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.
Does that include the graphs from Think Progress by your comrades
Get real
We should raise taxes on the rich
right now
Huh? 1.2M have not given up looking for work.
MSN Money
Why the job market still stinks
The drop in the unemployment rate is coming mainly from people leaving the work force in record numbers -- 1.2 million, mostly young folks who we need to support the housing market. Those who are finding work are finding part-time, low-wage positions. No wonder "hard" economic data such as a drop in retail sales and a rise in the savings rate suggest a lack of progress out there.
Who knew MSN Money is part of the evil right wing cabal
I'm not sure if they are part of a cabal, but they are wrong. The change in the benchmark by adding 1.5M to the noninstitutionalized population is what created the appearance of 1.2M leaving. The actual numbers don't reflect it because it didn't happen.
But it's not as if the BLS hid this fact. It's right there in the report!
"Effective with data for January 2012, updated population estimates which reflect the results of Census2010 have been used in the household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau updates the estimates to reflect new information and assumptions about the growth of the population during the decade. The change in population reflected in the new estimates results from the introduction of the Census 2010 count as the new population base, adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics and other information, and some methodological changes in the estimation process. The vast majority of the population change, however, is due to the change in base population from Census 2000 to Census 2010.
In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official household survey estimates for December 2011 and earlier months. To show the impact of the population adjustment, however, differences in selected December 2011 labor force series based on the old and new population estimates are shown in table B"
Does that include the graphs from Think Progress by your comrades
Get real
That would be data, from which one would extrapolate an opinion, or not if they so decide.
Whether the data is accurate or not is debatable, but you are posting a conclusion, not data. I am not interested in the gentleman's conclusion that you are posting.
So, post his data, with sources, and I will be happy to argue that.
And yet in spite of that the labor force INCREASED by 500 thousand workers that very same month!!!!MSN Money
Why the job market still stinksThe drop in the unemployment rate is coming mainly from people leaving the work force in record numbers -- 1.2 million, mostly young folks who we need to support the housing market. Those who are finding work are finding part-time, low-wage positions. No wonder "hard" economic data such as a drop in retail sales and a rise in the savings rate suggest a lack of progress out there.Who knew MSN Money is part of the evil right wing cabal
I'm not sure if they are part of a cabal, but they are wrong. The change in the benchmark by adding 1.5M to the noninstitutionalized population is what created the appearance of 1.2M leaving. The actual numbers don't reflect it because it didn't happen.
But it's not as if the BLS hid this fact. It's right there in the report!
"Effective with data for January 2012, updated population estimates which reflect the results of Census2010 have been used in the household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau updates the estimates to reflect new information and assumptions about the growth of the population during the decade. The change in population reflected in the new estimates results from the introduction of the Census 2010 count as the new population base, adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics and other information, and some methodological changes in the estimation process. The vast majority of the population change, however, is due to the change in base population from Census 2000 to Census 2010.
In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official household survey estimates for December 2011 and earlier months. To show the impact of the population adjustment, however, differences in selected December 2011 labor force series based on the old and new population estimates are shown in table B"
hmm, even Time reports the same
TimeMore than 1.2 million people joined the non-job seeking pool of working-age Americans last month.
And yet in spite of that the labor force INCREASED by 500 thousand workers that very same month!!!!I'm not sure if they are part of a cabal, but they are wrong. The change in the benchmark by adding 1.5M to the noninstitutionalized population is what created the appearance of 1.2M leaving. The actual numbers don't reflect it because it didn't happen.
But it's not as if the BLS hid this fact. It's right there in the report!
"Effective with data for January 2012, updated population estimates which reflect the results of Census2010 have been used in the household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau updates the estimates to reflect new information and assumptions about the growth of the population during the decade. The change in population reflected in the new estimates results from the introduction of the Census 2010 count as the new population base, adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics and other information, and some methodological changes in the estimation process. The vast majority of the population change, however, is due to the change in base population from Census 2000 to Census 2010.
In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official household survey estimates for December 2011 and earlier months. To show the impact of the population adjustment, however, differences in selected December 2011 labor force series based on the old and new population estimates are shown in table B"
hmm, even Time reports the same
TimeMore than 1.2 million people joined the non-job seeking pool of working-age Americans last month.
Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, Labor Force Participation Rate Tumbles To Fresh 30 Year Low | ZeroHedge
the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million
And you left out this part which came in between my quote and yours.:And yet in spite of that the labor force INCREASED by 500 thousand workers that very same month!!!!hmm, even Time reports the same
TimeMore than 1.2 million people joined the non-job seeking pool of working-age Americans last month.
Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, Labor Force Participation Rate Tumbles To Fresh 30 Year Low | ZeroHedge
the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million
add the rest of the quote hackasaursas....
those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation.
meaning the population grew!!!the non institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning
So as the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning, those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million.
hmm, even Time reports the same
Time
More than 1.2 million people joined the non-job seeking pool of working-age Americans last month.
And when it comes to labor force estimates, the steep jump in the number of those not seeking work came entirely from the census adjustment, which added 1.25 million people to that group. If you take out the census adjustment, the labor force numbers stayed essentially the same, as reflected by the labor force participation rate of 63.7%. In other words, the spike in the number of people no longer looking for work is entirely the result of some people at the Labor Department adding numbers to their spread sheets rather than an actual observed shift anywhere in the real economy.
MSN Money
Why the job market still stinks
The drop in the unemployment rate is coming mainly from people leaving the work force in record numbers -- 1.2 million, mostly young folks who we need to support the housing market. Those who are finding work are finding part-time, low-wage positions. No wonder "hard" economic data such as a drop in retail sales and a rise in the savings rate suggest a lack of progress out there.
Who knew MSN Money is part of the evil right wing cabal
I'm not sure if they are part of a cabal, but they are wrong. The change in the benchmark by adding 1.5M to the noninstitutionalized population is what created the appearance of 1.2M leaving. The actual numbers don't reflect it because it didn't happen.
But it's not as if the BLS hid this fact. It's right there in the report!
"Effective with data for January 2012, updated population estimates which reflect the results of Census2010 have been used in the household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau updates the estimates to reflect new information and assumptions about the growth of the population during the decade. The change in population reflected in the new estimates results from the introduction of the Census 2010 count as the new population base, adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics and other information, and some methodological changes in the estimation process. The vast majority of the population change, however, is due to the change in base population from Census 2000 to Census 2010.
In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official household survey estimates for December 2011 and earlier months. To show the impact of the population adjustment, however, differences in selected December 2011 labor force series based on the old and new population estimates are shown in table B"
hmm, even Time reports the same
Time
More than 1.2 million people joined the non-job seeking pool of working-age Americans last month.
You're quoting a source that doesn't understand the benchmark process.And yet in spite of that the labor force INCREASED by 500 thousand workers that very same month!!!!hmm, even Time reports the same
TimeMore than 1.2 million people joined the non-job seeking pool of working-age Americans last month.
Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, Labor Force Participation Rate Tumbles To Fresh 30 Year Low | ZeroHedge
the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million
add the rest of the quote hackasaursas....
those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation.
hmm, even Time reports the same
Time
More than 1.2 million people joined the non-job seeking pool of working-age Americans last month.
Yes, but your Time article goes on to say:
And when it comes to labor force estimates, the steep jump in the number of those not seeking work came entirely from the census adjustment, which added 1.25 million people to that group. If you take out the census adjustment, the labor force numbers stayed essentially the same, as reflected by the labor force participation rate of 63.7%. In other words, the spike in the number of people no longer looking for work is entirely the result of some people at the Labor Department adding numbers to their spread sheets rather than an actual observed shift anywhere in the real economy.
How dare those Boomers die or retire!!! CON$ want them counted as part of the labor force for perpetuity, or at least until a Republican is elected.And yet in spite of that the labor force INCREASED by 500 thousand workers that very same month!!!!
Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, Labor Force Participation Rate Tumbles To Fresh 30 Year Low | ZeroHedge
the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million
add the rest of the quote hackasaursas....
those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation.
Does that include the graphs from Think Progress by your comrades
Get real
That would be data, from which one would extrapolate an opinion, or not if they so decide.
Whether the data is accurate or not is debatable, but you are posting a conclusion, not data. I am not interested in the gentleman's conclusion that you are posting.
So, post his data, with sources, and I will be happy to argue that.
Arranged data, can also be opinions or biased
Argue?
Well you already did
you used an ad hominem
And you chopped the quote too, but you chopped the quote to hide the fact that the increase in the "not in the labor force" was due mostly to an increase in population!!! My chopped quote hid nothing. The labor force increased by 1/2 a million workers.How dare those Boomers die or retire!!! CON$ want them counted as part of the labor force for perpetuity, or at least until a Republican is elected.add the rest of the quote hackasaursas....
those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation.
so you chopped the quote and are now engaged in hackery to cover your trax, nice job!
not
That would be data, from which one would extrapolate an opinion, or not if they so decide.
Whether the data is accurate or not is debatable, but you are posting a conclusion, not data. I am not interested in the gentleman's conclusion that you are posting.
So, post his data, with sources, and I will be happy to argue that.
Arranged data, can also be opinions or biased
Argue?
Well you already did
you used an ad hominem
The Dow just reached a 4 year high, the Nasdaq just reached an 11 year high.
Unemployment down, the economy coming back.
What will Necrophillia complain about now?
Granted, Crissy
truth is hard for the left
and you might feel it is complaining
But that is your own internal demon you will
have to deal with
Try to dress it up anyway you want
But, so far we have gotten little "bang for our buck"
Remember as Papa Obama said about lipstick and pigs
