How soon to the next big correction/crash?

[DrainBamage]

I presume you live off of your portfolio.

Irrelevant attempt at distraction. How I live has nothing to do with published methodologies of data collection and statistical analysis methods of BLS.

I ask again, how exactly is the BLS data on part time workers phony?

 

[DrainBamage]

The fact is that if Trump is successful with his platform UE will increase for the next 12-18 months as more people rejoin the laborforce. That is the kind of counter-intuitive mess we are in because of the BLS model.

The model for U-3 isn't from BLS, it is a model from UN's International Labor Organization. It attempts to measure how many actively looking for jobs can't find one, not LBF.

 

[Indeependent]

The data comes from COMPANIES.
COMPANIES lie (that's how we get Market Crashes).

No, it doesn't. You keep saying this but I quoted the exact source of the data from BLS. Since you seem determined to ignore this and continue arguing using a fundamental misunderstanding of the subject I'll do it again:

First the source of number of workers part time for economic reasons: Number of people working part time for economic reasons falls in June 2016 : The Economics Daily: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

There were 20.5 million people in June 2016 who worked part time for noneconomic reasons. These people worked part time because of school or training, family or personal obligations, or other reasons. These data are from the Current Population Survey. For more information, see “The Employment Situation — June 2016” (HTML) (PDF). For more charts, see Graphics for Economic News Releases: The Employment Situation. Part-time workers are people who worked fewer than 35 hours during the survey reference week.


Now the definition of said Current Population Survey, from Current Population Survey (CPS)

The Current Population Survey (CPS) is a monthly survey of households conducted by the Bureau of Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It provides a comprehensive body of data on the labor force, employment, unemployment, persons not in the labor force, hours of work, earnings, and other demographic and labor force characteristics.


More on CPS here:

Approximately 60,000 households are eligible for the CPS. Sample households are selected by a multistage stratified statistical sampling scheme.[7] A household is interviewed for 4 successive months, then not interviewed for 8 months, then returned to the sample for 4 months after that. An adult member of each household provides information for all members of the household.


Given above , it takes a special kind of stubborn to be in denial about the source of the data on workers part time for economic reasons. You're thinking of CES survey for calling companies, which is not what is used for employment characteristics. I get that people misunderstand this data, but to plug your ears and keep chanting what is obviously incorrect is incredible.

So again for 10th time, how exactly is the BLS data on part timers phony? (Yes, I realize at this point you just threw that out but cannot back it up)

This is rich...You are quoting the BLS as to how the BLS operates.
The site is NOT telling the whole story.
Now get off your chair tomorrow and take a trip to your local DOL and get the truth.
This subject is closed until you do such.

 

[Indeependent]

I presume you live off of your portfolio.

Irrelevant attempt at distraction. How I live has nothing to do with published methodologies of data collection and statistical analysis methods of BLS.

I ask again, how exactly is the BLS data on part time workers phony?

So you live off your portfolio and want to hypnotize yourself into thinking the companies you invest in are helping Americans.
They're not.

 

[william the wie]

double counting of those with multiple parttime jobs and that is where Chaos theory comes in. We do not have sufficient knowledge of initial much less present conditions to determine actual changes. A business start supported by part time work could be counted three different ways.

Most trespassers on Long Island work at least 2 jobs.
Their Citizen children are not doing much better.
The bottom line is that Off-Shoring, Visas and Trespassers have deflated wages.

While true that wage drop is more a result of non-investment than illegals. Public and private investment has been dropping due to government policy mostly state but plenty of federal and municipal policy as well.

 

[Indeependent]

double counting of those with multiple parttime jobs and that is where Chaos theory comes in. We do not have sufficient knowledge of initial much less present conditions to determine actual changes. A business start supported by part time work could be counted three different ways.

Most trespassers on Long Island work at least 2 jobs.
Their Citizen children are not doing much better.
The bottom line is that Off-Shoring, Visas and Trespassers have deflated wages.

While true that wage drop is more a result of non-investment than illegals. Public and private investment has been dropping due to government policy mostly state but plenty of federal and municipal policy as well.

China, India, Mexico...a plague upon the average American's financial stability.

 

[william the wie]

I presume you live off of your portfolio.

Irrelevant attempt at distraction. How I live has nothing to do with published methodologies of data collection and statistical analysis methods of BLS.

I ask again, how exactly is the BLS data on part time workers phony?

So you live off your portfolio and want to hypnotize yourself into thinking the companies you invest in are helping Americans.
They're not.

actually my wife and I do live off our portfolios and pensions I normally invest where there is real investment and undervaluation combined. I do want real net investment to increase so that I can make more off my portfolio.

 

[Indeependent]

I presume you live off of your portfolio.

Irrelevant attempt at distraction. How I live has nothing to do with published methodologies of data collection and statistical analysis methods of BLS.

I ask again, how exactly is the BLS data on part time workers phony?

So you live off your portfolio and want to hypnotize yourself into thinking the companies you invest in are helping Americans.
They're not.

actually my wife and I do live off our portfolios and pensions I normally invest where there is real investment and undervaluation combined. I do want real net investment to increase so that I can make more off my portfolio.

And I admire anyone who admits such and at the same time sees reality.

 

[DrainBamage]

This is rich...You are quoting the BLS as to how the BLS operates.
The site is NOT telling the whole story.
Now get off your chair tomorrow and take a trip to your local DOL and get the truth.
This subject is closed until you do such.

Ah, so now you are explaining your obvious confusion of the household versus establishment survey by implying there is some nefarious plot by BLS to mislead about the source of their data.

So now you're two levels deep. The data is phony because they ask companies, and if BLS specifically says the part-timer data comes from household survey we shouldn't believe this massive government agency with thousands of employees are all hiding some secret where they don't use household survey for that. You have further strength in your argument by repeatedly bragging about how many people with advanced degrees you know.

If it is possible for you to sound any more ridiculous I can't imagine what it would be.

So you live off your portfolio and want to hypnotize yourself into thinking the companies you invest in are helping Americans.
They're not.

Um, I didn't answer your question about whether I live off my portfolio and you know it, so here you've managed to both answer for me then form an opinion I have based on the answer you provided about my own personal finance situation.

Desperate much?

Here is what we know:

1. Indeependent believes BLS data on part timers is phony
2. Indeependent explains this by saying part-timers data comes from surveying businesses
3. When it is pointed out part-time data comes from Household Survey Indeependent discounts that as somehow false since it is BLS saying that

In other words, Indeependent is talking out of his ass and can't support any of his argument aside from constant references to how he knows people with advanced degrees and participates in a network of people who are in the know. Oh yeah also an article from 2009.

You're right, case closed.

 

[william the wie]

double counting of those with multiple parttime jobs and that is where Chaos theory comes in. We do not have sufficient knowledge of initial much less present conditions to determine actual changes. A business start supported by part time work could be counted three different ways.

Most trespassers on Long Island work at least 2 jobs.
Their Citizen children are not doing much better.
The bottom line is that Off-Shoring, Visas and Trespassers have deflated wages.

While true that wage drop is more a result of non-investment than illegals. Public and private investment has been dropping due to government policy mostly state but plenty of federal and municipal policy as well.

China, India, Mexico...a plague upon the average American's financial stability.

Actually increasing household financial instability dates from the 1970s for sure and possibly the late 1960s. "High Wire" by Peter Gosselin is a bit dated but we have too many leftover memes from "The Great Inflation" 1966-82 and that is another important read.

 

[Indeependent]

This is rich...You are quoting the BLS as to how the BLS operates.
The site is NOT telling the whole story.
Now get off your chair tomorrow and take a trip to your local DOL and get the truth.
This subject is closed until you do such.

Ah, so now you are explaining your obvious confusion of the household versus establishment survey by implying there is some nefarious plot by BLS to mislead about the source of their data.

So now you're two levels deep. The data is phony because they ask companies, and if BLS specifically says the part-timer data comes from household survey we shouldn't believe this massive government agency with thousands of employees are all hiding some secret where they don't use household survey for that. You have further strength in your argument by repeatedly bragging about how many people with advanced degrees you know.

If it is possible for you to sound any more ridiculous I can't imagine what it would be.

So you live off your portfolio and want to hypnotize yourself into thinking the companies you invest in are helping Americans.
They're not.

Um, I didn't answer your question about whether I live off my portfolio and you know it, so here you've managed to both answer for me then form an opinion I have based on the answer you provided about my own personal finance situation.

Desperate much?

There is NO nefarious motives in how the BLS operates.
It's a governmental agency with limited resources.
They do what they can do.
And they are NOT capable of analyzing or predicting ANYTHING when the US has a Global Employee Pool.

 

[Indeependent]

double counting of those with multiple parttime jobs and that is where Chaos theory comes in. We do not have sufficient knowledge of initial much less present conditions to determine actual changes. A business start supported by part time work could be counted three different ways.

Most trespassers on Long Island work at least 2 jobs.
Their Citizen children are not doing much better.
The bottom line is that Off-Shoring, Visas and Trespassers have deflated wages.

While true that wage drop is more a result of non-investment than illegals. Public and private investment has been dropping due to government policy mostly state but plenty of federal and municipal policy as well.

China, India, Mexico...a plague upon the average American's financial stability.

Actually increasing household financial instability dates from the 1970s for sure and possibly the late 1960s. "High Wire" by Peter Gosselin is a bit dated but we have too many leftover memes from "The Great Inflation" 1966-82 and that is another important read.

There has been a major difference in employment since post 9/11 regarding the 3 sources of non-American labor.
I know lots of people with advanced degrees who lost jobs in the 70s but they knew when the market recovered their career wasn't going to be sent overseas or taken by a business visa.

 

[DrainBamage]

There is NO nefarious motives in how the BLS operates.
It's a governmental agency with limited resources.
They do what they can do.
And they are NOT capable of analyzing or predicting ANYTHING when the US has a Global Employee Pool.

You sure type a lot of stuff that doesn't prove your point.

When it was shown to you that part-timer data comes from Population Survey you dismissed it on the grounds the explanation came from BLS site. Now you somehow have these overworked people taking the time to fabricate the source of their data, but they aren't the ones doing the collecting for CPS that would be Census Bureau. Nobody has said anything about predicting anything, we're talking about actual data from surveys of current (or previous) employment status. Their data shows a clear and steady decline in the number of part time workers, which discounts your claim to the contrary.

Since then you''ve been spinning into a logic pretzel (and looking quite foolish) trying to dance around it. Let's keep it up, this thread is hilarious and a classic I'll probably revisit in future days for a good laugh at you.

 

[DrainBamage]

[
There has been a major difference in employment since post 9/11 regarding the 3 sources of non-American labor.
I know lots of people with advanced degrees who lost jobs in the 70s but they knew when the market recovered their career wasn't going to be sent overseas or taken by a business visa.

And this makes the data on number of workers part-time for economic reason phony how exactly?

Remember you said it is phony, and have since incorrectly claimed the data came from calling companies, which when proven wrong you now believe BLS isn't properly explaining when they say the data comes from calling 60,000 households.

 

[Indeependent]

There is NO nefarious motives in how the BLS operates.
It's a governmental agency with limited resources.
They do what they can do.
And they are NOT capable of analyzing or predicting ANYTHING when the US has a Global Employee Pool.

You sure type a lot of stuff that doesn't prove your point.

When it was shown to you that part-timer data comes from Population Survey you dismissed it on the grounds the explanation came from BLS site. Now you somehow have these overworked people taking the time to fabricate the source of their data, but they aren't the ones doing the collecting for CPS that would be Census Bureau. Nobody has said anything about predicting anything, we're talking about actual data from surveys of current (or previous) employment status. Their data shows a clear and steady decline in the number of part time workers, which discounts your claim to the contrary.

Since then you''ve been spinning into a logic pretzel (and looking quite foolish) trying to dance around it. Let's keep it up, this thread is hilarious and a classic I'll probably revisit in future days for a good laugh at you.

How do we know these people were telling the truth?
How do we know the data from companies is true?
The BLS simply takes it's input and publishes what their bosses tell them to publish.
Now be a good little Portfolio Boy and visit your DOL.
I presume you are healthy enough to drive.

 

[Indeependent]

[
There has been a major difference in employment since post 9/11 regarding the 3 sources of non-American labor.
I know lots of people with advanced degrees who lost jobs in the 70s but they knew when the market recovered their career wasn't going to be sent overseas or taken by a business visa.

And this makes the data on number of workers part-time for economic reason phony how exactly?

Remember you said it is phony, and have since incorrectly claimed the data came from calling companies, which when proven wrong you now believe BLS isn't properly explaining when they say the data comes from calling 60,000 households.

The data is not audited...conclusions from unaudited data are phony.

 

[DrainBamage]

How do we know these people were telling the truth?
How do we know the data from companies is true?
The BLS simply takes it's input and publishes what their bosses tell them to publish.
Now be a good little Portfolio Boy and visit your DOL.
I presume you are healthy enough to drive.

1. What people? Are you suggesting that all these thousands of government workers, many of whom have worked through several adminstrations, are in some massive conspiracy to falsify data? Do you have proof of this?

2. Irrelevant, since we've already shown you misunderstood the source of the source of data on part time workers. It comes from household survey.

3. See #1, you're basically saying it is phony because you say so. Clearly you know nothing about how their analysis works so you're just making things up, which is no way to support a position.

4. DOL is a federal agency that includes BLS

5. More attempts at distraction, has nothing to do with what we're talking about

The data is not audited...conclusions from unaudited data are phony.

How do you know it isn't audited? I submit you know absolutely nothing about the processes that go into taking Household Survey data and generating reports on the number of people working part time for economic reasons. This is nothing more than "its phony because I believe it is" argument that gets you nowhere.

You being clueless about their process is bolstered by you clearly misunderstanding the source of part-time data, you incorrectly thought it came from CES. Surely someone that naive about the unemployment data is also naive about whether they audit data.

Furthermore I'd disagree that non--audited data is phony, phony implies intentional deceit which while possible with any data set it is in no way implied just by not having been audited.

 

[Indeependent]

How do we know these people were telling the truth?
How do we know the data from companies is true?
The BLS simply takes it's input and publishes what their bosses tell them to publish.
Now be a good little Portfolio Boy and visit your DOL.
I presume you are healthy enough to drive.

1. What people? Are you suggesting that all these thousands of government workers, many of whom have worked through several adminstrations, are in some massive conspiracy to falsify data? Do you have proof of this?

2. Irrelevant, since we've already shown you misunderstood the source of the source of data on part time workers. It comes from household survey.

3. See #1, you're basically saying it is phony because you say so. Clearly you know nothing about how their analysis works so you're just making things up, which is no way to support a position.

4. DOL is a federal agency that includes BLS

5. More attempts at distraction, has nothing to do with what we're talking about

The data is not audited...conclusions from unaudited data are phony.

How do you know it isn't audited? I submit you know absolutely nothing about the processes that go into taking Household Survey data and generating reports on the number of people working part time for economic reasons. This is nothing more than "its phony because I believe it is" argument that gets you nowhere.

You being clueless about their process is bolstered by you clearly misunderstanding the source of part-time data, you incorrectly thought it came from CES. Surely someone that naive about the unemployment data is also naive about whether they audit data.

Furthermore I'd disagree that non--audited data is phony, phony implies intentional deceit which while possible with any data set it is in no way implied just by not having been audited.

This is by far your dumbest post.
Even WilliamTheWie is ignoring your nonsense at this point.
Don't put words in my mouth,
Now go back and read my posts again.

 

[DrainBamage]

This is by far your dumbest post.
Even WilliamTheWie is ignoring your nonsense at this point.
Don't put words in my mouth,
Now go back and read my posts again.

I've read them, and you STILL haven't been able to explain how part-timer data is phony despite that being the point of contention.

Implying BLS employees lying, claiming lack of audits when you have no idea about their statistical process, all sorts of stuff you're throwing out without any proof doesn't help your position. Bottom line you have nothing to prove the data is phony, and it is fairly amusing to what you trying to dancing around that fact.

So I'll ask again, how EXACTLY is BLS data on part timers phony? Taking wild ass guesses that they must be lying or don't audit when you have no idea isn't an answer, that is tantamount to saying you're right because you are right.

 

[william the wie]

[
There has been a major difference in employment since post 9/11 regarding the 3 sources of non-American labor.
I know lots of people with advanced degrees who lost jobs in the 70s but they knew when the market recovered their career wasn't going to be sent overseas or taken by a business visa.

And this makes the data on number of workers part-time for economic reason phony how exactly?

Remember you said it is phony, and have since incorrectly claimed the data came from calling companies, which when proven wrong you now believe BLS isn't properly explaining when they say the data comes from calling 60,000 households.

The data is not audited...conclusions from unaudited data are phony.

There are various censuses so every 3-10 years there is defensible data on one or more inputs of the BLS model so everyone in more or less their right mind uses data from analysts. If you can afford to spend $10K a year for a Reuters terminal or $25K for a Bloomberg one you can get reasonably good data in a more or less timely fashion. However Bloomberg runs a TV channel that mainly acts as a tutorial to help you find the data if the help desk is busy.