Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

AN UNEMPLOYMENT STORY WASHINGTON WON'T RELEASE
New York Post ^ | June 5, 2003 | JOHN CRUDELE

Posted on 06/05/2003 12:33:19 AM PDT by sarcasm

June 5, 2003 -- THERE were 313,000 fewer jobs in the U.S. last year than the government originally believed. But you won't see that disastrous number in tomorrow's report on the job market for May.

Missing jobs will be inconspicuously removed with an overall adjustment to the labor force - something Washington calls its annual "benchmark" revision.

More likely you'll only see an official drop in the number of jobs of between 20,000 and 50,000.

Bad enough, but nothing that'll send stock prices reeling.

There are already over 500,000 jobs lost in just the last three months of this year. Investors had better hope Wall Street doesn't look too closely at the new job numbers.

I told you on Tuesday how the government will start "seasonally" adjusting its job figures each and every month - 12 seasons a year. And I explained that this enormous change in methodology would throw comparisons off and drive the experts crazy.

Today's column will explain why the job market feels a lot worse than the feds say it is.

Start with the 313,000 jobs that never existed. And the income that those 313,000 people were expected to have earned also never existed. The government discovered its error when it compared federal numbers with those being produced by the states.

But Washington says the size of these benchmark revisions will be reduced after it starts seasonally adjusting its figures each month.

I don't think so - because of another trick the Bureau of Labor Statistics is pulling.

Included in each month's jobs figures are estimates of jobs that the government believes are being created by new companies it can't prove exist.

This "plug" used to be called, of all things, the "bias factor."

In the old days, the "bias factor" never took jobs out of the economy - it only added them by accounting solely for new companies the government assumed it wasn't counting, instead of counting the bankrupt ones that were quietly disappearing and taking jobs with them.

Over time, bias factors added about as many jobs as Washington had to quietly remove in the annual benchmark revision.

This year the government has changed this "bias factor" - but only a little bit.

Nowadays this method can result in a reduction of jobs from the economy as it did last January when 156,000 "bias" jobs were taken out of the count.

But in the last three months, the government has been assuming job growth from these invisible companies.

In February, 63,000 of these mystery jobs were added; 115,000 were added in March and 176,000 in April.

I'm guessing that May will also be an add.

Too bad the unemployed can't get one of these non-existent jobs. That would make the economy a lot better - at least in everyone's imagination.

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: jobmarkeet

1 posted on 06/05/2003 12:33:19 AM PDT by sarcasm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sarcasm
But in the last three months, the government has been assuming job growth from these invisible companies. In February, 63,000 of these mystery jobs were added; 115,000 were added in March and 176,000 in April. I'm guessing that May will also be an add. Too bad the unemployed can't get one of these non-existent jobs. That would make the economy a lot better - at least in everyone's imagination.

Bump

2 posted on 06/05/2003 8:02:01 AM PDT by A. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
Jay Leno had a George Bush imitator on last night with some good lines.  When asked about the economy he responded:

AKA GWB: Yes, Jay, the economy is getting better.  Look at all the small companies my policies have created.

Jay:    How did the small companies get started Mr. President.

AKA GWB:  They used to be big companies.

3 posted on 06/05/2003 8:06:29 AM PDT by Incorrigible
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sarcasm; arete; sourcery; Soren
So much of BLS/BEA stats aren't data but fabrication to make the data look the way they think it should look. Like they're still in highschool fudging the data to get the 'right result'.

Dealing with the chaos of reality and gleaning information and knowledge from data is not easy, but altering the data never works. They ought to report the data as it is, and then side-by-side show how they choose to adjust it and why - but then they and Greenspan would be out of jobs.

Previous article is at ADJUSTING NUMBERS TO THE POINT OF UNREALITY

4 posted on 06/05/2003 6:12:59 PM PDT by Starwind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sarcasm
bttt
5 posted on 06/06/2003 10:27:09 AM PDT by Tauzero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson