More economic good news, unemployment rate drops to 8.6%

[Full-Auto]

Obviously you don't know how they measure it because you're wrong. And I note you don't even try to prove your false statements. I gave links.

And if you participated in a survey, then it's obviously NOT admin tax records.

Now, for the Current Employment Survey, where Employment (not unemployment) numbers come from...the universe for the survey is the UI tax list, and a full count of businesses is done once a year (it takes months to do) for the benchmark.

But it's still a monthly survey...and the UNemployment numbers can only come from a survey.

Never mind you are desperately confused. I know where they come from thats part of the problem.

But dont let the obvious concern you.

I do this for a living, dumbass. I regularly meet with the people who do the calculations. So stop talking out of your ass, do some research and you'll see you're wrong.

I mean come on! How the fuck can tax records give monthly numbers for veteran status, disability, hours of work, industry, reason for unemployment, duration of unemployment, education, reason for not looking for work, etc etc? It doesn't even make sense. It's not possible to come up with the UNemployment numbers from tax records.

Again, READ! How the government measures unemployment

the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then.

If this is what you do for a living.... I do not.... Then how can we make the system more accurate? The criticism is the inaccuracy. I would think some adjustments on tax reporting would more then do the job.

I pay taxes every week. They can take the money but ignore the info?

 

[pinqy]

Never mind you are desperately confused. I know where they come from thats part of the problem.

But dont let the obvious concern you.

I do this for a living, dumbass. I regularly meet with the people who do the calculations. So stop talking out of your ass, do some research and you'll see you're wrong.

I mean come on! How the fuck can tax records give monthly numbers for veteran status, disability, hours of work, industry, reason for unemployment, duration of unemployment, education, reason for not looking for work, etc etc? It doesn't even make sense. It's not possible to come up with the UNemployment numbers from tax records.

Again, READ! How the government measures unemployment

the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then.

If this is what you do for a living.... I do not.... Then how can we make the system more accurate? The criticism is the inaccuracy. I would think some adjustments on tax reporting would more then do the job.

I pay taxes every week. They can take the money but ignore the info?

Take a look at the data published: Employment Situation
The A tables are from the household survey.
The B tables are from the establishment survey.
It's just not possible to get the necessary data from tax records. Yes, the list is used to benchmark the numbers, but that just can't be done every month, it takes too long.

 

[LoneLaugher]

never mind you are desperately confused. I know where they come from thats part of the problem.

But dont let the obvious concern you.

i do this for a living, dumbass. I regularly meet with the people who do the calculations. So stop talking out of your ass, do some research and you'll see you're wrong.

I mean come on! How the fuck can tax records give monthly numbers for veteran status, disability, hours of work, industry, reason for unemployment, duration of unemployment, education, reason for not looking for work, etc etc? It doesn't even make sense. It's not possible to come up with the unemployment numbers from tax records.

Again, read! how the government measures unemployment

the government conducts a monthly sample survey called the current population survey (cps) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The cps has been conducted in the united states every month since 1940, when it began as a work projects administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then.

if this is what you do for a living.... I do not.... then how can we make the system more accurate? The criticism is the inaccuracy. I would think some adjustments on tax reporting would more then do the job.

I pay taxes every week. They can take the money but ignore the info?

50%

 

[thereisnospoon]

I'm not sure what you mean by "net numbers." BLS uses a survey, the Current Population Survey conducted by the Census Bureau as the source of the Labor Force information.
The official Employment numbers come from the Current Employment Survey, a survey of non-farm business payrolls.



Those that timed out their benefits are still unemployed as far as the UE rate is concerned. The survey doesn't even ask about benefits. If you're lookng for work, you're unemployed...doesn't matter if you ever received benefits or ever had a job. Only half the people classified as unemployed are receiving benefits.

The bureau has real employments numbers. Not a survey. It is tracked through taxes.

It has hard numbers for every month.

I would LOVE to know where you got that notion. It's not true. Go to the BLS site yourself: How the government measures unemployment

Taxes don't tell demographics, unemployment status, etc.

This is from the USDoL.....How the Government Measures Unemployment
What are the basic concepts of employment and unemployment?
The basic concepts involved in identifying the employed and unemployed are quite simple:

People with jobs are employed.
People who are jobless, looking for jobs, and available for work are unemployed.
People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force.
Looks to me like those who have stopped or are n ot looking for work and NOT one of the above categories to be considered unemployed, are simply not counted.
Therefore when 300.000 people stop looking for work, they simply just vanish.
SO unemployment stats are not to be trusted. As a matter of fact, those statistics are of little use to the everyday American. The news media and the stock markets seem particularly interested though.
If it were up to me, I'd tell the Dept of Labor to stop publishing the figure.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I do this for a living, dumbass. I regularly meet with the people who do the calculations. So stop talking out of your ass, do some research and you'll see you're wrong.

I mean come on! How the fuck can tax records give monthly numbers for veteran status, disability, hours of work, industry, reason for unemployment, duration of unemployment, education, reason for not looking for work, etc etc? It doesn't even make sense. It's not possible to come up with the UNemployment numbers from tax records.

Again, READ! How the government measures unemployment

If this is what you do for a living.... I do not.... Then how can we make the system more accurate? The criticism is the inaccuracy. I would think some adjustments on tax reporting would more then do the job.

I pay taxes every week. They can take the money but ignore the info?

Take a look at the data published: Employment Situation
The A tables are from the household survey.
The B tables are from the establishment survey.
It's just not possible to get the necessary data from tax records. Yes, the list is used to benchmark the numbers, but that just can't be done every month, it takes too long.

Suffice to say that there are a lot of formerly full time workers who are not working, not collecting and not looking for work.
The figures that really matter are the closing of new loans and credit approvals, same store purchase figures, hard goods purchases, savings account deposit figures, New and existing home purchases and of course the Consumer Price Index.
These are real numbers that I believe reflect the condition of the economy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I know that the numbers the government gives out are wrong it has been shown that the government does cook the books I don't have any links and not even going to look for any. You can believe the bullshit all you want I believe what's around me and with what I have to deal with on a day to day basis

In other words, you just made it up and don't care if you're right or wrong. Wow.

Fuck you, you god damn son of a bitch this is what I said do not chop up part of what I post

 

[pinqy]

I know that the numbers the government gives out are wrong it has been shown that the government does cook the books I don't have any links and not even going to look for any. You can believe the bullshit all you want I believe what's around me and with what I have to deal with on a day to day basis

In other words, you just made it up and don't care if you're right or wrong. Wow.

Fuck you, you god damn son of a bitch this is what I said do not chop up part of what I post

You're making assertions based on NOTHING. You claim things are true, but have zero evidence to back it up. You didn't even know how the data was collected and derived. You've been shown wrong multiple times directly (through the actual definitions) and indirectly (comparison of people collecting benefits versus people classified as Unemployed). You have NO response except insults, continued baseless assertions, and an outright refusal to even look anything up.

Do you really think that's in anyway intellectually honest?

 

[Full-Auto]

I do this for a living, dumbass. I regularly meet with the people who do the calculations. So stop talking out of your ass, do some research and you'll see you're wrong.

I mean come on! How the fuck can tax records give monthly numbers for veteran status, disability, hours of work, industry, reason for unemployment, duration of unemployment, education, reason for not looking for work, etc etc? It doesn't even make sense. It's not possible to come up with the UNemployment numbers from tax records.

Again, READ! How the government measures unemployment

If this is what you do for a living.... I do not.... Then how can we make the system more accurate? The criticism is the inaccuracy. I would think some adjustments on tax reporting would more then do the job.

I pay taxes every week. They can take the money but ignore the info?

Take a look at the data published: Employment Situation
The A tables are from the household survey.
The B tables are from the establishment survey.
It's just not possible to get the necessary data from tax records. Yes, the list is used to benchmark the numbers, but that just can't be done every month, it takes too long.

Currently, However how do we improve the system to be more accurate? You must have some ideas, since this is what you do.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In other words, you just made it up and don't care if you're right or wrong. Wow.

Fuck you, you god damn son of a bitch this is what I said do not chop up part of what I post

You're making assertions based on NOTHING. You claim things are true, but have zero evidence to back it up. You didn't even know how the data was collected and derived. You've been shown wrong multiple times directly (through the actual definitions) and indirectly (comparison of people collecting benefits versus people classified as Unemployed). You have NO response except insults, continued baseless assertions, and an outright refusal to even look anything up.

Do you really think that's in anyway intellectually honest?

No you are making assertions based cooked books and government fuzzy math.

You claim things are true, but have zero evidence to back it up.

anyone who get's out of the house and talks with people will know that your government numbers that you use are not correct.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I know that the numbers the government gives out are wrong it has been shown that the government does cook the books I don't have any links and not even going to look for any. You can believe the bullshit all you want I believe what's around me and with what I have to deal with on a day to day basis

In other words, you just made it up and don't care if you're right or wrong. Wow.

Fuck you, you god damn son of a bitch this is what I said do not chop up part of what I post

pinqy when you take the context away from a persons post when quoting and responding to them it makes you look dishonest.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In other words, you just made it up and don't care if you're right or wrong. Wow.

Fuck you, you god damn son of a bitch this is what I said do not chop up part of what I post

pinqy when you take the context away from a persons post when quoting and responding to them it makes you look dishonest.

Dishonest people do have a problem with that.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Fuck you, you god damn son of a bitch this is what I said do not chop up part of what I post

pinqy when you take the context away from a persons post when quoting and responding to them it makes you look dishonest.

Dishonest people do have a problem with that.

its a giant "pet peeve" of mine when someone quotes me and either leaves out the context then argues against a statment when, in context, their argument has no merit or they take a long post and break it up into like 10 sections to respond to each one as if they don't have the retention to read 10 sentances and just respond to the whole thing.

Plus when they break the quotes down like that it makes it hard to respond back the way the formatting on the forum is

 

[pinqy]

In other words, you just made it up and don't care if you're right or wrong. Wow.

Fuck you, you god damn son of a bitch this is what I said do not chop up part of what I post

pinqy when you take the context away from a persons post when quoting and responding to them it makes you look dishonest.

Enlighten me. What context of his post did I leave out that makes my comments invalid or unfair? I used only that part because that was the only part I wished to address. What exactly about the rest of the post do you think I needed to include and address to make my comments more "honest?"

 

[uscitizen]

Unemployment down in November? Wow, that's shocking! How about this: I predict that unemployment will go back up in January.

It's the holiday season people!

One more time, for posterity and stupid people alike: The numbers are seasonally adjusted. The BLS understands that hiring increases this time of year and adjusts the raw data accordingly.

Ahh yes "massage the data"

 

[pinqy]

This is from the USDoL.....How the Government Measures Unemployment

Yes, I posted that same link at least once in this thread already.

People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force.
Looks to me like those who have stopped or are n ot looking for work and NOT one of the above categories to be considered unemployed, are simply not counted.

They're not counted in the labor force (because they're not in the labor force) but they're still counted.

Therefore when 300.000 people stop looking for work, they simply just vanish.

How do you figure? They're not part of the UE rate calculation, but they didn't "vanish," they're in the category of "Not in the Labor Force" or they're out of the population altogether (dead, left the country, went to prison/institution, or joined the military). Those arent' counted, but that's a small group.

 

[8537]

Unemployment down in November? Wow, that's shocking! How about this: I predict that unemployment will go back up in January.

It's the holiday season people!

One more time, for posterity and stupid people alike: The numbers are seasonally adjusted. The BLS understands that hiring increases this time of year and adjusts the raw data accordingly.

Ahh yes "massage the data"

They don't "massage the data". They remove seasonal variations so that the data is a more accurate snapshot of trend.

Of course, they also publish the raw data for all to see - that's how we know that something like 315,000 jobs were actually created despite the 120,000 figure.

 

[Uncensored2008]

your guy created the mess

You should have stuck it out and finished third grade.

Seriously.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Bush should have seized Fannie and Freddie and arrested all their top officers

Frank Rains in Chains is Barney Frank's Bane....

Frank and Dodd = 100% fraud.

 

[Uncensored2008]

it


is



adjusted


to


account


for



holiday


hiring

IT

Is

Adjusted

To

Account

For

Obama's

Low

Poll

Numbers

 

[pinqy]

it


is



adjusted


to


account


for



holiday


hiring

IT

Is

Adjusted

To

Account

For

Obama's

Low

Poll

Numbers

How? And by whom? The current Comissioner of BLS, the only political appointee in BLS, was appointed by President Bush, and had previously served as Bush's Chief Economist on the White House Council of Economic Advisers. He's the guy with the final word on the numbers. The President doesn't get to see or have any idea what the numbers will be.

And again, what process do you think could be used to adjust the numbers considering the thousands of cells of data? The seasonal adjustment uses a set software program and you can't really change the inputs to get a desired output...it's too complicated.