Skip to comments.Bifrucation of Jobs Adds to Confusion
Posted on 05/06/2014 4:50:22 PM PDT by Kaslin
The market continues to grapple with the meaning of Friday's jobs report, which was really much like Dickens' novel: The best of times and worst of times.
288,000 jobs created are huge in the context of the current recovery, but 806,000 leaving is an even bigger headline. Hourly earnings didn't budge, and that's alarming, even if it does buy the Fed more time to keep rates low. The fact is that the economy struggles against headwinds out of its control. Those pressures are two-prong:
* Fiscal policy designed to harm success * The Dropout Nation where more and more Americans toss in the towel
The week after the jobs report is released is typically a dud as most big earnings are out and key economic data has to wait another four weeks. The bias will be to the downside, although there's no sense of panic. On that note, the high-flying tech names will have to make yet another stance and there's no doubt that the issues in Ukraine are becoming harder to ignore.
Please forgive me, I can’t help myself; BIFURCATION not bifrucation.
Two kinds of fructose?
Red jobs and Blue jobs.
After five years Obama’s commissars have taken political control of virtually all Federal bureaucracies. That is why it is not possible to believe any data or statistics that is being released by the Federal government.
More jobs, but fewer working. What that means is that people are replacing one full time job with two (or more) part time ones. Of course, the Obama’s (and their drive-by partners) will consider this ‘success’.
Alright, somebody help me with the implications of the math, here. "Leaving" is essentially either retiring or falling off the unemployment rolls, whether that's going on disability, public assistance of some form, or resorting to living under a bridge or something. So, as impressive as it's supposed to be, 288,000 jobs "created" fell into the maw of over a million, less retirees, therefore that leaves the 806,000?
How atypical is 806,000 in the context of the time frame? "Leaving" means that they're no longer part of the calculus due to no longer being eligible for unemployment benefits, correct? So, the 288,000 "created," did it make a dent in this number meaning it would have been worse, or are these "created" jobs going to recent graduates and other new entrants into the job market?
It's just the most bizarre thing being spun as a positive and used to show a decline in unemployment but no matter how I cut it, it still looks as if over three quarters of a million people fell out of the labor market in a single month and it could have been over a million. That's not a positive statistic, that's a scary statistic.
In kaslin’s defense, the headline was taken exactly as posted at Town Hall.
According to Sean Hannity today over 200,000 of the 288,000 jobs were “invented jobs” by the Labor Dept. and not real jobs.
It’s spelled the same at the site.
And the graphics have no relationship to the story.
I think you should read this:http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-05-05/jobs-report-was-fact-disaster
What does THAT mean?
I’m still looking and “no longer tallied” by the system.
Much of the hullabaloo about the jobs numbers is that the weekly reports are “seasonally adjusted”. I think the adjustments are not accurate and are responsible for much of the changes in numbers hired. You would need to dig into the report to get the unadjusted numbers, but the headline numbers are almost always the adjusted numbers.
And stocks at record highs. Madness.
It was mis-applied, as well as misspelled.
I expected this article to be about folks who now have to work TWO jobs to make ends meet.
Sure, the total job NUMBERS go up; but NOT the total amount of workers!
WHY don’t I EVER read ahead??
Sounds like the rationale for raising gas prices:
It's merely a temporary increase, due to change over to the winter blend.It's NEVER temporary!
...six months later...
" It's merely a temporary increase, due to change over to the summer blend."
In the future, merely having a job will be considered as being “rich”. (Thanks to Obama and his policies)
Did not know this....zero hedge is pretty good at explaining things the MSM will not:
Put it this way. If you go from one solid full time job to working as a waiter, cab driver, and tossing pizzas, the establishment survey will show that the economy created TWO jobs (one job lost plus three started= two jobs net) whereas the household survey will show NO growth (one person lost a job and started working elsewhere).
With this in mind, you should be paying attention to the household survey. The household survey shows 73,000 jobs were LOST. This negates the claim that 288,000 were created.