You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

285 K jobs lost in May [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
unlawflcombatnt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-07-08 02:50 AM
Original message
285 K jobs lost in May
Advertisements [?]
June 6, 2008

Friday's Employment Report is another testament to government science fiction writers' creative talents. Nonfarm Payroll Employment fell "only" -49,000. But this number was highly manipulated, and greatly understates true job losses.

Let's start with the "Household Survey" ( which is NonFarm Payroll Employment, which comes from the "Establishment Survey").

A total of 285,000 jobs were lost in May, falling from April's 146.331 million down to 146.046 million for May.

Unemployment rose from 5.0% to 5.5%

The number of those unemployed increased by a whopping 861,000 in May, from April's 7.626 million up to 8.487 million in May. (This is an addition of 861,000 workers to the unused labor supply, putting even more downward pressure on wages.)

There are now 87 million working age Americans who are NOT employed.
(This is the sum of those Unemployed + "Not-in-labor-force").

Now let's go to the Establishment Survey, which creates the numbers for Nonfarm Payroll Employment.

Nonfarm Payroll Employment declined "only" -49,000. This number, however, was manipulated upward by the BLS's favorite tool the business "birth/death" model. This concoction added 217,000 jobs to the total. ( The "birth/death" addition is based on an imaginary number of jobs created that are not counted, unlike the bulk of the Payroll Employment number, which is based on actual, countable jobs. The birth/death model is like a "mark-to-model" addition to the employment number.)

What this really means is, that Payroll Employment would have declined -266,000, were it not for the fictitious addition of jobs from the Birth/Death guesstimate. Below is a copy of the BLS's Birth/Death estimate, showing the addition.

This model can also be found at the following link:

The Payroll Employment breakdown showed a decline of -34K jobs in Construction and -26K in Manufacturing. Service sector jobs increased +8K. (The individual breakdowns can best be seen at )

Below is a bar graph from showing the month-to-month losses in Payroll Employment:

This is the 5th straight month of Payroll Employment job losses. The lion's share of job losses have come from Construction and Manufacturing. And without the addition of virtual jobs to both Construction and Manufacturing, those job losses would be much larger. Expect these job losses to be revised upward, once the BLS is forced to replace the fictitious birth/death additions with the actual countable numbers.

This is also at least the 5th month of the Recession as well, though it may have started even sooner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -285 K jobs lost in May unlawflcombatnt  Jun-07-08 02:50 AM   #0 
  - Over a QUARTER OF A MILLION jobs in ONE MONTH!  gateley   Jun-07-08 03:07 AM   #1 
  - You should be  unlawflcombatnt   Jun-07-08 06:06 PM   #6 
  - Effect of Employment Report on Markets  unlawflcombatnt   Jun-07-08 03:22 AM   #2 
  - Make that  laylah   Jun-07-08 06:30 AM   #3 
  - Welcome To Stagflation...  KharmaTrain   Jun-07-08 06:52 AM   #4 
  - The huge bubbles created by Greenspan's accommodation of junior's  indepat   Jun-07-08 07:01 AM   #5 
  - Bailing out Rich Financiers  unlawflcombatnt   Jun-07-08 08:21 PM   #7 
     - 'cause then, some will trickle down to the little people  indepat   Jun-08-08 10:28 AM   #8 
  - How did I miss this yesterday? Kicking anyway. n/t  lumberjack_jeff   Jun-08-08 10:40 AM   #9 
  - 87 million Americans of working age are unemployed  leftofthedial   Jun-08-08 10:45 AM   #10 
  - no, not all working Americans are in the labor force  The Inquisitive   Jun-08-08 12:50 PM   #11 
  - I'm not talking about the technical definition.  leftofthedial   Jun-08-08 02:21 PM   #16 
  - 40% is a little high.  KillCapitalism   Jun-08-08 01:52 PM   #12 
  - Living in Michigan, I think most of the State runs at close to 40percent  sarcasmo   Jun-08-08 02:08 PM   #14 
  - 300 million people in the US. 100 million (plus) are kids and old folks and infirm.  leftofthedial   Jun-08-08 02:24 PM   #17 
  - That's not how unemployment has EVER been measured.  Zynx   Jun-08-08 02:11 PM   #15 
  - EVER?  leftofthedial   Jun-08-08 02:26 PM   #18 
     - Um, no. Never.  Zynx   Jun-08-08 02:45 PM   #19 
        - number of workers without jobs divided by total number of workers in the population?  leftofthedial   Jun-08-08 06:37 PM   #20 
        - From Wiki  leftofthedial   Jun-08-08 11:27 PM   #21 
  - In 2000 the employment to population ratio was 73%. Today it is 71%.  lumberjack_jeff   Jun-08-08 11:33 PM   #22 
  - Didn't Bush say it was because of all the high school graduates, LMFAO.  sarcasmo   Jun-08-08 02:06 PM   #13 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC