Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Missing 9.4 million Jobs

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 » Topic Forums » Economy Donate to DU
 
mhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 12:02 AM
Original message
The Missing 9.4 million Jobs
http://www.comstockfunds.com/index.cfm?act=Newsletter.c...

Comstock Funds
Charlie Minter
7 April 2004

Although the 308,000 increase in March payroll employment may seem like a lot compared to what weve been getting and what most have been expecting, it actually falls far short of what we should be seeing at this stage of a recovery. Heres what we found in examining the last seven economic recoveries.

In the first six of these recoveries beginning with May 1954 employment rose by an average of 7.7 percent over the first 28 months with a high of 9.1 percent and a low of 5.5 percent. This includes one cycle that peaked in 24 months with a gain of 7.4 percent. Even in the recovery that started in March 1991, employment climbed 2.2% over the first 28 months. For all of the seven recoveries, employment rose by an average of 6.9 percent over 28 months. So lets not hear any more about employment being a lagging indicator. It is not, and even if it were, 28 months is surely enough time to catch up.

In the current recovery employment has actually declined 0.2 percent in the first 28 months that includes the March number and the revisions that were released on Friday. If employment had increased by 6.9 percent, the average of the past recoveries, March payrolls would have come to about 139.9 million rather than the 130.5 million actually reported. This means that there are now 9.4 million fewer jobs than there should be at this point in the cycle, and that we needed an average increase of 322,000 jobs for each of the past 28 months to equal the average job growth of the last seven expansions.

Snip ......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Another Illusion
I did some research, and counted among the 308,000 new jobs were over 200,000 striking supermarket employees who returned to work after the strike. :puke: :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Their report did have this included... they probably didn't understand it
Non-farm payrolls climbed 308,000 in March, helped a bit by the return of workers after a labor dispute at California grocery stores ended, the Labor Department said. This was the biggest gain since April 2000 and well above the 103,000 rise expected on Wall Street.

The best I could find was 70,000 grocery workers involved in the dispute.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Mr pResident? Would you like to Super Size that economic miracle?
" The department said payrolls got a 10,000-to-20,000 boost as employees returned to work following a dispute at grocery stores in California that had idled 72,000 workers. The impact was muted because many of the returning employees displaced temporary hires.

The return of the striking and locked-out workers was reflected in a 47,000-job increase in the retail sector.

In addition, construction payrolls shot up by 71,000 in a bounce-back from a 21,000 decline in February attributed to bad weather. Retail trade added 47,000 jobs in March. This sector has added 132,000 jobs since December, after posting a net job loss in 2003. Within retail trade, employment in food stores increased by 13,000 over the month, reflecting the net impact of workers returning from a strike. Wholesale trade employment edged up over the month. Since October, the industry has added 39,000 jobs."


------
But if you look at the Employment Situation Explanatory Note on the Labor Dept report http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.tn.htm, you find this:

"People are classified as employed if they did any work at all as paid employees during the reference week; worked in their own business, profession, or on their own farm; or worked without pay at least 15 hours in a family business or farm. People are also counted as employed if they were temporarily absent from their jobs because of illness, bad weather, vacation, labor-management disputes, or personal reasons."

How do you get the biggest gain in 4 years when your poll numbers suck? You LIE!

You include a bunch of people (138,000)in categories who normally were counted all along as employed, then say they went back to work -look how many jobs we ADDED and Presto, Bounce, Talking heads praising almightly Shrub!

And if you look at the gains for the year, of the entire 354,000 jobs ShrubCo is claiming to have created (even if we ignore the falsely reported ones above) -

"Within the leisure and hospitality sector, employment in food services and drinking places increased by 27,000 over the month and by 186,000 over the year."

That's right folks, 52% of the jobs they claim to have created this year are people flipping hamburgers - no wonder they are trying to reclassify this as manufacturing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frodo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. A couple points there
People are also counted as employed if they were temporarily absent from their jobs because of illness, bad weather, vacation, labor-management disputes, or personal reasons."

That's for a different survey. And it's a small part of why the unemployment rate went down for a couple months that no jobs were being added. People "out of work" on the establishment survey were counted as employed on the household survey.

You include a bunch of people (138,000)in categories who normally were counted all along as employed, then say they went back to work -look how many jobs we ADDED and Presto, Bounce, Talking heads praising almightly Shrub!

Not exactly. Most of those people were mentioned in the previous months' reports as mitigating reasons why the job number didn't go up. It really went up 71,000 (instead of 1,000) that month but 70,000 people went on strike so they get deducted. The explanaton didn't fly here because "jobs are jobs - if they aren't getting paid they don't ahve a job" (a pretty reasonable take on the matter). But now they are back to work.

They negatively impacted the numbers a couple months ago and positively impacted them this month. We have to score it one way or the other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Aug 21st 2014, 05:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Economy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
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