Welcome to PatsFans.com

Something Postive - Have At It - Negate at Will

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Mrs.PatsFanInVa, Dec 4, 2009.

  1. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,889
    Likes Received:
    328
    Ratings:
    +559 / 9 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Employers in the U.S. cut the fewest jobs in November since the recession began and the unemployment rate unexpectedly fell, signaling the recovery is lifting the labor market out of the worst slump in the post-World War II era.

    Payrolls fell by 11,000 workers, less than the median estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News, figures from the Labor Department showed today in Washington. The jobless rate declined to 10 percent.
    The smaller-than-expected decline in payrolls was accompanied by gains in hours worked, wages and staffing at temporary employment agencies, signs companies may soon begin to hire full-time workers.

    The number of temporary workers increased 52,000 in November, the biggest since October 2004 and the fourth straight rise. Payrolls at temporary-help agencies often turn up before total employment because companies prefer to see a steady increase in demand before taking on permanent staff.

    The average work week grew to 33.2 hours in November, the highest since February, while average weekly earnings rose to $622.17.

    Some companies are adding workers. Infosys Technologies Ltd., India’s second-largest software exporter by revenue, plans to add 1,000 employees in the U.S. in the next four to five quarters, said Chief Financial Officer V. Balakrishnan.

    Payrolls in U.S. Decline 11,000 in November; Unemployment 10% - Bloomberg.com
     
  2. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,228
    Likes Received:
    197
    Ratings:
    +668 / 2 / -9

    God Damn Bush
     
  3. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,673
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +387 / 3 / -15

    #18 Jersey

    "After the typical in January in which the Birth/Death Model revisions bore some semblance of reality, the Birth/Death numbers remain in deep outer space.

    At this point in the cycle birth death numbers should have been massively contracting for months. The BLS is going to keep adding jobs through the entire recession in a complete display of incompetence.

    Please note that one cannot subtract or add birth death revisions to the reported totals and get a meaningful answer. One set of numbers is seasonally adjusted the other is not. In the black box the BLS combines the two coming out with a total. The Birth Death numbers influence the overall totals but the math is not as simple as it appears and the effect is nowhere near as big as it might logically appear at first glance."


    Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

    Furthermore......

    "The official unemployment rate is 10.0%. However, if you start counting all the people that want a job but gave up, all the people with part-time jobs that want a full-time job, all the people who dropped off the unemployment rolls because their unemployment benefits ran out, etc., you get a closer picture of what the unemployment rate is. That number is in the last row labeled U-6.

    It reflects how unemployment feels to the average Joe on the street. U-6 is 17.2%. Both U-6 and U-3 (the so called "official" unemployment number) are poised to rise further although most likely at a slower pace than earlier this year.

    Looking ahead, there is no driver for jobs and states in forced cutback mode are making matters far worse.

    Unemployment is likely to continue rising until sometime in 2011."
     
  4. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,627
    Likes Received:
    217
    Ratings:
    +514 / 13 / -12

    #24 Jersey

    Sorry, there is nothing positive about 10% unemployment - especially after all those (LOL at this) "saved jobs".
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2009
  5. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    It is better than 10.2% unemployment. That is a literally +.2% improvement. So math and an elementary play on words says you're wrong.
     
  6. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,673
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +387 / 3 / -15

    #18 Jersey

    That is nothing to "LOL" about....more like a "ROFL" on that one! :rofl:
     
  7. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,673
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +387 / 3 / -15

    #18 Jersey

    If you actually read my link, you'll find that the unemployment rate is being manipulated via the birth/death model/data.

    Also, it does not measure those who have been unemployed for a long time and have become discouraged. The real rate is well over 15% unemployed.
     
  8. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    17% +. I'm well aware, and have been for years of the problems of the way we calculate unemployment, including the Bush administrations efforts to make this calculation even less meaningful. Nevertheless, at the most literal level, the unemployment rate did decrease, did it not?
     
  9. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,627
    Likes Received:
    217
    Ratings:
    +514 / 13 / -12

    #24 Jersey

    My statement was not correct literally, I suppose, but this is still not "positive". I guess if my kid fails math then I'll start to buy him treats for coming home with a D-. Good job, buddy :rolleyes:
     
  10. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    If you expected the jobs number to do anything other than gradually improve, then you would be expecting something the history of recession recovery has never shown to happen. Good job on the fanciful expectations and the invalid analogy.
     
  11. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,627
    Likes Received:
    217
    Ratings:
    +514 / 13 / -12

    #24 Jersey

    Don't worry, I don't have any positive expectations with this administration. If unemployment is below 9% this time next year I will be surprised and I expect it to be at 10+% at various times next year. I also expect inflation to start kicking up if unemployment does lower with the literal ton of cash the obamans are dropping on the economy.
     
  12. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,826
    Likes Received:
    182
    Ratings:
    +374 / 11 / -28

    If I remember correctly Ronald Reagan changed the way we count the unemployed, prior to that it included the discouraged workers and those who lost benefits, so the quick fix was manipulate the information to exclude everyone except those who are collecting...

    The result was that the numbers of unemployed went miraculously down... but who cares about history... Ronnie has been deified by the right...
     
  13. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,673
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +387 / 3 / -15

    #18 Jersey

    Great point Darryl! Yes, the methodology changed and continues to morph. Unemployment numbers are calculated by the federal gov't and you gotta believe they are still being manipulated by the current regime....and they are!

    The Birth/Death model is where they are doing their manipulating!
     
  14. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,673
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +387 / 3 / -15

    #18 Jersey

    Only "if" the birth/death model reflects reality AND only if they count those who are still unemployed but not counted.

    My theory is that the administration wanted to post some positive news to spur increased holiday shopping. I know it's theory, but you gotta admit, it makes a LOT of sense.

    The gov't is also falsely reporting real estate trends as well. I guess some believe NEWS can change the direction of the economy. That is not only stupid, it's dishonest!
     
  15. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    They wouldn't have needed to fudge the unemployment rate since the extremely low number of jobs lost relative to the rest of this year is already really good news. The unemployment rate was already fudged and I'm not aware of any effort by the administration to change it, for better or for worse.
     
  16. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,128
    Likes Received:
    285
    Ratings:
    +675 / 6 / -9

    Unreal. Good news comes out and you still can't muster up the stones to give credit where credit is due.

    There is no question that jobs were saved, and almost everyone who knows anything about economics agrees that without the stimulus, unemployment would be higher than it is now.

    I'm sure you might LOL about that, since you seem to revel in your ignorance, but I'm sure those who still have jobs appreciate the gesture.
     
  17. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,673
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +387 / 3 / -15

    #18 Jersey

    Well, considering 17% unemployment is "depression-level", I would not have expected the numbers to get much worse. Just keep in mind that over time, people who are no longer collecting unemployment but are still out of work will not be counted in the U3 definition. But that WON'T mean unemployment numbers are declining.

    Which is why we should be using a metric that continually accounts for ALL unemployed workers. Its a damn shame a lie that is not the way our gov't measures something so important. There should be absolute clarity when posting these numbers, but there is actually very little.

    But the reality is, EVERY administration "fudges" the facts...including this one. After all, why would anyone believe this administration is any different?
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2009
  18. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    I believe they are using the existing definition, and have not altered it the way it was altered (for the worse) by at least 2 previous administrations (and I'm sure others).

    It'd be a lot worse if they tightened the definition of unemployed further, and the trumpeted those numbers. Of course it's political suicide to actually correct the definition right now. Either way, it should be corrected.
     
  19. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,673
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +387 / 3 / -15

    #18 Jersey

    We agree.....
     
  20. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,880
    Likes Received:
    88
    Ratings:
    +172 / 0 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    That’s irrelevant:rolleyes:
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>