Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So the main difference is ADP is private payroll, BLS includes government. So a crappy month for private growth jobs and a stellar month for government welfare jobs.....the way I read it.
The BLS household survey looks at about 60,000 households a month, so that would include government jobs.
Plus they went back and "adjusted" the horrid December report to make it good.I believe the BLS also includes the self-employed whereas the ADP does not.
Beginning in 2017, economists began observing significant divergences between the ADP and BLS figures on national employment, with the ADP estimates consistently higher than government figures. This is likely due to subtle differences in methodology and sampling between the two bodies. ADP's data is based on the payrolls of their client companies, meaning that their figures must be adjusted to reflect national economic data.
Something just doesn't add up for me. If the ADP estimates are consistently higher, how do they get such a different lower number for January? I get that the additional numbers of new gov't employees and the self-employed could make a difference, but this much? Why would the ADP numbers usually be higher it doesn't include gov't employees and the self-employed? The big difference this time raises a red flag, WTF is going on?
And the market tanked the other day, today with the "good" report it is recovering...hhmmmmmm.I believe the BLS also includes the self-employed whereas the ADP does not.
Beginning in 2017, economists began observing significant divergences between the ADP and BLS figures on national employment, with the ADP estimates consistently higher than government figures. This is likely due to subtle differences in methodology and sampling between the two bodies. ADP's data is based on the payrolls of their client companies, meaning that their figures must be adjusted to reflect national economic data.
[from link in Todd's post #26]
Something just doesn't add up for me. If the ADP estimates are consistently higher, how do they get such a different lower number for January? I get that the additional numbers of new gov't employees and the self-employed could make a difference, but this much? Why would the ADP numbers usually be higher it doesn't include gov't employees and the self-employed? The big difference this time raises a red flag, WTF is going on?
Conned?The "MAGA movement" is a farce, and you've been conned by a buffoon.
I love America. You love Trump.
Negative, it just seems that with the amount of damage control, including wasting women and children overseas prior to the report, that there's something very amiss.The disappointment among the right is palpable.
What policy specifically?Me, I fully expect things to pick up as, state by state, they say "No Mas" to Biden's policies and any improvement along those lines will be in spite of Biden's policies.
In December the ADP report claimed that the economy would produce 969,000 jobs. The BLS reported 199,000 before revising to 510,000 today as more complete information came in.Job growth rose far more than expected in January despite surging omicron cases that seemingly sent millions of workers to the sidelines, the Labor Department reported Friday.
Nonfarm payrolls surged by 467,000 for the month, while the unemployment rate edged higher to 4%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Dow Jones estimate was for payroll growth of 150,000 and a 3.9% unemployment rate.
Payrolls show surprisingly powerful gain of 467,000 in January despite omicron surge
Nonfarm payrolls were expected to increase 150,000 in January, according to economists surveyed by Dow Jones.www.cnbc.com
This is in sharp contrast to the ADP report that came out Wednesday with drastically different numbers, so WTF? Either I'm missing something or somebody is lying. Could be both I guess. Anybody got any answers?
The labor force number increased from 61.7 to 62.2% jackass.Yup, it’s Democrat monkey math at work.
Read the actual report:
Employment Situation Summary - 2024 Q02 Results
www.bls.gov
Unemployment rate rose to 4.0%
Number of unemployed persons stayed the same 6.5 million.
Job leavers increased to 952,000.
Temporary layoffs increased to 959,000.
Permanent job losers 1.6 million.
Persons jobless in last 5 weeks : 2.4 million
Labor force participation rate holds at 62.2%.
5.7 million looking for a job not counted as unemployed.
6 million unable to work due to pandemic, up from 3.1 million in December.
1.8 million prevented from working due to pandemic but are not counted as unemployed.
Liars, Damn Liars and Statisticians.I'll be flat-out honest here, I do not trust any numbers or information coming out of any gov't agency. And not a whole lot of trust in reports coming from non-gov't agencies or organizations either. The results we see are directly related to the data input plus whatever the parameter values are. Changing the formula used probably means a code change, but you can monkey with the data or parameters that are input without changing anything.
He didn't have to make them look like buffoons--they did a cracker jack job of that all by themselves. He just publicized it.He made idiots like you look like buffoons.
I'll be flat-out honest here, I do not trust any numbers or information coming out of any gov't agency. And not a whole lot of trust in reports coming from non-gov't agencies or organizations either. The results we see are directly related to the data input plus whatever the parameter values are. Changing the formula used probably means a code change, but you can monkey with the data or parameters that are input without changing anything.
Besides, the Dept. Of Commerce comes under the liar-in-Chiefs Executive branch.
They must be using Dominion software!
Who the hell knows what algorithms they use!!
Job growth rose far more than expected in January despite surging omicron cases that seemingly sent millions of workers to the sidelines, the Labor Department reported Friday.
Nonfarm payrolls surged by 467,000 for the month, while the unemployment rate edged higher to 4%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Dow Jones estimate was for payroll growth of 150,000 and a 3.9% unemployment rate.
Payrolls show surprisingly powerful gain of 467,000 in January despite omicron surge
Nonfarm payrolls were expected to increase 150,000 in January, according to economists surveyed by Dow Jones.
This is in sharp contrast to the ADP report that came out Wednesday with drastically different numbers, so WTF? Either I'm missing something or somebody is lying. Could be both I guess. Anybody got any answers?
Plus they went back and "adjusted" the horrid December report to make it good.
But the difference between the ADP report on Wednesday and today's BLS report is huge, something is waayyy off here. A minus 301,000 vs a plus 467,000? C'mon guys, something is wrong here. I ain't saying what it is, don't really know. But this is ridiculous.
