Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

TheDumbMoney (58.91)

Excellent Take-Down of ZeroHedge and Drudge's "1.2 Million Fall Out of Labor Force" Claim

Recs

7

February 03, 2012 – Comments (20) | RELATED TICKERS: SPY

See here:

http://www.ftportfolios.com/Commentary/EconomicResearch/2012/2/3/drudge,-tyler-durden-and-economic-ignorance

Kisses,

DTAF

20 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On February 03, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Frankydontfailme (27.71) wrote:

hmmm yup nothing to see here at all

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/01/Participation%20Rate.jpg

Report this comment
#2) On February 03, 2012 at 8:01 PM, TheDumbMoney (58.91) wrote:

You must be unaware of the context.  Their claim today had to do with December 2011 through January 2012 figures.  I'm well aware of the longer term trend, especially since 2001, which in fact makes a lot of the carping about Obama's particular record all the more silly.

Report this comment
#3) On February 04, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Starfirenv (< 20) wrote:

Takedown?  I must be "unaware" also.  It's not just these guys- with their 'fake names and agenda'.  More info here if you're interested.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/contrary-to-government-claims-of-243000-jobs-created-almost-1-million-jobs-were-actually-lost-in-january.html 

"This is the largest absolute jump in ‘Persons Not In Labor Force’ on record…and biggest percentage jump in 30 years.."

 

Report this comment
#4) On February 04, 2012 at 12:26 PM, ETFsRule (99.92) wrote:

Starfirenv: Your own link says:

"the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million..."

When the labor force increases, AND the unemployment rate drops in the same month, that's a good thing.

DMAF's link is correct: what happened in January is that there was a jump in the BLS estimate of total US population. As a result there was a corresponding increase in the work force, as well as in the # of people not in the work force.

The employment to population ratio was constant. Nothing bad happened in Dec-Jan.

Let's face it, zerohedge is a bunch of clowns. Even if you are a regular reader, and agree with their political views, you should be furious at them right now for intentionally misleading their readers.

Report this comment
#5) On February 04, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Varchild2008 (84.38) wrote:

I don't see how you can have a falling unemployment rate at the same time as you have a flat employment - population ratio.

The BLS is still BS in my opinion.

Report this comment
#6) On February 04, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Varchild2008 (84.38) wrote:

Out of 1.7 million new working aged....only 500,000 found a job and 1.2 million did not or didn't look to get a job....

And yet the unemployment rate falls and we are supposed to be celebrating over the fact that 1.2 million work aged now counted into the population of BLS's report are jobless?

Report this comment
#7) On February 04, 2012 at 6:04 PM, ETFsRule (99.92) wrote:

"I don't see how you can have a falling unemployment rate at the same time as you have a flat employment - population ratio."

It happens because unemployment only counts the "work force", while the ratio counts the entire population. So, if the work force is changing, then the 2 stats don't always go in the same direction.

Usually they move inversely, but it's not a perfect relation.

"Out of 1.7 million new working aged....only 500,000 found a job and 1.2 million did not or didn't look to get a job....

And yet the unemployment rate falls and we are supposed to be celebrating over the fact that 1.2 million work aged now counted into the population of BLS's report are jobless?"

But, lots of other people found jobs, which is good.

Report this comment
#8) On February 04, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Frankydontfailme (27.71) wrote:

To sum up: yes we are adding jobs but not enough to compensate for the increase in the population.

Zerohedges suggestion that 1.2*10^6 dropped out of the work force in january was misleading becuase in reality the government distortions took place over several months. The "takedown" was exaggerated and ETFs comments were asinine. 

Report this comment
#9) On February 04, 2012 at 6:36 PM, ETFsRule (99.92) wrote:

"To sum up: yes we are adding jobs but not enough to compensate for the increase in the population. "

Not enough? Then why didn't the employment to population ratio decline?

"Zerohedges suggestion that 1.2*10^6 dropped out of the work force in january was misleading becuase in reality the government distortions took place over several months."

There were no gov't distortions. You still aren't understanding what occured with January numbers. The net change of 1.2 million people doesn't represent anyone falling out of the work force. Not even one person.

These are "new people" being counted in the working-age population. Therefore, they could not have dropped out of the work force, because they were not counted in any of the numbers until now.

"The "takedown" was exaggerated and ETFs comments were asinine."

The only asinine comment was yours. Next time try to comprehend the issue before commenting.

Report this comment
#10) On February 04, 2012 at 7:01 PM, TMFHousel (90.63) wrote:

For those who think BLS numbers are a conspiracy, why not look at the private ADP job-creation numbers? They've actually been more bullish than BLS numbers over the past year. 

Report this comment
#11) On February 04, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Frankydontfailme (27.71) wrote:

No one said anything about conspiracy.

More from ZH: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/explaining-yesterdays-seasonally-adjusted-nonfarm-payroll-beat

Report this comment
#12) On February 04, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Frankydontfailme (27.71) wrote:

No one said anything about conspiracy.

More from ZH: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/explaining-yesterdays-seasonally-adjusted-nonfarm-payroll-beat

Report this comment
#13) On February 04, 2012 at 7:03 PM, TMFHousel (90.63) wrote:

Here's more on the topic: 

The "Not in Labor Force" actually declined in January

 

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2012/02/employment-not-in-labor-force-actually.html 

Report this comment
#14) On February 04, 2012 at 7:31 PM, ETFsRule (99.92) wrote:

Civilian labor force

Run for the hills! It's a disaster, because... uh...

Report this comment
#15) On February 05, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Frankydontfailme (27.71) wrote:

"The employment to population ratio was constant. Nothing bad happened in Dec-Jan."

So you are saying the government lied when they claim the unemployment ratio dropped? 

Report this comment
#16) On February 05, 2012 at 11:38 AM, ETFsRule (99.92) wrote:

"So you are saying the government lied when they claim the unemployment ratio dropped?"

Nope.

I suggest you look up the meaning of each of these statistics.

Report this comment
#17) On February 05, 2012 at 2:54 PM, TheDumbMoney (58.91) wrote:

Tip: When you keep getting your arguments shot down, and then you keep coming up with new and different arguments, that is the number one sign of a mind seeking to fit facts to ideology, which is incorrect. Opinions should exist in the service of facts, while these days ideology, not religion, is the opiate of the masses.

Happy Sunday,

DTAF 

Report this comment
#18) On February 05, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Frankydontfailme (27.71) wrote:

Tip: Keep your sophistry to yourself.

People that don't have jobs are unemployed. The economy isn't adding enough jobs to compensate for the growing popoulation, especially when properly counting those that left the labor force. I don't care how the government chooses to define a statistic on any given Sunday. Facts are facts.

 

Report this comment
#19) On February 06, 2012 at 12:07 PM, TheDumbMoney (58.91) wrote:

Franky, interestingly, with your new comment, you open up yet another variant argument. Have a nice week.

All best, 

DTAF

Report this comment
#20) On February 06, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Frankydontfailme (27.71) wrote:

Not to add arguments (god forbid we fully explore a complex topic!) but this is the most reasoned and non-biased explanation for the labor market I've seen:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/02/fewer-nonfarm-employees-now-than.html

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement