Tags for This Article:

Media (2897)  Dollar (553)  Economy Recession (405)  Markets (311)  Job Unemployment (100)  Stock Market- Investing (98)  Manufacturing (71)  Decline (62)  Stockmarket (50)  Employment Jobless (42)  McDowell (1) 

Populum Tag Cloud
       Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
Articles
Diaries Products
Events All
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs
From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity
Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
Sub-levels

 

 

 

Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
March 8, 2008 at 07:42:25

Promoted to column top on 3/8/08:
Job Loss for February Much Higher than 63,000

by Christopher Wright     Page 1 of 2 page(s)

www.opednews.com

 

Tell A Friend

(0.0 from 0 ratings) View Ratings | Rate It

This one particularly got my ire:

Front Page: 25,000 jobs expected to be created in February

Back section: 63,000 jobs lost in February.

63,000 jobs lost brought the Dow Jones down to the 11,800 level. What would it have been had they seen the real numbers. As bad as this is, and it is what is reported throughout the media, it is not the 'real' number.

I worked for a State government for a while as a researcher/planner.  One of my areas was in workforce retention so I spent a good deal of time watching the income and outgo of employees in various categories.

Now, my math is pretty good, though admittedly simple. That is to say that I squeezed somehow through statistics in my undergraduate degree and was thrilled that it wasn't necessary for my Masters. I can count without using my fingers and toes but don't really understand high-level statistical schmoozing and machinations.

So, when I would see that 60% of a certain position tended, year after year, to leave their employment after less than 6 months, I would write a report to the powers that be. In my simplistic mind, patterns are patterns and percentages are percentages. By the time the reports were 'fine-tuned' by the powers that be, all problems disappeared and life was good. I expect it wasn't so good for those folks who left a decent paying State job for unknown reasons and I still can't believe it was good for the various departments who depended on those workers.

Like I said, I'm educated but basically simple. If we really didn't need those employees, why continue hiring them and losing them year after year?  If we really did need that job class, why didn't we find out why they left and try to change things? I left there eventually – it wasn't worth the cognitive dissonance. 

Now I am far removed from that environment but occasionally some numbers come across my computer search that just don't make sense and I foolishly look further into them. Such it was on Friday, March 7th with the federal Jobs Report that tanked the Dow Jones: 63,000 jobs lost in the Economy! Dow heads down into the 11,000's!

What kind of jobs were lost, I wondered? As the initial report was on the internet, I decided to take a gander at it. Big Mistake! Déjà vu – I was mentally back in my old, discarded job.

Here are the numbers that they report.  You can go there yourself and check it out at page 2 & 3 of http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm 

Jobs Lost, February 2008

Manufacturing                  -52,000

Construction                     -39,000

Retail Trade                      -34,000

Wholesale Trade               -9,000

Temp Empl Svcs               -28,000

 1  |  2

 

Christopher is a retired Mayflower family, Navy Vet, flower child, Mensan and a long-time rural Alaskan with a lifetime or two in Social Sciences and cross-cultural endeavors. He has a terminal graduate degree and is heading into his terminal years with full speed ahead. His idols are those wonderful people who can take a complex subject and make it meaningful and understandable to those not specifically trained in that field but none the less affected by it. He writes mostly about human behavior, foibles, science, history, Alaskana, the environment and presently, critical thinking, politics, war and social change. Chris generally prefers to just give you the info and let you make up your own mind – it just doesn't work well otherwise – but sometimes he just can't resist slapping people on the forehead. "Talk your walk and walk your talk"

Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
8 comments

Futurist, writer, professional speaker, competitive runner
Grady CashFuturist, writer, professional speaker, competitive runner

Government reports can be hard to read

Government reports can be notoriously hard to read. The report discussed categories, sub-categories, and sub-sub-categories without distinction, so it's easy to get confused. The huge loss in credit intermediation caught my eye. It seems very unlikely that such a relatively labor market could lose so many jobs in one month. Credit intermediation is a sub-category of financial services, which is itself a sub-category, I think, of professional and business services, so the credit intermediation losses are already included in the credit and business services. Also, the credit intermediation losses did not all occur in February. If you refer to the actual report, you'll find this sentence [with emphasis added], "In financial activities, credit intermediation employment continued to decline and has fallen by 116,000 since a peak in October 2006." That is, over a period of a little less than a year and a half.

by Grady Cash (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 8:39:18 AM
 


Christopher is a retired Mayflower family, Navy Vet, flower child, Mensan and a long-time rural Alaskan with a lifetime or two in Social Sciences and cross-cultural endeavors. He has a terminal graduate degree and is heading into his terminal years with full speed ahead.

His idols are those wonderful people who can take a complex subject and make it meaningful and understandable to those not specifically trained in that field but none the less affected by it.

He writes...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Christopher WrightChristopher is a retired Mayflower family, Navy Vet, flower child, Mensan and a long-time rural Alaskan with a lifetime or two in Social Sciences and cross-cultural endeavors. He has a terminal graduate degree and is heading into his terminal years with full speed ahead.

His idols are those wonderful people who can take a complex subject and make it meaningful and understandable to those not specifically trained in that field but none the less affected by it.

He writes...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Yep

Absolutely correct, Grady and thanks. I got up at 5AM this morning with the nagging thought that I had missed something so rewrote the entire article - hopefully a little clearer and more accurate.

The numbers to me are still catywampus in several ways. Some will change when the full report comes out on April 4th. The DJIA reacted to the "job loss' numbers, particularly because the job replacement categories were mostly low-level earners comparatively.

There were other numbers that, on closer reading, were 2007 averages or total yearly job declines that made it more difficult to understand.

I appreciate the constructive criticism.

by Christopher Wright (16 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 29 comments) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 9:05:49 AM
 


truth seeker
gordon nelsontruth seeker

The phantom birth-death formula added 135,000 jobs, too

Besides the +/-30,000 gov't jobs you may have missed in the official number,the BLS added 135,000 birth-death jobs in order to arrive at this still-dismal number> http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm
Notice on the link, they are removing 2007 data, so we can't compare the phantom jobs added year-over-year? Also, they used to line up the tables "stacked" so it was easy to compare. I have long called for an investigation of the BLS, and who is the Bush-operative(s) there. Notice they added 9,000 construction jobs! Bear in mind, they take a number of districts (the Fed Reserve Banks ones I think), and using new corporation filings(many are bogus "S" or tax shelters), assign the number of jobs they think are created, this magic formula added 135K jobs.

by gordon nelson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 13 comments) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 12:16:20 PM
 


Christopher is a retired Mayflower family, Navy Vet, flower child, Mensan and a long-time rural Alaskan with a lifetime or two in Social Sciences and cross-cultural endeavors. He has a terminal graduate degree and is heading into his terminal years with full speed ahead.

His idols are those wonderful people who can take a complex subject and make it meaningful and understandable to those not specifically trained in that field but none the less affected by it.

He writes...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Christopher WrightChristopher is a retired Mayflower family, Navy Vet, flower child, Mensan and a long-time rural Alaskan with a lifetime or two in Social Sciences and cross-cultural endeavors. He has a terminal graduate degree and is heading into his terminal years with full speed ahead.

His idols are those wonderful people who can take a complex subject and make it meaningful and understandable to those not specifically trained in that field but none the less affected by it.

He writes...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Ah-ha!

Now, isn't that another nice little bit of statistical fluff? As it appears they are never really revised by hard data, it becomes a group of straw people that may or may not ever exist. In fact, many could then be double counted - once in hard data from tax type records and again via the formula. Aren't they creative?

My revised article still came up with 123,000 job losses but I don't know if Rob is going to exchange it any time soon.

Thanks for the info.

Christopher

by Christopher Wright (16 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 29 comments) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 12:42:24 PM
 


I'm just a country bumpkin liberal in Texas who is hanging on for dear life to the turnip truck.
victorberryI'm just a country bumpkin liberal in Texas who is hanging on for dear life to the turnip truck.

Elaine Chao

The primary Bush operative at the BLS is the Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao (wife of Senator Mitch McConnell).  If you've ever seen or heard her, you know her first priority is to cook the books as much as she can to cast the Bush economy in a favorable light.

And if you think the "loyal Bushies" made a mess at the Department of Justice, imagine what they're doing at the Departments of Labor and Commerce.    There's not an economic statistic coming from either one that anyone should take at face value.

"Two-term mandate Bush" has now presided over two bouts of recession.  According to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), one has to go all the way back to the Eisenhower administration to find such mismanagement of the economy.  Congratulations to the moron!  And congratulations to the two-time Bush voters who are even more moronic!

Since 1952, Jimmy Carter has been the only Democratic president who suffered an "official" economic recession during his term in office.  All the other recessions occurred during Republican rule.   

by victorberry (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 5:39:23 PM
 


truth seeker
gordon nelsontruth seeker

how many Bush operatives @ BLS?

Good point about Chow, but she doesn't goose the numbers. It's been reported many places that Bush installed a political operative to review all data coming out of all agencies. The employment number goes to the White House before release, but anyone who understands the corruption in CPI, PPI, GDP, would conclude there are insiders planted @ BLS. The GDP is a CRIMINAL FRAUD, because the GDP deflater, or inflation ,is understated by as much as 2-3%, if you look at the 3rd Quarter 2007 GDP report, the inflation deflater was THE LOWEST IN 43 YEARS, meaning the imput costs , oil, etc were a complete (criminal?) fraud, arriving at a grossly overestimated GDP. The (criminal?) goal is to not show negative GDP. If the PPI is running at 3%, there IS NO WAY we have a positive GDP. It's been negative , imho, for 2 quarters, at least.  Also, they add in foreign manufacturing, as if it's produced by Americans, in the GDP.

by gordon nelson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 13 comments) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 8:28:16 PM
 


Mike Folkerth is the author of "The Biggest Lie Ever Believed" and is not your run-of-the-mill author of finance and economics.

The former real estate broker, developer, private real estate fund manager, auctioneer, Alaskan bush pilot, restaurateur, U.S. Navy veteran, heavy equipment operator, taxi cab driver, fishing guide, horse packer and few jobs too embarrassing to mention, writes from experience and plain common sense.

Mike’s humorous systems of “Mikeronomics” ...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Mike FolkerthMike Folkerth is the author of "The Biggest Lie Ever Believed" and is not your run-of-the-mill author of finance and economics.

The former real estate broker, developer, private real estate fund manager, auctioneer, Alaskan bush pilot, restaurateur, U.S. Navy veteran, heavy equipment operator, taxi cab driver, fishing guide, horse packer and few jobs too embarrassing to mention, writes from experience and plain common sense.

Mike’s humorous systems of “Mikeronomics” ...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Gordon

GDP includes goods and services. All GOVERNMENT spending and government provided services is included in GDP.

I would agree with you that we have been negative for a minimum of two quarters if the numbers were properly accounted for.

Bush however, didn't make up the rules, there is a very long list of adjustments to GDP, CPI and jobless claims. For instance, the Boskin Commission under Clinton drastically changed the way CPI was reported in order to keep it artifically low.

The bottom line is that the U.S. is in recession and I see no way to keep parts of our country from entering depresion status.

by Mike Folkerth (120 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 562 comments) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 11:11:07 PM
 

 

8 comments

 

Tell A Friend

 


Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008

Blog Ads

 

 

 

 

Most Popular Articles
in the Last 2 Days
(by Recommend Emails)

"Welcome, Rich White Oligarchs!" --Daily Show Billboard Greets Republicans In Minnesota Posted by Rob Kall

Why I Won't Vote for John McCain by Phillip Butler

Carville is a Spy for Bush Posted by Josh Mitteldorf

Virgo New Moon, August 30, 2008 by C.L. Pagano

Got a Traffic Ticket in the Mail for a Right on Red at an Automated Enforcement Light? by Tumerica

Howard Zinn's Advice to Obama by Rob Kall

McCrash: McCain's Military Record Revisited by Hill Kemp

The Slow Death of Democracy and the Rise of the Corporate Hydra by Siv O'Neall

The Rise and Fall of the US Dollar as the The World Reserve by John Little

"Now, This!" by Stephen Pizzo

Popularity Navigation
Control Panel:

Select Time
6 hrs 12 hrs
1 Day 2 Days
3 Days 1 Week
2 Weeks 1 Month
2 Months 3 Months
6 Months Last Year
Select Content
Articles Diaries
Polls Events
All Op-Eds
News Life/Arts/Science
Select Popularity
Page Views
# of Comments
Recommend Emails
  

Go To Top 50 Most Popular