April unemployment numbers

[fskimospy]

It's based on the new system consistently yielding lower unemployment numbers than the old system. When the new system consistently yields lower unemployment numbers than the old system, one doesn't really need to know why the new system consistently yields lower unemployment numbers than the old system to know that the new system consistently yields lower unemployment numbers than the old system.

This is not sound logic. If the old system were faulty this would be the case as well. If employment really were better and everything else stayed the same this would also be the case. Saying that lower reported unemployment is facial evidence of an attempt to change the numbers to make unemployment lower is illogical.

So again, you have made a statement that BLS has intentionally altered their calculations to make unemployment appear better. If this is the case, provide the changes they have made that accomplish this. If you can't do that you might want to question why you would come to such a conclusion considering your lack of evidence.

 

[fskimospy]

The economy grew at .1% during the first quarter 2014.

http://time.com/82434/gdp-economy-first-quarter-2014/

If fewer people are filing for unemployment, where are the getting jobs at?

The economic growth report does not confirm the unemployment numbers. In other words, the 2 numbers do not jive.

Except of course that the regressions that relate GDP growth and employment growth don't make statements of what those changes would be on a quarterly basis.

 

[werepossum]

This is not sound logic. If the old system were faulty this would be the case as well. If employment really were better and everything else stayed the same this would also be the case. Saying that lower reported unemployment is facial evidence of an attempt to change the numbers to make unemployment lower is illogical.

So again, you have made a statement that BLS has intentionally altered their calculations to make unemployment appear better. If this is the case, provide the changes they have made that accomplish this. If you can't do that you might want to question why you would come to such a conclusion considering your lack of evidence.

There is a lot written on this subject, and I have every faith that you can find it for yourself.

 

[Bowfinger]

It's not good news that the unemployment rate went down if it went down due to people giving up on finding work. It's merely made to look like good news. ...

Jobs = Jobs + 288,000.

That is good news, no matter how desperately you need to deny it.

 

[Bowfinger]

There is a lot written on this subject, and I have every faith that you can find it for yourself.

Any of it written by credible, qualified sources? BLS documents any changes to its methodology. What did they change that caused this purported jobs inflation?

 

[fskimospy]

There is a lot written on this subject, and I have every faith that you can find it for yourself.

Well as the person making the assertion I assume you have read it and can point us all in that direction. When can we expect this?

 

[Bowfinger]

Well as the person making the assertion I assume you have read it and can point us all in that direction. When can we expect this?

Soon, I'm sure. I once spent significant time to understand their numbers and methodologies, but I've not kept up. Based on a quick check of their unemployment stats, it looks like their last actual methodology changes were in 2003 and 2004, with something new starting this month (though I didn't see the details). I am therefore especially curious to learn about these other mysterious changes -- undocumented, perhaps -- that have "consistently" distorted the numbers in Obama's favor. It should be fascinating reading.

 

[Knowing]

Jobs = Jobs + 288,000.

That is good news, no matter how desperately you need to deny it.

It added 190,000 in March '14, but that didn't move the rate. The economy needs to add around 250,000 jobs every month in order to keep up with the number of people entering the workforce. So yes, ~40,000 more jobs than are necessary is a small win.

The unemployment rate went down by .4 percent because of people who were no longer counted as unemployed, almost three quarters of a million of them.

The swan diving labor participation rate is not healthy.

 

[fskimospy]

Soon, I'm sure. I once spent significant time to understand their numbers and methodologies, but I've not kept up. Based on a quick check of their unemployment stats, it looks like their last actual methodology changes were in 2003 and 2004, with something new starting this month (though I didn't see the details). I am therefore especially curious to learn about these other mysterious changes -- undocumented, perhaps -- that have "consistently" distorted the numbers in Obama's favor. It should be fascinating reading.

Yes, I'm sure that explanation will be forthcoming any minute now.

It seems odd to believe there is a deliberate attempt to cook the books by the authoritative, nonpartisan entity that is responsible for some incredibly important information that is used all over the world, all based on nothing.

 

[Texashiker]

Except of course that the regressions that relate GDP growth and employment growth don't make statements of what those changes would be on a quarterly basis.

What? English, do you speak it?

The economy has stalled. Growth for the first quarter was 0.1%. So where are people getting jobs at?

We are seeing a reduction in unemployment for several reasons, but none of those reasons is because the economy is growing.

1 - People on long term unemployment are turning to social security disability. There was a thread on this topic a year ago or so?

Long term economic turndowns and the number of people applying for social security disability go hand-in-hand.

2 - baby boomers are retiring at what, 10,000 a day?

There are not enough new jobs being created to support the unemployment numbers.

Lets say 300,000 baby boomers are retiring every month, and all we need it around 90,000 new jobs every month to support the economy. Of course we are going to see less people filing for unemployment. We better pray the baby boomers never return to the workforce.

One of the big problems is people being hired to replace the boomers are not being hired in at the same wage. The new people are going to start in at much less than what someone on the job for 20 years will be making.

There are no new jobs.

The people who are getting the jobs vacated by the baby boomers are making less than the boomers were making. People make less money, they pay less taxes.

 

[fskimospy]

What? English, do you speak it?

The economy has stalled. Growth for the first quarter was 0.1%. So where are people getting jobs at?

We are seeing a reduction in unemployment for several reasons, but none of those reasons is because the economy is growing.

1 - People on long term unemployment are turning to social security disability. There was a thread on this topic a year ago or so?

Long term economic turndowns and the number of people applying for social security disability go hand-in-hand.

2 - baby boomers are retiring at what, 10,000 a day?

There are not enough new jobs being created to support the unemployment numbers.

Lets say 300,000 baby boomers are retiring every month, and all we need it around 90,000 new jobs every month to support the economy. Of course we are going to see less people filing for unemployment.

One of the big problems is people being hired to replace the boomers are not being hired in at the same wage. The new people are going to start in at much less than what someone on the job for 20 years will be making.

There are no new jobs.

The people who are getting the jobs vacated by the baby boomers are making less than the boomers were making. People make less money, they pay less taxes.

This is babbling nonsense.

 

[Texashiker]

This is babbling nonsense.

So you have nothing to dispute economic growth reports are not supporting the unemployment numbers?

Liberals such as yourself better pray the baby boomers never return to the workforce. If they do, the nation is going to be in for some very bad news.

 

[fskimospy]

So you have nothing to dispute economic growth reports are not supporting the unemployment numbers?

Liberals such as yourself better pray the baby boomers never return to the workforce. If they do, the nation is going to be in for some very bad news.

No, I'm saying that you have so little understanding of what you're talking about that discussing it is pointless. Your post was also mostly incoherent.

If you were a different poster I might bother. Considering your history though, I know not to waste my time.

 

[Texashiker]

No, I'm saying that you have so little understanding of what you're talking about that discussing it is pointless. Your post was also mostly incoherent.

If you were a different poster I might bother. Considering your history though, I know not to waste my time.

In other words, you have nothing.

What is going to be fun to watch, how people such as yourself will justify bailing out social security, and the free money going to the banks. You are for unlimited debt, right? Well, it is on its way.

Every president starting probably with nixon has screwed the middle class over. Nixon established talks with china. Regan lowered taxes on the rich. Bush and Clinton signed nafta and gatt.

Obama with all of his promises of hope and change has done nothing, absolutely nothing to change the course of this nation.

He has done nothing to bring the jobs back.

He has done nothing to bring north korea and iran inline for world peace to flourish.

What has obama done, he has worked on more free trade agreements to help ensure jobs will never come back. That is right, the jobs are "never" coming back.

Unemployment numbers are a farce, and absolute farce. The labor market is dependent on the baby boomers leaving their jobs. We are not depending on innovation, we are not depending on factories being built, there is nothing to look forward to.

The economy has stagnated and will never recover. The only way young people are able to find jobs is by older people leaving the job market.

 

[fskimospy]

You have no clue what you're talking about, as usual. Please go educate yourself.

 

[Texashiker]

You have no clue what you're talking about, as usual. Please go educate yourself.

You can bury your head in the sand all day long, all night, clear through next week or until the 2016 elections.

No matter how long you hide the truth is out here. The truth is like the long shadows just before the setting sun.

The sun is setting on the US economy. Running from the shadows is not going to help you. Pointing to the fading glimpses of light is not going to help you.

The American people were promised hope and change, and we were lied to.

 

[OverVolt]

So you believe there is a government conspiracy to make employment numbers look better? This is fascinating, considering the transparent way these surveys are conducted each month.

Can you let us know who you think is in on the conspiracy, how they did it, and why?

Haha yes, good, everyone gets it wrong when you can go straight to the BLS and see for yourself. Often times its the MEDIA that is misquoting the BLS if you care to dig into the ACTUAL report. This goes for MSM and new media alike.

That said the labor market is still borked. Its the skills gap. Its the fact that its the first time in history due to the aging population that we have 4 generations crammed in the workforce at once. Its both the kids hiding from adulthood in college racking up $1Tr in student loans just as much as its the miserly baby boomers retiring and their spending predictably drops off a cliff as it always does with people on fixed incomes. In terms of people dropping out of the labor force, those are your two biggest.

I think people like the ones you described have the right idea on the solutions but can't identify the real problems. And I think people like you have the right idea on the problems but would support solutions that would actually make it worse.

 

[First]

You can bury your head in the sand all day long, all night, clear through next week or until the 2016 elections.

No matter how long you hide the truth is out here. The truth is like the long shadows just before the setting sun.

The sun is setting on the US economy. Running from the shadows is not going to help you. Pointing to the fading glimpses of light is not going to help you.

The American people were promised hope and change, and we were lied to.

lol.

 

[OverVolt]

The economy grew at .1% during the first quarter 2014.

http://time.com/82434/gdp-economy-first-quarter-2014/

If fewer people are filing for unemployment, where are the getting jobs at?

The economic growth report does not confirm the unemployment numbers. In other words, the 2 numbers do not jive.

They don't. They rack up student loans by going to university of phoenix or they are retiring, or in a soup kitchen line.

 

[Texashiker]

They don't. They rack up student loans by going to university of phoenix or they are retiring, or in a soup kitchen line.

You mentioned we have 4 generations in the job market. Students have $1 trillion in debt, baby boomers are going to wind down their spending habits,,, and a few other things.

You were right on target.

Where is the money supposed to come from to pay back the trillion dollars in student loans and pay for the baby boomers retirement?

Its not from my generation. We have busted our ass for the past 25+ years and are hoping to take things easy until retirement.

Maybe from my kids, but they are barely scrapping by.

We think things are bad now? Just wait until baby boomers hit their peak retirement and peak medical bills. Who is going to be paying for dementia treatments for millions of boomers? What about cancer, heart surgery,,,,, by the tens of millions.

Its ok though. The federal reserve can just print more money.

Social secueity, medicare, medicaid need a few trillion? No problem.

The fed is having to print money out of thin air to keep wall street afloat. Maybe they can do the same thing for SS?

 

[werepossum]

Well as the person making the assertion I assume you have read it and can point us all in that direction. When can we expect this?

You can expect it any time you wish to expect it.

It added 190,000 in March '14, but that didn't move the rate. The economy needs to add around 250,000 jobs every month in order to keep up with the number of people entering the workforce. So yes, ~40,000 more jobs than are necessary is a small win.

The unemployment rate went down by .4 percent because of people who were no longer counted as unemployed, almost three quarters of a million of them.

The swan diving labor participation rate is not healthy.

One could project the point at which we'll have zero unemployment and no one working. As long as the appropriate party is in power, some people will still insist that everything is fine.

 

[realibrad]

You mentioned we have 4 generations in the job market. Students have $1 trillion in debt, baby boomers are going to wind down their spending habits,,, and a few other things.

You were right on target.

Where is the money supposed to come from to pay back the trillion dollars in student loans and pay for the baby boomers retirement?

Its not from my generation. We have busted our ass for the past 25+ years and are hoping to take things easy until retirement.

Maybe from my kids, but they are barely scrapping by.

We think things are bad now? Just wait until baby boomers hit their peak retirement and peak medical bills. Who is going to be paying for dementia treatments for millions of boomers? What about cancer, heart surgery,,,,, by the tens of millions.

Its ok though. The federal reserve can just print more money.

Social secueity, medicare, medicaid need a few trillion? No problem.

The fed is having to print money out of thin air to keep wall street afloat. Maybe they can do the same thing for SS?

So this post I almost 100% agree with. Your previous post I disagree with almost 90% of it. Lol

 

[fskimospy]

Haha yes, good, everyone gets it wrong when you can go straight to the BLS and see for yourself. Often times its the MEDIA that is misquoting the BLS if you care to dig into the ACTUAL report. This goes for MSM and new media alike.

That said the labor market is still borked. Its the skills gap. Its the fact that its the first time in history due to the aging population that we have 4 generations crammed in the workforce at once. Its both the kids hiding from adulthood in college racking up $1Tr in student loans just as much as its the miserly baby boomers retiring and their spending predictably drops off a cliff as it always does with people on fixed incomes. In terms of people dropping out of the labor force, those are your two biggest.

Just an FYI, there's really very little evidence for a 'skills gap':

http://www.bcg.com/media/PressReleaseDetails.aspx?id=tcm:12-118945

Perhaps more importantly, wage data doesn't show there to be a skills gap either. If we really were super short on people with certain skills it would stand to reason that their wages would strongly increase as companies competed for the workers they needed. That hasn't happened though.

I think people like the ones you described have the right idea on the solutions but can't identify the real problems. And I think people like you have the right idea on the problems but would support solutions that would actually make it worse.

What about my solutions do you think would make it worse, and why?

 

[fskimospy]

You can expect it any time you wish to expect it.

Like I said, I won't hold my breath for you to back up your accusations.

 

[Bowfinger]

It added 190,000 in March '14, but that didn't move the rate.

That's because the participation rate increased in March.

The economy needs to add around 250,000 jobs every month in order to keep up with the number of people entering the workforce. So yes, ~40,000 more jobs than are necessary is a small win.

No, that's way off. The break-even point is around 140,000 jobs per month the last time I checked. Further, that figure has been trending downwards. It was closer to 150,000 a decade ago. We're therefore looking at ~148,000 more jobs above the break-even point.

The unemployment rate went down by .4 percent because of people who were no longer counted as unemployed, almost three quarters of a million of them.

Well that, and the 288,000 who were hired into new jobs. I suppose technically that 288K includes a lot of people who are no longer counted as unemployed, what with them being employed now.

The swan diving labor participation rate is not healthy.

Swan diving? Hyperbole, much? The labor participation rate has dropped 3.1 points in ten years, less than 0.5% per year. That's noteworthy, but not much of a dive. Further, as I offered earlier (and you ignored), much of that drop is the long-anticipated retirement of baby boomers. Such retirements of senior employees open opportunities for other job seekers. Finally, the current participation rate is higher than it was during the booming 60's, and comparable to where it was in the 70's. The world didn't end then, and it won't end now.