HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » September jobs report: US...

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 07:34 AM

September jobs report: US economy gains 661,000 payrolls, unemployment rate ticks down to 7.9%

Source: Yahoo Finance

The US economy saw another 661,000 jobs added back in September and a modest improvement in the unemployment rate, as the recovery in the labor market continues as a stagnating rate.

The Labor Department released its September jobs report Friday morning. Here were the main metrics from the release, compared to consensus estimates compiled by Bloomberg.

[snip]

The addition in non-farm payrolls marked the fifth straight month of net job gains. Still, the economy remains far from recuperating the jobs lost during the nadir of the pandemic period in March and April. Between those two months, employment fell by more than 22 million. Through August, just 10.6 million jobs were brought back.

Even as the US economy brings back some workers, an increasing number of Americans have found their layoffs to be permanent. Fewer than half of unemployed workers reported being on temporary layoff or furlough in August, representing a major slide from the near-80% in the category in April. The number of permanent job losers in August rose by 534,000 to 3.4 million, with this measure having increased by 2.1 million since February.

Read more: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/september-jobs-report-labor-department-coronavirus-pandemic-unemployment-185815250.html



Too much going on this morning but our DU analysts are ready to provide all the details.




TEXT

BLS-Labor Statistics
@BLS_gov
Nonfarm payroll employment rises by 661,000 in September; unemployment rate falls to 7.9% http://go.usa.gov/vrK #JobsReport #BLSdata
8:30 AM · Oct 2, 2020

32 replies, 1493 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply September jobs report: US economy gains 661,000 payrolls, unemployment rate ticks down to 7.9% (Original post)
BumRushDaShow Oct 2020 OP
mahatmakanejeeves Oct 2020 #1
BumRushDaShow Oct 2020 #4
machI Oct 2020 #2
moose65 Oct 2020 #3
progree Oct 2020 #9
Igel Oct 2020 #19
mahatmakanejeeves Oct 2020 #5
progree Oct 2020 #6
BumRushDaShow Oct 2020 #7
progree Oct 2020 #11
BumRushDaShow Oct 2020 #12
mahatmakanejeeves Oct 2020 #8
mahatmakanejeeves Oct 2020 #10
progree Oct 2020 #13
mahatmakanejeeves Oct 2020 #14
progree Oct 2020 #15
progree Oct 2020 #16
progree Oct 2020 #17
progree Oct 2020 #18
progree Oct 2020 #20
BumRushDaShow Oct 2020 #21
progree Oct 2020 #22
Demsrule86 Oct 2020 #23
BumRushDaShow Oct 2020 #24
progree Oct 2020 #25
BumRushDaShow Oct 2020 #26
ProfessorGAC Oct 2020 #27
progree Oct 2020 #28
ProfessorGAC Oct 2020 #29
progree Oct 2020 #30
DrToast Oct 2020 #31
ProfessorGAC Oct 2020 #32

Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 07:40 AM

1. From the source, the BLS report:

Last edited Fri Oct 2, 2020, 08:54 AM - Edit history (1)

Thanks. I hadn't noticed it was 8:30 already. For once, I was doing the work my employer is paying me to do. Anyway:

Nonfarm payroll employment rises by 661,000 in September; unemployment rate falls to 7.9%

Economic News Release USDL-20-1838

Employment Situation Summary
Transmission of material in this news release is embargoed until 8:30 a.m. (ET) Friday, October 2, 2020

Technical information:
Household data: cpsinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/cps
Establishment data: cesinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov


THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- SEPTEMBER 2020


Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 661,000 in September, and the unemployment rate declined to 7.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. These improvements in the labor market reflect the continued resumption of economic activity that had been curtailed due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and efforts to contain it. In September, notable job gains occurred in leisure and hospitality, in retail trade, in health care and social assistance, and in professional and business services. Employment in government declined over the month, mainly in state and local government education.

This news release presents statistics from two monthly surveys. The household survey measures labor force status, including unemployment, by demographic characteristics. The establishment survey measures nonfarm employment, hours, and earnings by industry. For more information about the concepts and statistical methodology used in these two surveys, see the Technical Note.

Household Survey Data

In September, the unemployment rate declined by 0.5 percentage point to 7.9 percent, and the number of unemployed persons fell by 1.0 million to 12.6 million. Both measures have declined for 5 consecutive months but are higher than in February, by 4.4 percentage points and 6.8 million, respectively. (See table A-1. For more information about how the household survey and its measures were affected by the coronavirus pandemic, see the box note at the end of this news release.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates declined in September for adult men (7.4 percent), adult women (7.7 percent), Whites (7.0 percent), and Asians (8.9 percent). The jobless rates for teenagers (15.9 percent), Blacks (12.1 percent), and Hispanics (10.3 percent) showed little change over the month. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

Among the unemployed, the number of persons on temporary layoff decreased by 1.5 million in September to 4.6 million. This measure is down considerably from the high of 18.1 million in April but is 3.8 million higher than in February. In September, the number of permanent job losers increased by 345,000 to 3.8 million; this measure has risen by 2.5 million since February. The number of unemployed job leavers rose by 212,000 to 801,000 in September. (Job leavers are persons who quit or voluntarily left their previous job and immediately began looking for new employment.) (See table A-11.)

In September, the number of unemployed persons who were jobless less than 5 weeks increased by 271,000 to 2.6 million. The number of persons jobless 5 to 14 weeks decreased by 402,000 to 2.7 million, and the number of persons jobless 15 to 26 weeks fell by 1.6 million to 4.9 million. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) increased by 781,000 to 2.4 million. (See table A-12.)

The labor force participation rate decreased by 0.3 percentage point to 61.4 percent in September and is 2.0 percentage points lower than in February. The employment-population ratio, at 56.6 percent, changed little over the month but is 4.5 percentage points lower than in February. (See table A-1.)

In September, the number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) declined by 1.3 million to 6.3 million, reflecting a decrease in the number of persons whose hours were cut due to slack work or business conditions. The number of involuntary part-time workers is 2.0 million higher than in February. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. (See table A-8.)

The number of persons not in the labor force who currently want a job, at 7.2 million, changed little in September; this measure is 2.3 million higher than in February. These individuals were not counted as unemployed because they were not actively looking for work during the last 4 weeks or were unavailable to take a job. (See table A-1.)

Among those not in the labor force who currently want a job, the number of persons marginally attached to the labor force, at 1.9 million, changed little in September. These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months but had not looked for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. The number of discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached who believed that no jobs were available for them, was 581,000 in September, also little changed from the previous month. (See Summary table A.)

Household Survey Supplemental Data

In September, 22.7 percent of employed persons teleworked because of the coronavirus pandemic, down from 24.3 percent in August. These data refer to employed persons who teleworked or worked at home for pay at some point in the last 4 weeks specifically because of the pandemic.

In September, 19.4 million persons reported that they had been unable to work because their employer closed or lost business due to the pandemic--that is, they did not work at all or worked fewer hours at some point in the last 4 weeks due to the pandemic. This measure is down from 24.2 million in August. Among those who reported in September that they were unable to work because of pandemic-related closures or lost business, 10.3 percent received at least some pay from their employer for the hours not worked.

About 4.5 million persons not in the labor force in September were prevented from looking for work due to the pandemic. This is down from 5.2 million in August. (To be counted as unemployed, by definition, individuals must either be actively looking for work or on temporary layoff.)

These supplemental data come from questions added to the household survey beginning in May to help gauge the effects of the pandemic on the labor market. The data are not seasonally adjusted. Tables with estimates from the supplemental questions for all months are available online at www.bls.gov/cps/effects-of-the-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic.htm.

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 661,000 in September, following larger gains in the prior 4 months. In September, nonfarm employment was below its February level by 10.7 million, or 7.0 percent. Notable job gains occurred in leisure and hospitality, in retail trade, in health care and social assistance, and in professional and business services. Employment declined in government, mainly in state and local government education. (See table B-1. For more information about how the establishment survey and its measures were affected by the coronavirus pandemic, see the box note at the end of this news release.)

Employment in leisure and hospitality increased by 318,000 in September, with almost two-thirds of the gain occurring in food services and drinking places (+200,000). Despite job growth totaling 3.8 million over the last 5 months, employment in food services and drinking places is down by 2.3 million since February. Amusements, gambling, and recreation (+69,000) and accommodation (+51,000) also added jobs in September.

Retail trade added 142,000 jobs over the month, with gains widespread in the industry. Clothing and clothing accessories stores (+40,000) accounted for about one-fourth of the over-the-month change in retail trade. Notable employment increases also occurred in general merchandise stores (+20,000), motor vehicle and parts dealers (+16,000), and health and personal care stores (+16,000). Employment in retail trade is 483,000 lower than in February.

Employment in health care and social assistance rose by 108,000 in September but is down by 1.0 million since February. Health care added 53,000 jobs in September, with continued growth in offices of physicians (+18,000), home health care services (+16,000), and offices of other health practitioners (+14,000). Social assistance added 55,000 jobs, mostly in individual and family services (+32,000) and in child day care services (+18,000).

Professional and business services added 89,000 jobs in September. Employment increased in services to buildings and dwellings (+22,000), architectural and engineering services (+13,000), and computer systems design and related services (+12,000). Despite
gains of 910,000 since April, employment in professional and business services is 1.4 million lower than in February.

Employment in transportation and warehousing rose by 74,000 in September. Within the industry, job gains continued in warehousing and storage (+32,000), transit and ground passenger transportation (+21,000), and couriers and messengers (+10,000). Although the industry has added 291,000 jobs since May, employment in transportation and warehousing is 304,000 lower than in February.

Manufacturing added 66,000 jobs over the month. Durable goods accounted for about two-thirds of the gain, led by motor vehicles and parts (+14,000) and machinery (+14,000). Despite gains over the past 5 months, employment in manufacturing is 647,000 below February's level.

Financial activities added 37,000 jobs in September. Job growth occurred in real estate and rental and leasing (+20,000) and in finance and insurance (+16,000). Employment in financial activities is 162,000 below the level in February.

In September, the other services industry added 36,000 jobs, largely in membership associations and organizations (+31,000). Employment in other services is 495,000 lower than in February.

Employment in information grew by 27,000 in September but is down by 276,000 since February. Motion picture and sound recording industries accounted for most of the September gain (+23,000).

Construction employment increased by 26,000 in September, with growth in residential specialty trade contractors (+16,000) and construction of buildings (+12,000). Construction employment is below its February level by 394,000.

In September, wholesale trade added 19,000 jobs, with gains in both the durable and nondurable goods components (+13,000 and +8,000, respectively). Employment in wholesale trade is 312,000 lower than in February.

Government employment declined by 216,000 in September. Employment in local government education and state government education fell by 231,000 and 49,000, respectively. A decrease of 34,000 in federal government was driven by a decline in the number of temporary Census 2020 workers. Partially offsetting these declines, employment in local government, excluding education, rose by 96,000.

Employment in private education decreased by 69,000 in September, after a gain of similar magnitude in August. Employment in the industry is down by 355,000 since February.

Employment changed little in mining in September (+1,000). Employment in the industry is down by 133,000 since a recent peak in January 2019; about three-fourths of this decline has occurred since February of this year.

In September, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls,at $29.47, changed little (+2 cents). Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees were also little changed in September (+1 cent) at $24.79. The large employment fluctuations over the past several months--especially in industries with lower-paid workers--complicate the analysis of recent trends in average hourly earnings. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 0.1 hour to 34.7 hours in September. In manufacturing, the workweek rose by 0.2 hour to 40.2 hours, and overtime decreased by 0.1 hour to 2.9 hours. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 0.1 hour to 34.1 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for July was revised up by 27,000, from +1,734,000 to +1,761,000, and the change for August was revised up by 118,000, from +1,371,000 to +1,489,000. With these revisions, employment in July and August combined was 145,000 more than previously reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors.)

_____________
The Employment Situation for October is scheduled to be released on Friday, November 6, 2020, at 8:30 a.m. (ET).

{snip an explanation and links to charts}

* * * * *

[center]Facilities for Sensory Impaired[/center]

Information from these releases will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: 202-691-5200, Federal Relay Services: 1-800-877-8339.

* * * * *

Commissioner's Statement on the Employment Situation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mahatmakanejeeves (Reply #1)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 07:57 AM

4. Good morning and TGIF on FULL MOON FRIDAY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 07:47 AM

2. Trump is sacrficing human life to advance the economy.

As a second wave of COVID infection is on the upswing, Trump claims victory with the economy as people get sick and die.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 07:56 AM

3. Remember during the later Obama years...

When jobs were added in large numbers almost every month, all the Republicans could find to talk about was the labor force participation rate, which no one in the real world had ever heard of? It hovered between 62 and 63%, which was somehow "bad" at that time. Now, it's lower than that, and not a peep about it! Good times....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moose65 (Reply #3)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 08:50 AM

9. An interesting graph of LFPR -- it fell during the Bush II years too

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Set the beginning date to 2000 to see the last Clinton year and the Bush II years and beyond to the present

In January 2017, the last month of the Obama admin, it was 62.8%. Now it's 61.4%.

This is from my Data Links posting (#6) :

# Labor Force http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11000000?output_view=net_1mth
The labor force is the sum of employed and unemployed. To count as unemployed, one must have actively sought work in the past 4 weeks (just looking at want ads and job postings doesn't count)

Monthly change in thousands, 1st 9 months:
2020: 50 -60 -1633 -6432 1746 1705 -62 968 -695

Total count in thousands, 1st 9 months:
2020: 164606 164546 162913 156481 158227 159932 159870 160838 160143
September is down 4.403 million from February -- lots of people are discouraged from looking because of poor prospects and/or concerns over coronavirus
January and February data affected by changes in population controls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moose65 (Reply #3)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 05:10 PM

19. The details matter.

Bush II had maybe a 1.5% drop in the participation rate; after 2009, the slope steepened so Obama had a 3-3.5% drop.

A reduction in the participation rate often disguises a rise in the unemployment rate. It can be because of retirement, education, etc., but it can also just signal discouraged workers. People get bent out of shape mistakenly thinking that if unemployment benefits expire you're no longer counted as unemployed, so the unemployment rate is artificially low (benefits and unemployed are different things); if you're a discouraged worker and don't look for work, you're not included in among the unemployed and it really does make the unemployment rate artificially low.

As for current stats, I take them with a grain of salt. When NYC has mandated that a large portion of its workforce be unemployed it's not the same as the kinds of structural things that lead to higher unemployment during a normal recession. Government enforced unemployment has to follow different rules. When the government mandates unemployment, of course it's going to be higher--it's like reduced air pollution with an EPA mandate or increased compliance with safety belts when cops are out in force. During a pandemic, a lot of people that might seek work won't if they're afraid given the 99% fatality rate and the horrors that accrues to each COVID patient (because they're subject not to be put on a ventilator but to ventilating); that's not "discourage" but "terrified". COVID-19 bears real risks, but the media's profited from stoking terrah here just as it did in 2004 and 2005. All the economic definitions made assumptions about cause and effect, and now the cause is different and we're ignoring the assumptions. It's sloppy thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 07:57 AM

5. Links to earlier reports:

Last edited Fri Dec 4, 2020, 12:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Good afternoon, all.

Wed Sep 30, 2020: Links to earlier reports:

Fri Sep 4, 2020: Links to earlier reports:

Wed Sep 2, 2020: Links to earlier reports:

Fri Aug 7, 2020: Links to earlier reports:

Wed Aug 5, 2020: Links to earlier reports:

{snip}

Updated from this post of Friday, December 6, 2019: Good morning. Links to earlier reports:

-- -- -- -- -- --

[center]Past Performance is Not a Guarantee of Future Results.[/center]

Nonetheless, what is important is not this month's results, but the trend. Let’s look at some earlier numbers:

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in September 2020:

Private-sector employment increased by 749,000 from August to September on seasonally adjusted basis

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in August 2020:

Economy adds 1.4 million jobs in August, and the unemployment rate fell below 10 percent

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in August 2020:

Private-sector employment increased by 428,000 from July to August, on a seasonally adjusted basis.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in July 2020:

Nonfarm payroll employment rises by 1.8 million in July; unemployment rate falls to 10.2%

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in July 2020:

Private-sector employment increased by 167,000 from June to July, on a seasonally adjusted basis.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in June 2020:

Nonfarm payroll employment rises by 4.8 million in June; unemployment rate falls to 11.1%

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in June 2020:

ADP National Employment Report: Private Sector Employment Increased by 2,369,000 Jobs in June

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in May 2020:

Unemployment rate drops to 13 percent, as the economy began to lose jobs at a slower pace

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in May 2020:

Private-sector employment decreased by 2,760,000 from April to May, on a seasonally adjusted basis.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in April 2020:

Jobless rate soared to 14.7% in April as U.S. shed 20.5 million jobs amid coronavirus pandemic

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in April 2020:

ADP National Employment Report: Private Sector Employment Decreased by 20,236,000 Jobs in April

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in March 2020:

Nonfarm payroll employment falls by 701,000 in March; unemployment rate rises to 4.4%

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in March 2020:

Private-sector employment decreased by 27,000 from February to March, on a seasonally adjusted basis

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in February 2020:

The U.S. labor market showed strength in February, adding 273,000 jobs

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in February 2020:

U.S. adds 183,000 private-sector jobs in February, ADP says

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in January 2020:

The economy added 225,000 jobs in January, showing continued strength

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in January 2020:

ADP says 291,000 private-sector jobs created in January, largest gain in 4 years

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in December 2019:

Economy adds 145,000 jobs in December as unemployment rate remains at 3.5 percent

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in December 2019:

U.S. private sector adds the most jobs in eight months

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in November 2019:

Labor market remained strong in November as U.S. economy added 266,000 jobs

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in November 2019:

U.S. private sector job growth slows down sharply in November: ADP

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in October 2019:

U.S. economy added 128,000 jobs in October as GM strike displaced workers; jobless rate ticks up

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in October 2019:

ADP National Employment Report: Private Sector Employment Increased by 125,000 Jobs in October

Bureau of Labor Statistics, for employment in September 2019:

U.S. economy added just 136,000 jobs in September, in fresh sign economy is cooling

ADP[sup]®[/sup] (Automatic Data Processing), for employment in September 2019:

ADP National Employment Report: Private Sector Employment Increased by 135,000 Jobs in September

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 08:12 AM

6. LINKS TO SOME BLS DATA SERIES NUMBERS AND GRAPHS

Everyone of these data series comes with a table and graph.

# Nonfarm Employment (Establishment Survey, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
Monthly changes (in thousands): https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth
2019: 269 1 147 210 85 182 194 207 208 185 261 184
2020: 214 251 -1373 -20787 2725 4781 1761 1489 661
Feb and March of 2020 are Corrected. August and September are Preliminary. In thousands

   NOT SEASONALLY ADJUSTED: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CEU0000000001

# Employed in thousands from the separate Household Survey, http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000
Monthly changes (in thousands): http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000?output_view=net_1mth

2019: -198 239 -125 -45 148 304 198 549 403 246 -8 267
2020: -89 45 -2987 -22369 3839 4940 1350 3756 275
Jan and Feb of each year are affected by changes in population controls. In thousands

   NOT SEASONALLY ADJUSTED: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02000000

# Nonfarm PRIVATE Employment (Establishment Survey, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001
Monthly changes: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001?output_view=net_1mth
    ^-Good for comparison to the ADP report that typically comes out a few days earlier
NOT SEASONALLY ADJUSTED: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CEU0500000001

# INFLATION ADJUSTED Weekly Earnings of Production and Non-Supervisory Workers http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000031

# Labor Force http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11000000?output_view=net_1mth
The labor force is the sum of employed and unemployed. To count as unemployed, one must have actively sought work in the past 4 weeks (just looking at want ads and job postings doesn't count)
Monthly change in thousands, 1st 9 months:
2020: 50 -60 -1633 -6432 1746 1705 -62 968 -695
Total count in thousands, 1st 9 months:
2020: 164606 164546 162913 156481 158227 159932 159870 160838 160143
September is down 4.403 million from February -- lots of people are discouraged from looking because of poor prospects and/or concerns over coronavirus
January and February data affected by changes in population controls.


# Unemployed http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13000000
2020: 5892 5787 7140 23078 20985 17750 16338 13550 12580 (in thousands)
(but continuing claims for unemployment insurance IN ALL PROGRAMS for the week ending September 12 was 26530 thousand, it's higher because, because, because it's not lower and its not the same, that's why )

https://www.dol.gov/ui/data.pdf
The total number of people claiming benefits in all programs for the week ending Sept 12 was 26,529,810, an increase of 484,856 from the previous week. There were 1,423,884 persons claiming benefits in all programs in the comparable week in 2019.



# ETPR (Employment-To-Population Ratio) aka Employment Rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

# LFPR (Labor Force Participation rate) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

# Unemployment rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

# U-6 unemployment rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13327709

# NILF -- Not in Labor Forcehttp://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS15000000

# NILF-WJ -- Not in Labor Force, Wants Job http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS15026639

# Part-Time Workers who want Full-Time Jobs (Table A-8's Part-Time For Economic Reasons) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12032194

# Part-Time Workers (Table A-9) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12600000

# Full-Time Workers (Table A-9) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12500000

# Multiple Jobholders as a Percent of Employed (Table A-9) https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12026620

# Civilian non-institutional population https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS10000000

# Black unemployment rate https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000006
First 9 months of 2020: 6.0 5.8 6.7 16.7 16.8 15.4 14.6 13.0 12.1   Trump: "what have you got to lose?"

# Hispanic or Latino unemployment rate https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000009
First 9 months of 2020: 4.3 4.4 6.0 18.9 17.6 14.5 12.9 10.5 10.3

# White unemployment rate https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000003
First 9 months of 2020: 3.1 3.1 4.0 14.2 12.4 10.1 9.2 7.3 7.0

LFPR - Labor Force Participation Rate for some age groups
The LFPR is the Employed + jobless people who have looked for work in the last 4 weeks (and say they want a job and are able to take one if offered). All divided by the civilian non-institutional population age 16+.
SA means Seasonally adjusted. NSA means Not Seasonally Adjusted
16+: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300000
25-34: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300089 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300089
25-54: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300060 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300060
55+: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11324230 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01324230
65+: SA: ---------------- NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300097

LFPR - Labor Force Particpation Rate (prime age 25-54) by gender
All: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300060
Men: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300061
Women: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300062


ETPR - Employment to Population Ratio for some age groups
SA means Seasonally adjusted. NSA means Not Seasonally Adjusted
16+: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300000
25-34: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300089 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300089
25-54: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300060 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300060
55+: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12324230 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02324230
65+: SA: ---------------- NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300097

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progree (Reply #6)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 08:15 AM

7. Good morning and thank you!

The quick "switch-up" from COVID to the 'conomy".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Reply #7)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 08:53 AM

11. Hi BRDS, thanks for the thread. It keeps me busy, a way to help me manage my sorrow

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progree (Reply #11)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 08:59 AM

12. I hear ya.

I think that is why many of us are here doing this (and related stuff). Helps to focus and not let the chaos get overwhelming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 08:47 AM

8. Links to charts and graphs from the BLS Twitter account:

See our interactive graphics on today’s #JobsReport http://go.usa.gov/cn5B4 #BLSdata #DataViz



Understanding BLS Unemployment Statistics #JobsReport #BLSdata


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 08:51 AM

10. Additional links:

It used to be that you could get free access to articles in The Wall Street Journal. by going in through TWSJ.'s Twitter account or the Twitter accounts of the authors:

How to get around the paywall to read articles in The Wall Street Journal.:

For free access to articles in The Wall Street Journal., trying going in through the authors' Twitter feeds:

This trick doesn't seem to work anymore, but you might be able to get in if they've slipped up. Here are those accounts:

* * * * *

The Wall Street Journal.: @WSJ
https://twitter.com/wsj

Wall Street Journal

Breaking news and features from the WSJ.

* * * * *

Ben Leubsdorf: @BenLeubsdorf
https://twitter.com/BenLeubsdorf

I cover the economy at @WSJ. @ConMonitorNews, @AP, @the_herald alum. DC native. Hyperactive news omnivore. Also I like burritos. ben.leubsdorf@wsj.com

* * * * *

Josh Zumbrun: ‎@JoshZumbrun
https://twitter.com/JoshZumbrun

National economics correspondent for the Wall Street Journal. Covering the world's usual state of greed and disorder, confusion and apathy. josh.zumbrun@wsj.com

* * * * *

Nick Timiraos: @NickTimiraos
https://twitter.com/NickTimiraos

National economics correspondent, The Wall Street Journal

Please look at the tweets, as Nick Timiraos likes to slice and dice the data every which way. Also, link to the "11 charts " article from his Twitter feed to get past TWSJ.'s paywall.

* * * * *

Jeffrey Sparshott: @jeffsparshott
https://twitter.com/jeffsparshott

Jeffrey.Sparshott@wsj.com

* * * * *

Paul Vigna: @paulvigna
https://twitter.com/paulvigna
Markets, bitcoin, and the zombie apocalypse.

* * * * *

Eric Morath: @EricMorath
https://twitter.com/EricMorath

Eric.Morath@wsj.com
I'm a Wall Street Journal economy reporter, dad, husband and Spartan for life. eric.morath@wsj.com

Washington DC

blogs.wsj.com/economics/

* * * * *

Sarah Chaney: ‎@sechaney
https://twitter.com/sechaney

Economy Reporter at The Wall Street Journal. Tar Heel. sarah.chaney@wsj.com

* * * * *

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 09:03 AM

13. This is the last jobs report before the election. The next jobs report is Nov 6, 3 days

after the election. So if there is any "crash" news in the jobs report because of the loss of all federal unemployment benefit supplements and whatever else is expiring or expired, we won't see it in a pre-election jobs report. But every Thursday is the unemployment benefits claims report...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 11:38 AM

14. This month's cherrypicked data from the Council of Economic Advisers:

ECONOMY & JOBS

September Jobs Report Shows American Grit
October 2, 2020 3 minute read

{snip}

The recovery has been historically unprecedented. Over the past five months, the unemployment rate has fallen by 6.8 percentage points. The last time the unemployment rate fell this much following its peak occurred between 1982 and 1999 following the global oil crisis, requiring almost 18 years, five presidential terms, and three administrations. The recovery the United States is witnessing now is almost 41 times faster than that. In fact, just a few months ago, every forecaster expected that 2020 would end with an unemployment rate far above 7.9 percent. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected in July that the unemployment rate in December would be 10.5 percent, while the Blue Chip consensus and the Federal Open Markets Committee (FOMC) of the Federal Reserve projected a rate of 9.3 percent. Time after time, the economy under President Trump pushes Americans to achieve the impossible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mahatmakanejeeves (Reply #14)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 12:32 PM

15. The unemployment rate drop is slowing down, only down 0.5 percentage points from August

and the drop would have been even less (i.e. the unemployment rate would be even higher) if the labor force participation rate had not dropped by 0.3 percentage points as it did in September.
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

695,000 people left the labor force in September and are not counted in the unemployment rate.
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11000000?output_view=net_1mth

I'm not surprised that the unemployment rate skyrocketed when the economy was locked down by government mandate, and that the UR rapidly dropped when the economy was opened up for the most part again.

The real test is how long will it take for the UR to get back to the 4.7% level that it was in January 2017 when Obama left office, a level that is 3.2 percentage points lower than it is now at 7.9%. (or back down even further to the February 2020 3.5% UR). I knew the economy would snap back to 80% or 90% of its former level, the worry is how long it takes -- how many years? to get back to 100% of where it was.

In January 2017, when Obama left office, the employment to population ratio was 59.9%. It's now 56.6%, a 3.3 percentage point drop. It has improved only 5.3 percentage points from it's low point in April (but it is up only 2.0 percentage points from 3 months ago and up only 0.1 percentage points over last month) (Edited to correct big errors in the last sentence)
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 01:41 PM

16. Number of permanent job losers jumped by 345,000 to 3.8 M which is up 2.5 M since Feb

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/white-house-donald-trump-response-jobs-report-180146308.html
The economy added 661,000 jobs but the labor market is down over 10 million jobs since before the coronavirus took hold.

A more worrying number was that many jobs appear to be gone permanently. The number of permanent job losers jumped by 345,000 to 3.8 million, an increase of 2.5 million since February.

...The unemployment rate – which dropped to 7.9% from 8.4% largely due to 700,000 workers leaving the labor force – was another aspect of the report LaVorgna highlighted.

... Larry Kudlow, the director of the NEC, made a more direct call on Friday. He said relief is currently “zero” and called for at least some stimulus. “Let’s find the key points and pass it,” he told reporters, noting that airlines in particular need help.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 01:54 PM

17. job market looks increasingly bleak ...

Unemployment is down, but job market looks increasingly bleak, Ethan Wolff-Mann, Senior Writer, Yahoo Finance, 10/2/20

... Pantheon chief economist Ian Shepherdson’s one-line summary: “Momentum fading; October will be much weaker.”

Permanent job losses increasing -- In the last jobs report before the presidential election, the data showed many people had stopped looking for jobs – and were therefore not officially counted as being in the labor force – and that permanent job losses ballooned by 345,000 to 3.8 million. Around two-thirds of these permanent losses — which are defined by layoffs lasting 27 weeks or more — have come since February because of pandemic-related shutdowns.

... "The rate of employment has clearly slowed, as the resurgence of the virus has constrained the pace of reopening, and the early signs for October are not encouraging."

Women also fared exceptionally poorly in this month’s job report, losing 143,000 jobs, but also dropping out of the workforce at the highest rate since the pandemic began.

... “The virus is in the driver's seat in controlling the speed of the recovery and right now the economy is in the slow lane unless Congress and the White House can settle their differences and provide additional stimulus to support those jobless Americans who have lost their paychecks and livelihoods and hope,” Rupkey wrote.

More: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/unemployment-is-down-but-job-market-looks-increasingly-bleak-165708559.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri Oct 2, 2020, 02:45 PM

18. Job Creation of record of post-WWII Presidents, Average Annual % Increase

Last edited Sun Oct 4, 2020, 10:06 AM - Edit history (1)

Job Creation of record of post-WWII Presidents, Average Annual % Increases :

THE BELOW WAS CREATED IN EARLY FEBRUARY AT NEAR THE PEAK OF THE PRE-COVID ECONOMY. Even so, it shows that Trump was a less-than-median job creator even at his high point. Now, according to the latest jobs report that came out October 2, Trump has lost 3.907 Million jobs since January 2017 when Obama left office, whch comes to 89,000 jobs lost per month during these 44 months. This of course, puts Trump last in the table as the only post WW-II loser

(Sorted from best to worst by average annual percentage increase in jobs. Republicans in red, Democrats in blue.)

Notice that -- with the tiny exception (0.2% difference) of Nixon to Kennedy -- the worst Democrat has a better record than the best Republican -- that is, until Obama, who inherited an economy that was losing several hundred thousand jobs a month And actually, Kennedy did not have a chance to complete his term -- had he done so, and had he had the same job creation numbers in December 1963 through January 1965 as Johnson had (a 3.48%/year annualized rate of increase), he would have easily topped Nixon.

Post-WWII Presidents ranked by Average Annual Percentage Increase In Jobs (the last column):
. . (updated 2/7/20 after new jobs report released - it has revisions going back decades.)




THE ABOVE WAS CREATED IN EARLY FEBRUARY AT NEAR THE PEAK OF THE PRE-COVID ECONOMY. Even so, it shows that Trump was a less-than-median job creator even at his high point. Now, according to the latest jobs report that came out October 2, Trump has lost 3.907 Million jobs since January 2017 when Obama left office, whch comes to 89,000 jobs lost per month during these 44 months. This of course, puts Trump last in the table as the only post WW-II loser

(Actually, the true jobs peak of the Trump economy was in February 2020 -- he gained another 251,000 jobs in February, which would make his 37 month record at the end of February 184,054 jobs/month, which comes to 1.52% average annual increase in jobs -- only trivially better than the 182,194 and 1.50% numbers shown in the table (which are at the end of January), and certainly doesn't affect his ranking from what is shown in the table).

Remember, Obama inherited the deepest recession since World War II, which lost 4.2 million jobs in the last 10 months of his predecessor, and in the last 3 months of his predecessor was losing 753,000 jobs a month. With that momentum, job losses continued for the first 13 months of the Obama presidency -- through February 2010 -- totalling 4.3 million jobs lost during those 13 months.

Anyway, despite the 4.3 million jobs lost in his first 13 months because of the Bush crash, Obama still beats 4 of the last 7 post-WWII Republican presidents (the count of 7 post-WWII Republican presidents includes Trump). Of these Republican presidents, only Nixon, Reagan, and Ford had better records than Obama, and Ford only edged him out by 0.01 percentage points.

In the above table, the average annual % increase in jobs (the last column) is a much fairer way to compare presidents than just the raw job creation figures in thousands because the latter is unfair to the earlier presidents who were working with much smaller labor forces to begin with. For example the number of job holders at the beginning of Truman's administration was only 38% as many as at the beginning of Clinton's administration, and 31% as many as at the beginning of G.W. Bush's administration. So Truman's pathetic-looking 93,570 jobs/month creation record turns out to be even better than Clinton's 238,521 jobs/month record when adjusted for the size of the labor force at the beginning of their terms.

In raw thousands of jobs created per year, both Reagan and Nixon beat Truman. But when adjusted for the size of the labor force -- again, by looking at average annual percentage increases in jobs -- Truman beats them both.

Official sources of information for the above:

# Payroll Jobs: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
# Monthly change of above: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth
# . . Hint: to see both of the above two together on the same page, go to http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001 and click on the "More Formatting Options" link in the upper right and check the "Original Data Value" and the "1-Month Net Change" checkboxes and click the "Retrieve Data" button halfway down the page on the left
# Private Sector Payroll Employment: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001
# Monthly change of above: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001?output_view=net_1mth
# . . Hint: to see both of the above two together on the same page, go to http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001
and click on the "More Formatting Options" link in the upper right and check the "Original Data Value" and the "1-Month Net Change" checkboxes and click the "Retrieve Data" button halfway down the page on the left

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 08:12 AM

20. In September, 4 times as many women over 20 dropped out of the labor force as did men

Last edited Sat Oct 3, 2020, 09:46 AM - Edit history (3)

Enough already: Multiple demands causing women to abandon workforce, 10/2/20

Just in September, 865,000 women over 20 dropped out of the American workforce compared with 216,000 men in the same age group, the Labor Department reported Friday.

At the end of 2019, women held just over half of all payroll jobs, for only the second time in history. Now, women now account for 49.7 percent of the workforce.

"Women got hit hardest, earliest," by layoffs in restaurants, retail, and health care — industries that were hard hit by the pandemic and which employ a lot of women, Stevenson notes.

More: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/10/02/npr-enough-already-multiple-demands-causing-women-to-abandon-workforce


In this section, men and women over age 20 is being referred to
From Table A-1: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm


September isn't at all typical of every recent month. But August and September were both months where 613,000 (Aug) and 649,000 (Sep) were the big months of male minus female differences in the labor force:

pp = percentage points.    LF = Labor Force,    LFPR = Labor Force Participation Rate

In August the male LF increased by 608,000 while the female LF decreased by 5,000 for a 613,000 differential

In September the male LF decreased by 216,000 and the female LF decreased by 865,000 for a 649,000 differential

From September 2019 to September 2020 (the past 12 months):
The male LFPR declined by 1.7 pp, while the female LFPR declined by 2.3 pp.
1,545,000 men left the LF while 2,463,000 women left the LF


From May 2020 to September 2020 (the past 5 months):
The male LFPR increased by 0.9 pp, while the female LFPR increased by 0.0 pp
1,239,00 men joined the LF, while 292,000 women joined the LF


As a reminder, the labor force statistics from the Household Survey (which is where these come from) are wildly volatile from month-to-month, with most of the month-to-month changes being more statistical noise than actual. But over several months, this is somewhat smoothed out somewhat.

=##################################=

BLS Table B-5. Employment of women on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted, In Sept 2019, women were 50.0% of all nonfarm payroll employees, in Sept 2020: 49.7% (Establishment Survey)
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t21.htm

=##################################=

Edited - I found the data for labor force, men and women over age 20, and included in above

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progree (Reply #20)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 08:31 AM

21. I read a similar article a few days ago republished in the Philly Inquirer (from Bloomberg)

The first female recession threatens to wipe out decades of progress for U.S. women

by Olivia Rockeman, Reade Pickert and Catarina Saraiva, Bloomberg News, Posted: October 1, 2020


Women helped pull the U.S. economy out of the last recession. This time around, they are falling behind. The pandemic is disproportionately affecting women and threatening to wipe out decades of their economic progress. As the crisis drags on, some of the biggest pain points are among women of color and those with young children.

These setbacks — characterized by some economists as the nation’s first female recession — stand in sharp contrast to the dramatic progress women made in the expansion following the last financial crisis. The jobs, income and promotions that women lose as a result of the coronavirus could hold back economic growth and sideline an entire generation of women.

The official data are stark. The unemployment rate for Black and Hispanic adult women remains above 10%, even though it’s decreased to 7.3% for white women, according to data from the Labor Department. At the same time, women between the ages of 25 and 54 — also known as prime-age — are increasingly dropping out of the workforce, often to care for children. The participation gap between men and women in this age group is now widening after shrinking to the narrowest ever right before the virus.

[snip]

This time around, women are increasingly dropping out of the labor market altogether as more women are losing or quitting their jobs "because they realize that children come first," San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly said in a virtual webinar earlier this month. Nearly seven million Americans aren’t employed because they have to take care of children, according to a census survey earlier this month. Since women earn less than men, on average, it’s often the mother who steps back. Women lose valuable skills during the time they aren’t working, which can make finding a job in the future harder and damage family finances, according to Center for American Progress analyst Malik.


https://www.inquirer.com/business/women-unemployment-pandemic-jobs-loss-economy-20201001.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Reply #21)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 09:50 AM

22. Yup, all in contrast to the Great Recession, which was dubbed the "Mancession". BTW I updated #20

-- I found the Labor Force numbers for men over 20 and women over 20 and put that in #20 above, and yes, it's a trend, not a fluke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 10:27 AM

23. I call bullshit. we are losing between 3000 and 4000 jobs per month and I can tell you

here in Ohio, it is dire. And everytime you pick up the paper or listen to financial news, there are more layoffs...cooking the books won't save the evil Trump administration...no way unemployment is down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #23)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 11:03 AM

24. Remember that this report would also be missing all the layoffs that are happening now

Those won't be reflected until a few days after the election.

It's now the "4th quarter" of the calendar year and companies operate on "quarters" for the personnel decisions. I expect a HUGE round of layoffs by the end of the year - either just before Christmas because they are mean like that, or by December 31st.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Reply #24)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 01:58 PM

25. And the survey week for these reports was the week that included the 12th, for the

Household Survey (which produces the unemployed, the unemployment rate, the labor force participation rate, and many other goodies) the reference week was Sept 6-12. For the Establishment Survey that produces the headline nonfarm payroll jobs number, its the pay period for the establishment that includes the 12th.

So any of the layoffs we've been hearing about in the last nearly 3 weeks are missed by this report. Also, a lot of the ones we've been hearing about recently are announcements of future layoffs, not ones that actually have or had occurred.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progree (Reply #25)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 03:47 PM

26. Well one one big case

the airlines did a big set of furloughs and layoffs, after doing buyouts and processing retirements leading up to their "official" next phase that started Oct. 1. And what that did here (and probably other airports) was necessitate elimination of many of the ancillary and support functions that go on in the airports, as well as another biggy - the retail establishments in there (food and miscellaneous sundries concessions).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 05:14 PM

27. They Need To Adjust Reporting Approach

This is an extraordinary year, so the need to quit reporting as usual.
This looks like good news, but the rate is still 2.13 times what it was one year ago.
This means there are around 8 million people without a job, that had one on February 1st.
Geez, even baseball uses asterisks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProfessorGAC (Reply #27)

Sat Oct 3, 2020, 10:19 PM

28. Interestingly, the BLS summary spoon feeds that info, comparing most major stats to February

For example: from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 661,000 in September, following larger gains in the prior 4 months. In September, nonfarm employment was below its February level by 10.7 million, or 7.0 percent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progree (Reply #28)

Sun Oct 4, 2020, 01:04 PM

29. Then Media Reports Should Be More Inclusive

People regaining jobs they already had is not a good thing. It means the country is only half way there.
The reporting on these number treat them as if there's some cause for celebration. Those people might never recoup that lost income.
I just think these thing should be reported as bullet point, with historical context.
The reporting of it would be harder to screw up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProfessorGAC (Reply #29)

Sun Oct 4, 2020, 01:39 PM

30. Yes, I agree. Some media reports are calling it a slowdown in job gains (judging from a couple

headlines I saw Friday-Saturday), but of the articles I've read over the past 4 months or so, very few point out how deep in the hole we still are

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProfessorGAC (Reply #27)

Sun Oct 4, 2020, 02:29 PM

31. The numbers are what they are

It’s not their job to editorialize them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrToast (Reply #31)

Sun Oct 4, 2020, 02:35 PM

32. Editorialize?

What are talking about?
They have numbers, and comparisons to prior year in the report.
But, they emphasize only one of their own data points. This is an extraordinary year, they should make extraordinary efforts to get people to see the whole story.
It's not their job of editorialize? It's not their job to tell part of the story either.
This leads to weak reporting by media.
Your reply is silly. It's not editorializing to provide context with the same set of statistics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread