BLS Reports Jobs Losses By State In September More Than Double 95K Loss Reported In NFP Report

Zero Hedge ^ | 10/22/2010 | Tyler Durden

[Zeddicus]

In the latest amusing discrepancy to come out of the BLS, today's reported unemployment data by state indicated that at the end of September, there was a total of 129,699,600 people employed across the various states. Not very surprisingly, the biggest deterioration occurred in California which lost 63.5 K jobs, followed by New York at 37.6K (Wall Street layoffs?) and Massachusetts at 20.9K. The total change from August's 129,923,400 employed was a drop of 223,800. Well, this is a little confusing as the NFP number for September indicated that total jobs lost were 95,000, a slightly more than 50% improvement compared to the job losses at the state level. As Zero Hedge has demonstrated, the data coming out of the BLS is statistically impossible to say the least, and at best, worthless. But now at least we are getting confirmation that just like in the Fed, there may be those within the BLS, who actually know how to count. Too bad, those are not the people in charge of actual propaganda dissemination.

[AU72]

It's obvious that the official employment and unemployment are hopelessly wrong.

With all the freaking polling companies and polls why can't one be done on this and publish it monthly?

[BenLurkin]

BTTT

[Gaffer]

Numbers game. Issue the 'official' report showing very liberal assessment of numbers, then a week or two later, release 'corrected' numbers with no fanfare, then the next report, use the old 'official' bogus numbers and then repeat as needed. Conceivably, this could show a 'bounce' in employment if the number usages were mixed.

This ENTIRE corrupt government is just that - CORRUPT.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Most likely the state by state numbers are not seasonally adjusted.

Seasonal adjustment is a way to take out of the numbers the normal ebb and flow of employment, to make the numbers more indicative of changes in the underlying economy.

The idea is to baseline the year at a constant value if there is no economic change — without seasonal adjustment, employement would jump about wildly from month to month.

It is worth arguing whether the seasonal adjustments are accurate, but not to pretend that a difference between seasonal and non-seasonal numbers indicates that they can’t count.

[RWGinger]

How stupid al I? I would have thought that the BLS would need each state’s drop in employment to determine the national figure

it doesn’t say but maybe the higher number includes farm jobs. I believe the number the BLS reports as a national job loss is non farm

[AmusedBystander]

Those not working sure know it. The ones still working are worried that they won't be working much longer. The ones looking for work know that no one is hiring.

Welcome to Obamaville, USA.