Fuzzy Math?: CNBC Describes New Unemployment Numbers as 'Contradictory'

reply to post by renegadeloser


I remember the only good job I had was seasonal work in a craft store.

Most people won't be fooled.

What are we? 53%... Maybe that many.

America knows better. At election time, pay no attention to what they say, what Gov says.

At election time think back, to what they said and did when the election was far away.

Vote with those who think like you. Then trust them to do the right thing.

Don't vote for the free ice cream. Free ice cream is not free.

Well I think the real problem is that we are living with, and will live with, a persistent high unemployment rate. Employment and labor have been hit with efficiently in production. Couple this with greater productivity expected of those yet employed. Profits grow.

Fuzzy schmuzzy. I could never figure how they come to that unemployment rate. But boy it sure must be important.

I think what we really need to be talking about is the question. How much profit is too much? At what point is it better for the health of the system, to put more profit into employment and labor. Money placed here will more likely pass through the economy and will do so at a good velocity. I'm thinking this is a good thing.

If unemployment is 8.1 or 7.8 what's the difference? Good jobs are still hard to find. My one hope is that we never stop trying to find them, to demand good jobs. Just let me relieve my employed hard working brother, More people working. More people happy.with ample security of life's necessities. And just remember this is a world wide project. so giving may be required from many.

What have we got to lose? A couple of rich guys?

reply to post by xuenchen


They wouldn't fix the numbers because they know they'd get caught. But something irregular happened. 114,000 jobs is nothing great or even that good. It's 'lackluster.'

Unemployment rate is calculated by how many people ask for handouts by tax payers every month, not how many people is actually out of work. Many economists view that the actual unemployment rate based off of an enormous amount of variables is closer to 18-22%. That's just unemployment... In fact, I've known a few people who couldn't get unemployment because they have reached their cap. I don't remember where I've read this before but it seems pretty common to find online.

Unemployment isn't the only system that people collect money from, there's so much more like Social Security, working for the government etc etc... So the total amount that tax payers pay into all of this is ridiculously high which is why we spend more than we earn. I really wish I had all of the facts here, it would be amazing to know it all for sure

and we have an extra 7 million people they stopped counting since obama took office. that how they lower the unemployment rate. Its called labor force participation rate. If your not looking they dont count you but you are still unemployed.Add those people back and the rate goes to above 10%

Originally posted by xuenchen
Fuzzy Math?: CNBC Describes New Unemployment Numbers as 'Contradictory'

This is puzzling

But the government said the total number of workers employed surged by 873,000, the highest one-month jump in 29 years. The total of unemployed people tumbled by 456,000.

 

Let's not forget, one of the great "fudge factors: the BLS uses in many calculation is it's infamous "CES Birth/Death
Model " (birth and death of businesses, that is) -explained at the bls link above.

This slight of hand model allows the BLS to "estimate" into existence xxx amount of jobs, and in the in the BLS's eye's, it is a perfectly legitimate tactic.

So while yes, said number of total workers employed surged by 873,000, i believe in this instance (September) roughly 574,000 were "estimated" into existence.

I' am no master at any of this, however the many of the reputable financial sites I scan through are always sighting the CES Birth/Death Model to clarify the issue. -So i have a basic understanding of how they *ahem* rig the numbers. -do your own research, you will find all this to be fact, not "wishful theory"

The BLS's September Charts & Data (from Sept 2011 to Sept 2012) on Employment & Unemployment Data can be found here: www.bls.gov... -crunch your own numbers, if you will.

Last note: as others in this thread have noted, there are many other variables at play in the employment calculations.

The other statistic/statement i am always seeing on financial sites is that typically, because of the CES Model, the first 40k to 80k of "new jobs" created are "estimated" into existence due to the CES Birth/Death Model.

So lets say [hypothetical] of the 114,000 new jobs created this September the CES/Model estimated 50,000 jobs into existence. -that would leave only 64,000 "real" jobs created which actually had a guaranteed living,breathing human at the helm, so ta speak. -It varies depending on the initial inputs.

Don't forget boys and girls, every administration for at least the past 50-60 years has been fudging numbers with "creative math" on all sorts of government data sets. If you think administrations do not at least "double down" on manipulation(s) during election years well, i think it's high time you take your head out of the sand. (so no finger pointing, ya hear?)


And that people, is about all the energy i am willing to expend on the topic.

enjoy!
-s

reply to post by xuenchen


One thing I remember is that those stats usually only include the people that filed UI for the first quarter. Which means they may not include those that filed a second, third and so on quarter. It also wouldn't include people that ran out of UI and dropped off the radar.

Originally posted by Em2013
Unemployment rate is calculated by how many people ask for handouts by tax payers every month, not how many people is actually out of work. Many economists view that the actual unemployment rate based off of an enormous amount of variables is closer to 18-22%. That's just unemployment... In fact, I've known a few people who couldn't get unemployment because they have reached their cap. I don't remember where I've read this before but it seems pretty common to find online.

Unemployment isn't the only system that people collect money from, there's so much more like Social Security, working for the government etc etc... So the total amount that tax payers pay into all of this is ridiculously high which is why we spend more than we earn. I really wish I had all of the facts here, it would be amazing to know it all for sure

So you're saying Unemployment insurance/benefits and Social Security benefits are handouts?! You realize that anybody who works legally in this country pays into both for the eventuality that they will become unemployed or live long enough to retire. It's not a handout although it's not a 401k either. It's a safety net for those of us who aren't that lucky to make millions and never worry about hard times!

reply to post by xuenchen


You can trust in one thing if the Republicans held office they would use the same fuzzy math.



Wake up people both sides lie and lie and lie. And yet we still hold on to hope that maybe this time it will be another outcome.



Neither side can or will fix this problem. They can only hold off the collapse for so long at this point. The dollar is in serious trouble. And when we lose the reserve currency status the house of cards will fall down.

reply to post by SubTruth


Then how about we get serious about fixing our house instead of complaining about how bad it is while sitting under the roof?

Vote people..

Get involved...