Payrolls grow by 121,000

[nradisic]

Employment numbers are not as hot as predicted... Then again, I think most DU'ers know that the economy ain't as hot as the press makes it out to be. I believe that this is the fourth month in a row that employments numbers come out below concensus. Hmmm?

http://www.marketwatch.com/default.aspx?siteid=mktw&avatar=seen&dist=ctmw

[Roland99]

1. Lots of egg-smeared faces at the ADP today!!

[nradisic]

2. ADP predicted 368,000 new jobs?

What the hell are those people smoking?

Can we get some?

[Cassandra]

14. Here or in China?

[Norquist Nemesis]

3. Yeah, and Bush will be just down the street from me today

'touting' the numbers. :puke:

[UpInArms]

5. Spinners are already at it: Jobs report not as weak as it looks

http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=mktw&guid=%7BB5994557%2DC1C9%2D4DAE%2DAB7D%2DA16626BDCEFC%7D&symbol=

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. labor market was stronger in June than indicated by the tepid 121,000 growth in nonfarm payrolls.

The data from the Labor Department released Friday paint a muddled picture. While job growth of 121,000 was less than the 175,000 expected by economists and far less than the 390,000 projected by the ADP index, other aspects of the report show a healthier labor market. See full story.

In contrast to the weak payroll survey, the household survey showed robust job growth of 387,000 in June. The number of hours worked rose smartly, and average pay increased. The number of people who've been out of work longer than six months dropped by 217,000 to 1.1 million. The labor force participation rate rose by a tenth of a percentage point to 66.2%.

<snip>

The household survey continued to outperform the payroll survey in June. The household survey, which is used to compute the unemployment rate, has reported average job gains of 230,000 over the past year, compared with the 169,000 reported by the payroll survey.

While the two surveys measure slightly different things, economists say the payroll survey is a more accurate gauge of the labor market. But the household survey cannot be completely ignored.

...more...

You must pay attention to an inaccurate gauge!

[still_one]

7. they are trying to say the weaker number means the fed won't raise rates

consumer debt is the major issue right now, and people are reaching their credit limit.

[Tempest]

29. The investor class is cheering on the weak economy

They want interest rates to stay low, even if it means Americans suffer from it.

[Norquist Nemesis]

8. Paragraph #2

"In contrast to the weak payroll survey, the household survey showed robust job growth of 387,000 in June. The number of hours worked rose smartly, and average pay increased. The number of people who've been out of work longer than six months dropped by 217,000 to 1.1 million. The labor force participation rate rose by a tenth of a percentage point to 66.2%."

Yes, that's what happens when people are laid off. Others are required to pick up the slack at time and a half.

[ixion]

19. the team I'm on had about 10 developers when I started

we now have 4, and they haven't replaced anyone they've laid off, simply shifted the work to others. :grr:

[Norquist Nemesis]

22. And for the owners/shareholders it's "Soaring Productivity"!

I feel for you. I've spent more than enough time in the corporate dog and pony circus to last me for a lifetime.

[Roland99]

17. They sure are selling that point, eh?

:eyes:

[nradisic]

4. The unemployment rate numbers are cooked!

For the fourth month in a row, the unemployment rate sits at 4.6%, yet the rate of job creation has fallen way short all four of those months...I am no math wiz, but somehow that does not make sense. Even though there have been over 300,000 less jobs created than expected, the unemployment rate remains the same? Forget about all those folks that are destitute, can't find jobs and can't collect unemployment and are basically not counted any more....

Are we about to go to hell in a handbasket and we don't even know it?

[mike923]

30. If only it could be proven....

who ever breaks the story about the numbers being fixed is sitting on a pulitzer. I don't understand why any progressive leaning reporter doesn't do a story on it. It would mean multiple high ranking officials in the administration going to jail.

I just don't understand.

[Roland99]

31. See post #16. The numbers (incl. inflation) have been inflated for YEARS

[mike923]

32. You mean since Bush took office, or even before?

[Roland99]

33. Well, * has altered things more but it was done under Clinton, too.

Esp. unemployment.

[still_one]

6. they are going to pump up the market on this, at least in the open

they will say that the fed won't increase interest rates, blah blah blah

The biggest problem facing the country is debt, both on an individual basis, and government basis

How long will it be before consumers are tapped out on credit? When that happens, that is when things will start to get hairy. I personally think it will happen before the election.

The increasing gasoline prices, along with a lower standard of living do not bode well for the individual just trying to make ends meet

[mapatriot]

10. Futures stable

Actually, the S&P Futures have stayed unchanged,up a benign .80, since the announcement.

[still_one]

15. it just turned down

[Roland99]

20. It's a bloody mess on Wall Street now.

[still_one]

24. I believe you haven't seen anything yet

the summer is going to be a very tough one

I think the dow probably will get as low as 9000, and the other indicies will follow

[Roland99]

25. You may be right......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2375767&mesg_id=2376018

[Ishoutandscream2]

44. May want to do some online betting

"In the next three months, will the stock market go below 10000?" Right now, Vegas has it at +500. Think I may play it. Sure seems to be a more reliable investment than playing the market.

[bluestateguy]

9. That doesn't even keep up with the new workers entering the workforce

You need at leat 150,000 just to keep up with the new workers entering the workforce.

Sorry Bush, no credit.

[still_one]

12. absolutely correct, it is pathetic

they are trying to say this means they will not increase interest rates, and that is good for the market. The futures have already fallen back from when the news was first released

[Ilsa]

11. Yeah, those payroll numbers are full of situations like I saw

yesterday: the lady at a donut shop gets there are 5am every day and works until 1pm. Then she goes to her new second job until around 7-8. Then she goes home and spends 30 minutes with her kids she hasn't seen all day, goes to bed, and starts over at 5am the next morning. And her husband still owes the IRS. This is Bush's America.

[KKKarl is an idiot]

18. Family values

Bush & Co. go on about family values. This lady does not even get to see her kids. What are her kids going to grow up & do. They do not get enough attention. Mom & dad may grow apart because they do not see each other enough. One or both may even have an affair because of this. Then the divorce. Those kids are messed up for life. They will fail in their commitments because of the lives they knew with their parents. Going from one partner to the next. Maybe, if they were female, having an abortion along the way. Thank you George Bush for the minimum wage of $5.15 & the diminishing welfare programs. You preach family values & yet you don't give the majority of Americans the opportunity to practice them.

[maine_raptor]

13. If the definition of a depression is

an economic slowdown over a certain length of time (and it's too damn early for me to remember the exact numbers with only one cup of coffee in me so far), shouldn't there be a term for a period of time when the employment numbers are continually down?

Is there an econo-geek out there that can enlighten me on this?

I have long suspected, like poster #4, that the "unemployment rate" numbers being put out are BS. When the data that makes up an overall number ("unemployment rate") moves, the overall number should show some effect. What gives on that?


I wonder if this thought has occurred to Lou Dobbs and the like?

[Roland99]

16. Unemployment and inflation numbers *ARE* total bullshit. Here's why >>>>>>

1. Employment and Unemployment Reporting
http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/article/id=341

3. Consumer Price Index
http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/article/id=343

[papau]

42. I really like John Williams' work :-)

:-)

[Birthmark]

21. Payrolls grow by 121,000

http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm

And only 175,000 of the 121,000 jobs "created" are simply assumed to have been created. :D

[davekriss]

23. I was just about to ask...

...how many of the 121,000 jobs created were the CES birth-death fudge factor. 175,000? That means (seasonal adjustments aside), they counted a net loss of jobs of -49,000!

Gee, if it weren't for this statistical "adjustment" adding ersatz-jobs, we the people of main street would really be suffering!!

[tritsofme]

36. See post 35. nt

[tritsofme]

35. The Net Birth/Death Model is not seasonally adjusted.

So the number is not is comparable to the seasonally adjusted payroll number that was released.

However it might be able to be compared to the non-seasonally adjusted number, which is a gain of 539,000.

[papau]

43. over 12 months the average 80000 job increase caused by birth/death

is more than half the total seasonally adjusted average monthly job increase.

1849 vs 1854 is the dif for seasonally 12 months and not seasonally 12 months, so over 12 months the birth death can be treated as a direct add to the total job gain.

[freethought]

26. How much of this is seasonal employment? n/t

[The Anti-Neo Con]

27. Yeah and how many are min. wage McJobs? n/t

[LiberalEsto]

34. Well, both my kids are waitressing

and one of their cousins, a college grad, works for Starbucks. The older cousins got through college while it was still affordable, and they're doing ok jobwise.

As far as I can tell, the job market absolutely stinks. I've been working part time for 2 years after 13 months of unemployment.

[Roland99]

28. Numbers usually get seasonally adjusted. But, the thing to note with this

is that ~160,000 new jobs are needed each month to account for an increase in the size of the labor force.

The Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) ticked up last month but job creation was well below the minimum needed for equilibrium yet the unemployment number remained the same. But, I think we all know that real unemployment is really about 12% or a tad higher.

[tritsofme]

37. I liked your response

until you claimed "real unemployment" is around 12%

Even the broadest measure of unemployment only ticks in at 8.4%

And there are bound to be discrepancies between the CES which calculates payrolls and the CPS which calculates the unemployment rate.

[Roland99]

38. Well, have you ever read John Williams?

http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/article/id=341

The popularly followed unemployment rate was 5.5% in July 2004, seasonally adjusted. That is known as U-3, one of six unemployment rates published by the BLS. The broadest U-6 measure was 9.5%, including discouraged and marginally attached workers.

Up until the Clinton administration, a discouraged worker was one who was willing, able and ready to work but had given up looking because there were no jobs to be had. The Clinton administration dismissed to the non-reporting netherworld about five million discouraged workers who had been so categorized for more than a year. As of July 2004, the less-than-a-year discouraged workers total 504,000. Adding in the netherworld takes the unemployment rate up to about 12.5%.

[tritsofme]

39. U6 peaked at 10.4% in Sept 2003.

It never reached 12.5%

And as I said earlier, it now stands at 8.4%, a 0.2% uptick from last month, and its highest level since February.

[Roland99]

40. The 12.5% includes more than just U-6. I just posted that.

[cosmicdot]

41. June layoffs rise by 25% vs May

June layoffs rise by 25 pct vs. May: survey


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Planned U.S. layoffs rose in June for the first time this year, by 25 percent over May, possibly signaling an economic slowdown, according to a report released on Thursday.

Total announced layoffs in the month were 67,176 jobs, compared with 53,716 planned cuts in May, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc., an employment consulting firm, "in what may be new evidence of an economic slowdown."

In the first half of 2006, U.S. employers announced 436,458 job cuts, 19 percent lower than the 538,274 cuts seen in the first half of 2005, the firm said. Most of the layoffs in June resulted from cost cutting, Challenger said in a statement.

...

"Many economists are pointing toward a slowdown in the second half of the year, due in part to weaker consumer spending as well as inflation. Consumers at the gas pump are not the only ones seeing their budgets squeezed," Challenger said, adding companies' costs were soaring due to high energy and materials costs.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-07-06T113209Z_01_NAT002136_RTRUKOC_0_US-ECONOMY-LAYOFFS-CHALLENGER.xml&src=rss


where do these numbers fit in?
does a survey miss any numbers?


thanks to MaineDem and UpInArms for posting this in LBN yesterday
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2374084

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2373953