobless people such as full-time students and stay-at-home moms who plainly do not want a job at the present time.

Five million people started a new job in April. There were 5.4 million advertised job openings as of the end of that month, the most since that series began 15 years ago. What sort of effort are your "gave up" people putting forward in hopes of becoming employed? None at all would seem to be the answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2015, 05:45 AM
 
Location: Spain
12,722 posts, read 7,567,076 times
Reputation: 22633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Eagle View Post
This probably does not count people who have just given up looking for jobs. It is probably a lot higher then that.
Yes on both counts... it doesn't include people who gave and it would be higher if it did.

Now why would we be interested in people who aren't looking for work when trying to measure how many people can't find work?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2015, 05:47 AM
 
6,768 posts, read 5,481,691 times
Reputation: 17641
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanhawk View Post
US adds 223K jobs in June | TheHill

If anyone really thinks the unemployment rate is that low then you are a dupe. Good and even not so good jobs are still hard to find.
Five years into an economic "recovery" and we an ever lower number of people in the population looking for work? Some recovery. Also, the number of jobs for April and May was revised downward which seems to be a common occurrence with the government stats.
Ha. I was gonna respond as such when I read only the title.

The "jobs" "created" are mostly part time, seasonal or temporary among the lower income jobs. The upper income jobs MAY fall into the same category, at least here.

It also doesn't count those who gave up, started their own business{which may be failing}, or actually retired-for now-until the economy improves, or retired permanently.

No, we are NOT recovering very well in the j-o-b-s department.

BUT IT LoOKS GOOD ON PAPER< and the Goverment will take credit for it!

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top