pinqy
Gold Member
Those were new hires. I don't know what other definition of "hires" you could mean. That's gross, so that certainly doesn't mean total employment went up that much...there were 3,792,000 total seperations (less than half were layoffs).Nice trick. I said "new hires." I guess we can debate about what that means also. Go ahead.
They do.The government could try some automation and a data system that can handle it.
For 150 million people at the same time? I don't think so. And, every March, BLS does do a full count of non-farm payroll employment from UI records. It takes months even with automation.We do have to pay these people we hire. Those paychecks have to be recorded. My bank can do a payroll check for a new hire today with ease.
And that's just non-farm payroll. How would you handle the self employed and family businesses and under-the-table work?
And UNemployement? How would you get that quicker? Especially new entrants and re-entrants.
You said you haven't seen any press on new hirings, plants etc that would give more than 400,000 for the week. That implies that if there were that large a number of hires, you would see it in the press. Well, in February there were nearly 4 million new hires, so you surely can point to where in the press you would have seen those. If you can't show it, then you have to admit that just not seeing that many hires in the press doesn't mean they didn't occur.I'm not sure what you're asking. Please clarify.
Which survey and which measure? It varies....The UE rate is about+-.2 percentage points, so the UE rate is between 8.6 and 9.0. That's at 90% confidence. To compare, Gallup's unemployment rate error is +-.7 percentage points. For employment and unemployment levels, it's somewhere around .5% and 2.5% depending on the series. You can calculate the standard errors yourself using the tables in http://www.bls.gov/cps/eetech_methods.pdfWhere do I start? Ok, it's done by SURVEY. What is the margin of error for these surveys?
You can only administratively drop out people from administrative numbers. Since there are no admin numbers for total employment, you can't have admin drops. And if you look at the last few months, you'll see that the Labor Force has been increasing, not decreasing. Source: BLSTotal unemployment has not been going down, people are being administratively dropped out of the labor force due to a political need to show some improvement.
March 2010 - 153,660
March 2011 - 153,022
Where's the increase?
March 2010 to March 2011 is not "the last few months." Ok, so maybe Jan-March is stretching it a bit for "last few" as well, but it is an upturn.
And you haven't addressed the question of "admin drops" for non-admin data. How does that work, again?
Last edited: