Gallup unemployment continues to fall: New low of 7.3%.

I really wish we all could talk about facts and leave the crap out of it. It's for sure both sides does it. I think both men have the good of the country at heart. It's just they and we see things differently. I don't agree with Obama's illegal problem. Flooding our welfare rolls with millions of new low skilled illegals/now citizens. I also don't agree with him putting our biggest manufactures of electricity out of business and hurting a lot of poor with higher electric bills and eliminating thousands of jobs. But it seems he does and he has a lot of followers. So we;ll just have to see how this all works out.

 

Payroll equals employment.

Non-farm payrolls are non-farm people who are employed.

 

Holiday employment just at Taeget.

Target, for instance, expects to hire between 80,000 and 92,000 temporary employees nationwide, down from 90,000 workers in 2011. The Minneapolis-based company doesn't break out job figures on the metro level.

 

From my perspective it's not about winning or losing or failure; it's asking the question...what has government done in the last 3-4 years to allow the private economy to achieve more growth? Do you actually believe that the current administration can call themselves allies of industry? Forget about the political bailouts and loans and tax credits etc. given to a few chosen companies and explain what has government done for US industry in general to improve the chances of success, to grow the business, to increase exports, to encourage investment, etc.?

 

Holiday employment just at Taeget.

Target, for instance, expects to hire between 80,000 and 92,000 temporary employees nationwide, down from 90,000 workers in 2011. The Minneapolis-based company doesn't break out job figures on the metro level.

http://www.oregonlive.com/money/index.ssf/2012/09/businesses_big_and_small_gear.html

 

"Flooding the welfare rolls with millions of new low skilled illegals"

Huh? What are you talking about? There are far fewer illegals coming in now.

Putting biggest the manufactures of electricity out of business? Huh?

 

According to Gallup, if everyone stopped looking for a job, the unemployment rate would suddenly drop to 0%.

 

The unemployment numbers are 'supposed' to be seasonally adjusted in order to prevent extreme increases and decreases seen in month-to-month trends...which is why the unemployment rate won't go to 5% for December then back to 8% in February...

 

Of course. If you don't want a job, you are not unemployed.

 

Folks were saying the same thing last year remember?

The UR was over 9% in August and dropped to 8.5% in December, and many of our conservative friends kept saying it was just seasonal, and as soon as the new year started the rate would go back up to 9%.

But they were wrong. The rate kept falling and falling, down to 8.1% in April.

Now its next year. SSDD.

 

Didn't you say that last year?

But the UR kept dropping in February ...

 

Sure, they given out hundreds of billions in tax cuts and spending programs.

 

I see.

 

Sure. They just are missing about 10 million people who are employed but not on nonfarm payrolls.

 

You act like it is some bizarre notion.

 

I think we should just focus on the quantity of Americans who are employed...getting this data directly from payroll logs, using no smoke & mirrors calculations, no personal interviews...just the facts that we know. Then we can compare October 2012 with October 2011 and understand precisely how things are going not requiring seasonal adjustments. This can be factored by the percentage of population growth assuming a historical participation rate.

Example;

October 2011 employed; 132.5 million
October 2012 employed; 133.5 million

Population growth; 1.25%
October 2011 population; 310.6 million
October 2012 population; 314.5 million

132.5 million (*) 101.25% (=) 134.2 million

It would also be interesting to chart the monthly participation rate (quantity employed / population).

So...this indicates the rate of job growth is not even keeping up with the population growth.

 

Nonfarm payroll employment is a compiled name for goods-producing, construction and manufacturing companies. It does not include farm workers, private household employees, non-profit organization employees, or government employees.

Why would we care about farm workers, or house keepers, or government employees?

Non-farm payroll is the meat and potatoes of the economy!

Government can add 5 million jobs with debt money and you will think the job picture is fantastic.

Leave out the fluff and focus on the true jobs picture...

 

Fire, you misunderstand. Iriemon is not interested in the real unemployment numbers in the slightest.

 

What are the sources for your data? I'm not aware of any source that has published employment data for October 2012.

 

What are the sources for your data? I'm not aware of any source that has published employment data for October 2012.

 

There you go. See what happens when you read?

If they have jobs and are employed, why would you count them as unemployed? If you wanted to be accurate, I mean.

You mean you're agree stimulus works?

 

You guys are comparing 2 different numbers.

The payroll based (called the establishment survey) employment figure is 133.5 million.

The household survey employment number is 142.9 million.

The 2 numbers are not the same. The household survey is much more volatile than the establishment survey. The household survey is based on samples from state unemployment insurance records and phone calls to households, and counts as employed people that do not show up in the payroll survey - agricultural workers, selfemployed, people on unpaid leave, and unpaid family and private workers.

The payroll survey is based upon payroll tax records and is much more reliable, but it does not catch all the people who are just starting a business and may not be paying payroll taxes yet. The BLS estimates the number of new start-ups.

There is a lot of room for manipulation. Expect the unemployment rate to go up significantly when the quarterly revision comes out.

This was addressed in this thread regarding why the unemployment rate corrections always revise the unemployment rate up:

 

You were doing a good job explaining it until you went into the conspiracy mode. I'd love to here your explanation as to how "there is a lot of room for manipulation".

And they don't always revise the unemployment rate up.

For example, the Oct 2009 unemployment rate was initially released as 10.2%.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/business/economy/07jobs.html?_r=0

It is now listed as 10.0%.

 

A lot of Republican idiots make this comparison and they really are comparing "apples and oranges" because the information comes from two completely different sources and measures two completely different things.

The "Jobs added" comes from a survey of 170(?) major corporations and excludes all farm labor, small enterprise employment, and self-employment.

The "unemployment" numbers come from phone surveys of tens of thousands of families addressing how many are unemployed in the family, looking for work, or underemployed and it includes farm labor, self-employment and those who are voluntarily unemployed for numerous reasons such as going to school .