Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Unemployment rate below 8%....
?Never put off till tomorrow what you can do the day after tomorrow.?
Re: Unemployment rate below 8%....
My Blog:Through My Eyes
I wish I could gif on my iPad. Soooo many reaction gifs going to waste right nowdata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ae421/ae42148ff497f25f0a120bb3d29be675f516af95" alt=":( :("
"Employment increased in health care and in transportation and warehousing
but changed little in most other major industries."
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
Health care makes sense with all the new things going on with the ACA. I have a friend who is an actuary and works in insurance and he said he has never been busier because of obamacare taking affect.
I thought the ACA was supposed to kill jobs? LMK.
Lol. Okay, Jack Welch. Whatever you say.
Yes, except the numbers don't make sense.
The number of new jobs compared to the number of people who found work are WAY off. I'm not saying this some crazy conspiracy theory, but it does seem confusing how 114,000 jobs = over 800,000 people now working. I would be happy with some info on how they got this number with those figures.
I'd like to read it if anyone has seen this info. I always like knowing why things are the way they are. Maybe I'm just not using the correct combination of words to convince Google to give me what I'm looking for.
They use different proxies for growth and they don't usually add up for a variety of reaons (they're not real time, they're adjusted for seasonal swings, the sample is different, etc).
What info are you looking for? Unemployment rate, jobs created, payroll?
It's perfect timing that I saw this today, because I think Jack Welch does a good job explaining why the numbers don't make sense. I'll include the link but below is the specific part I'm talking about.
Bottom line: To suggest that the input to the BLS data-collection system is precise and bias-free is?well, let's just say, overstated.
Even if the BLS had a perfect process, the context surrounding the 7.8% figure still bears serious skepticism. Consider the following:
In August, the labor-force participation rate in the U.S. dropped to 63.5%, the lowest since September 1981. By definition, fewer people in the workforce leads to better unemployment numbers. That's why the unemployment rate dropped to 8.1% in August from 8.3% in July.
Meanwhile, we're told in the BLS report that in the months of August and September, federal, state and local governments added 602,000 workers to their payrolls, the largest two-month increase in more than 20 years. And the BLS tells us that, overall, 873,000 workers were added in September, the largest one-month increase since 1983, during the booming Reagan recovery.
These three statistics?the labor-force participation rate, the growth in government workers, and overall job growth, all multidecade records achieved over the past two months?have to raise some eyebrows. There were no economists, liberal or conservative, predicting that unemployment in September would drop below 8%.
I know I'm not the only person hearing these numbers and saying, "Really? If all that's true, why are so many people I know still having such a hard time finding work? Why do I keep hearing about local, state and federal cutbacks?"
Link to story:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444897304578046260406091012.html