Reply With Quote
that is a zero sum game. One in, one out. Net change zero.
It has also been stated that newly created jobs aren't the only jobs available to be filled.
that is a zero sum game. One in, one out. Net change zero.
The economy doesn't quite turn that quickly or easily.
If you have some proof this is not a coincidence, feel free to present it. Otherwise, you are too smart to be subs uting innuendo for data.
FWIW, the trend line is pretty consistent since the end of the crisis, if you note the graph presented earlier.
You know that there are a few million jobs that are available but unfilled due to a lack of skilled workers, right?
I am just saying that those already created jobs may be getting filled.
You are taking figures out of context without understanding how exactly they are arrived at and terms defined. Color me unsurprised.
I have already put forth what I think about what the figures represent. Feel free to research the report and debunk that, if you can.
http://adpemploymentreport.com/PDF/R...Y_DEC_2008.pdf
boom goes the dynamite.
2008 report? What's the significance?
Whups.
Haven't had time to fully read through everything yet, but this seems to note that it controls for growth rates, and delivers, as I noted, a figure NET of payroll growth rates. All the time I have for this at the moment though.A level of employment is established in each cell by ulating the predicted
value of the matched sample growth rate in each cell forward and backwards from
the most recently benchmarked March estimate of employment in that cell. Such
referencing effectively weights the growth rates of the ADP data in each cell by
the observed distribution of employment by industry and size classification.
Feel free to run with that Cobra. :p
When the rate is above 8% republicans talk about it all the time when it drops they say it is BS.
http://adpemploymentreport.com/methodology.aspx
Given by the people who contract to prepare the data for the reports as illustrative of the methodology. Sorry, in a rush. the linked pdf is what you get when you click the bottom of the page here.The ADP National Employment Report®
Overview of Methodology & Methodological Enhancements
December 18, 2008
Prepared by Macroeconomic Advisers, LLC
Overview
Publication of the Employment Situation by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (the BLS) is the first - and generally the most important - release of government-sponsored economic data every month. Employment is an intrinsically important statistic. Furthermore, financial markets react, sometimes strongly, to "surprises" in the BLS' estimates of establishment employment that might signal future changes in monetary policy. Hence, information that helps analysts anticipate monthly changes in employment is valuable.
Automatic Data Processing, Inc. (ADP) is the nation's premier provider of payroll-related services. Currently, ADP processes over 500,000 payrolls, for approximately 430,000 separate business en ies, covering over 23 million employees, in all major industries and states. While doing so, every month ADP collects a wealth of information related to payroll employment well before publication of the Employment Situation.
ADP has contracted with Macroeconomic Advisers, LLC to create and maintain from this rich, timely dataset new estimates of nonfarm private employment published in the ADP National Employment Report. These are constructed from ADP's data on payrolls following a procedure similar to that used by the BLS to process its monthly survey of Current Employment Statistics into the "official" estimates of establishment employment. The ADP National Employment Report is released, for public use only, two days prior to the Employment Situation.
Click here for complete detail of the methodology used to develop the ADP National Employment Report.
Oh, I see. But the ADP Report isn't the BLS report, IIRC.
or... if one prefers the BLS site itself:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
good faq there
Just figured that out myself, it was looking like a contractor to me that provided some data, still sifting through. My bad for being in a rush.
No biggie. I thought the other link you posted to Wapo and CC commented as a good post did explain how the BLS does it.
Is this statement right? If you are a parttime worker making a quarter of what you used to make you are considered employed and if you can't collect unemployment any longer but still unemployed you don't count towards the rate. I read that on a news blogs comment page. God bless
Not always. There are quite a few employers not hiring and working current employees overtime instead. I can see some empty positions being filled, just not than many.
It seems to me there is really something fishy about how they get those numbers. Did that many more people really stop looking for work to make the numbers change that much? I think not. I think that people fell off the unemployment payment system, and had also already given up on looking for work.
As pointed out earlier, the 0.3% drop seems to be well within the trend in previous years...
Nov-Dec 2010: down 0.4%
Nov-Dec 2011: down 0.2%
Nov-Dec 2012: down 0.3%
Not sure how what looks "fishy" about the last number compared to the rest.
EDIT: The bolded is wrong... Should be Sept-Oct. Then again, looks to be well within the regular movement of numbers.
so, this 8% thing being such a big deal means romney doesn't care about 39% now?
They know this. CC for example was ing about how cold the numbers be revised like that. I posted the BLS explanation on how the surveys and revisions are done. He left fow awhile and is now playing stupid again.
You are not going to get much better from en led es that vote themselves no taxes but buy golf carts with government funds only to about poor people getting AFDC being irresponsible.
it's 47%. He says now that he was COMPLETELY WRONG with his 47% "gaffe". Just a simple error of misspeaking among all the speeches and bull he says. He asks us to give him a break
I think the "being under 8%" and the election season is what's making this bigger than it is, tbh...
I think the 8% number comes from,IIRC, no in bent Pres has ever been re-elected with 8% or more unemployment.
As McConnell said, the Repug priority is to defeat Obama, NOT help the economy, esp not get under the magic threshold of 8%. That's why the Repugs block the Vet job act, and the Jobs Act. They've been counting on high unemployment and bad economy to defeat Obama, rather than them putting a decent candidate and a credible campaign.
Please quote the post I was ing about revisions. It's not there.
You are so full of that you just make up and act like it is fact.
And yeah, I took advantage of Obama's electric car tax credits to get free golf carts for the ranch. Not exactly free, though, since I've probably paid more taxes in my life than you have earned income. I was paying taxes back in those years you s thought the tax rates were "fair".
And yeah, a think there is a definite percentage of people on AFDC that are worthless pieces of and ing, breeding self perpetuatng leeches on the system.
I started this thread when the rate was over 8%. I still think their number is ed and off by multiple points, not percentages of points.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
