U.S. May Lose 824,000 Jobs as Employment Data Revised: Analysis

[ipaint]

U.S. May Lose 824,000 Jobs as Employment Data Revised: Analysis
Feb. 3 (Bloomberg Multimedia) -- The U.S. may lose 824,000 jobs when the government releases its annual revision to employment data on Feb. 5, showing the labor market was in worse shape during the recession than known at the time.

http://www.bloomberg.com/insight/birth-death-model.html

Largest revision in 18 years.

[leftstreet]

1. This is a good thing. It contributes to the Jobless Recovery!

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[Yuugal]

2. Who could have seen that coming?

[ddeclue]

3. We live in a post-employment economy.. jobs are SO 20th century...

I mean can't we all marry a millionaire, win on Survivor, or be America's next top model or be the American idol?

:eyes:

[undeterred]

4. The rest of us will win the Powerball lottery.

[ipaint]

5. They are still using the same birth death model today

From April '09 to Dec '09 it added 990,000 jobs. It should be interesting to see that revision in Feb. of 2011.

Smoke and mirrors.

[ProSense]

6. They've been announcing this revision for months.

U.S. Job Losses May Be Even Larger, Model Breaks Down (Update1)

What it shows is that the U.S. was losing even more jobs on a monthly basis and the turn around was even greater than realized.

[SarahB]

7. ...

:rofl:

[ProSense]

8. Jan. 2009 the U.S. lost nearly 900,000 jobs, about 100,000 than previously reported.

Laugh at a net 4,000 gain in November 2009.

[galileoreloaded]

12. You really, really don't understand the birth/death model....n/t

[ProSense]

14. No, you apparently don't understand adjustments

“We are probably still underestimating job losses,” said John Silvia, chief economist at Wells Fargo Securities LLC in Charlotte, North Carolina. “There could be another 30,000 to 40,000” that the data isn’t picking up, he said.

That would mean the loss of jobs for September could turn out to be as high as 300,000, rather than the 263,000 reported today by the Labor Department. Today’s report also showed the jobless rate climbed to 9.8 percent last month, a 26-year high.

Let's say it's 300,000 in September, how does that compare to revised numbers for October through December?

There is still a turn around relative to losing 900,000 jobs monthly.

[harkadog]

9. No it doesn't show that at all

The "turn around" as you call it will be affected by the next revision a year from now. No one knows what those numbers will be.

[ProSense]

13. We'll have to wait and see, but the assumption

that it will be wiped out is flawed. It will be revised, and it could go either way.

[galileoreloaded]

10. Your cognative dissonance disorder, while astounding, is seemingly accelerating in veracity.

Good luck with that.

[ipaint]

11. Apparently the "turn around" was aided by a faulty birth death model

that continues to skew the numbers.

Turn around, that's a hoot.