Is unemployment getting worse?

[Blackjack200]

Ho hum, another month, another 227,000 jobs added.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...te-unchanged/2012/03/09/gIQAt01B1R_story.html

The markets like it, and something tells me the voters will too.

 

[blankslate]

According to ADP payroll services as of 2 days ago at the time of this post.

Indicators are pointing to increased employment.

Here is the source article...

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-03-07/adp-says-u-dot-s-dot-added-216-000-jobs-in-february

A private company rather than some government agency which some here just distrust as a matter of course says employment is increasing.

from the article

“Everything is pointing to broader employment gains,” Troy Davig, a senior U.S. economist at Barclays Capital Inc. in New York, said before the report. “As people start experiencing a steadier stream of income, that will translate into consumption and that will start building a stronger foundation for growth.”

The ADP report is based on data from about 340,000 businesses employing more than 21 million workers. Macroeconomic Advisers LLC in St. Louis produces the data with ADP.

 

[First]

Instead of trying to put people down to inflate your elitist ego, do some research to see how graphs are used to manipulate peoples perceptions of statistics.

I know how they're used to manipulate people, and this isn't one of those cases. The purpose of this histogram, in this case, is to merely show an upward trend to make it visually clear what the graph is supposed to drive home to the reader. It's not meant to show some sort of inaccurate exponential growth.

In this case they put 108 million at the bottom and 111 at the top and take a slice off the top of the graph to make it look bigger than it actually is, a common deception practice discussed below on the last page of the lesson.(math scores for term 1)

http://www.mindset.co.za/resources//0000042667/0000068829/0000074357/LN%20Manipulating%20Data%20L3.pdf

I'm not even sure what you're trying to accomplish by posting this link you clearly don't understand. Nothing in this graph is inaccurate or exaggerated. Think of it this way; if they didn't show it the way that they did, they wouldn't be able to show a graph at all, because it would look like growth was non-existent. 108M to 111M is a significant improvement, so they HAVE to start the baseline where they did.