Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

JGus (29.60)

What a SHOCK! Job loss numbers revised upward!!! (3rd Edition)

Recs

29

May 08, 2009 – Comments (11) | RELATED TICKERS: JOB , S

In it's just released report, the government upwardly revised the job loss numbers for both February and March. Here is the quote from the BLS website:

The change in total nonfarm employment for February was revised from -651,000
to -681,000, and the change for March was revised from -663,000 to -699,000.
Monthly revisions result from additional sample reports and the monthly recal-
culation of seasonal factors.

That's 66,000 more jobs lost than were originally reported in those months. This upward revision is actually quite small compared to other revisions. However, since October, the BLS has added over ONE MILLION jobs lost through it's revisions. How do you think the market would have reacted had each month been reported with 150,000-200,000 more jobs lost when the initial reports came out?Just some more BS from the BLS.

11 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On May 08, 2009 at 8:57 AM, binve (29.35) wrote:

Good post man.

Report this comment
#2) On May 08, 2009 at 8:57 AM, JGus (29.60) wrote:

Here was my post from last month:

So, it turns out that we actually lost 86,000 more jobs in January than previously reported. That brings the Jan. job losses to 741,000. The government has revised every monthly job loss figure upward in the following months (except for February, so far), resulting in HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of more jobs lost than originally reported!!! What do you want to bet that the Feb. and March numbers get revised up as well? I'd be willing to bet my life savings on it!!! The numbers that the government continues to report - in virtually every area - are becoming more and more of a joke.

I guess we DID lose more jobs in February...it just took an extra month to figure that out : )

Report this comment
#3) On May 08, 2009 at 8:58 AM, WeenTang (80.65) wrote:

Yet another step towards complete and total loss of trust

Report this comment
#4) On May 08, 2009 at 9:06 AM, KhelSkie (85.93) wrote:

Trust?!?! You had trust?!?!

Report this comment
#5) On May 08, 2009 at 9:11 AM, automaticaev (< 20) wrote:

no its ok because the rate even more people are loseing jobs has slowed some.  cuz everyone knows that after you get stabed and bleed out when the blood flow slows everything is getting better!!

Report this comment
#6) On May 08, 2009 at 9:18 AM, drummer1000 (< 20) wrote:

It's "fuzzy math" intended to make April look better then reality. All part of the 'investing-on-silver-linings-of-horrible-news' that has been the trend lately...

Report this comment
#7) On May 08, 2009 at 9:19 AM, JGus (29.60) wrote:

Here are the revisions from the past 6 reports from the BLS - They total 732,000 additional jobs lost in the past 6 months. That's an average of 122,000 more jobs lost each month than were originally reported!!! 

April Report – Total Revisions = 66,000

The change in total nonfarm employment for February was revised from -651,000 to -681,000, and the change for March was revised from -663,000 to -699,000. Monthly revisions result from additional sample reports and the monthly recalculation of seasonal factors.

 

March Report – Total Revisions = 86,000

The change in total nonfarm employment for January was revised from -655,000 to -741,000, while the change for February remained -651,000. Monthly revisions result from additional sample reports and the monthly recalculation of seasonal factors.

 

February Report – Total Revisions = 161,000

The change in total nonfarm employment for December was revised from -577,000 to -681,000 and the change for January was revised from -598,000 to -655,000. Monthly revisions result from additional sample reports and the monthly recalculation of seasonal factors.

 

January Report – Total Revisions = 66,000

The change in total nonfarm employment for November was revised from -584,000 to -597,000, and the change for December was revised from -524,000 to -577,000. Monthly revisions result from additional sample reports and the monthly recalculation of seasonal factors. This month, the annual benchmarking process also contributed to these revisions.

 

December Report – Total Revisions = 154,000

The change in total nonfarm employment for October was revised from -320,000 to -423,000, and the change for November was revised from -533,000 to -584,000. Monthly revisions result from additional sample reports and the monthly recalculation of seasonal factors.

 

November Report – Total Revisions = 199,000

The change in total nonfarm employment for September was revised from -284,000 to -403,000, and the change for October was revised from -240,000 to -320,000. In both months, there were large revisions in most of the major industry sectors. These revisions resulted primarily because of the normal monthly recalculation of seasonal factors rather than the incorporation of additional sample reports.

Report this comment
#8) On May 08, 2009 at 9:24 AM, cbwang888 (27.38) wrote:

No suprise! All tools are used to save the economy. Lying and stealing ($ from taxpayers) are parts of them.

Report this comment
#9) On May 08, 2009 at 9:32 AM, StopLaughing (< 20) wrote:

So far Jan. had the highest unemployment. Normally, about 2 months after the highest unemployment month the economy bottoms (Mar.).

We still have UAW layoffs ahead but they get 90% of pay for not working. There is little loss of purchasing power. Supplier layoffs may be more serious. 

It is possible that the bottom is in on this recession. This could be a V bottom, but I think unemployment will tend to stay high.

Also note that the trend in revisions is down.

 

Report this comment
#10) On May 08, 2009 at 9:34 AM, finabuddy (98.96) wrote:

Comeon guys, these numbers have always been very subject to revision, and this is universally known. During growth times they revise them the opposite direction. These numbers arent "fuzzy" math or numbers to blindly "trust" as people are suggesting. Its a hard to gather statistic that they try to compile for the sake of economic analysis. Because there isnt a way to gaurantee these numbers should they just stop trying?

Report this comment
#11) On May 08, 2009 at 9:41 AM, amassafortune (30.24) wrote:

Nearly 1/3 of those on continuing unemployment lost their jobs more than six months ago - an all-time high. Temporary jobs fell by 63,000. Temps are a hopeful sign that the jobs will be made permanent at some point.

Did you see that productivity was up by 0.8% in Q1? Go, denominator! 

140,000 autoworkers taking time off this summer won't help.

automat, nice bleed-out analogy. Jobs are at the heart of the economy. Stats are decreasing at a slowing rate because the heart has less to pump.   

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement