Home (Post) Mobile Authors Say Anything Register Login

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Job Losses in June?  Well, Not Exactly-Modest Job Gains

Find it here

AP’s Aversa Continues Job Reporting Malpractice

By Tom Blumer

The Associated Press’s disgraceful coverage of last week’s Employment Situation Report from Uncle Sam’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) got left behind in the holiday weekend hubbub, but calls out for comment nonetheless.

The AP’s Jeannine Aversa reached into her Thesaurus as she began her report with what has become the wire service’s standard monthly error of treating reported seasonally adjusted job reductions as reflecting real people thrown out on the streets by mean old employers (as you will see after the jump, reality, as usual, differed):

“The nation lost jobs for a sixth month in a row in June, a storm of pink slips drenching this year’s July Fourth holiday for more than 60,000 Americans and leaving thousands more worried about the future.

Weighed down by energy prices and the housing crisis, employers laid off workers in stores, factories and forsaken building sites.

..... In June alone, employers got rid of 62,000 jobs, bringing total losses so far this year close to a staggering half-million — 438,000, according to the Labor Department’s report released Thursday.”

What happened on a not seasonally adjusted basis (i.e., in the real word) differed (go to this link at BLS to access tables referred to at this post):

(chart in article)

As you can see, 241,000 jobs were added on a not seasonally adjusted basis (translation: This is Uncle Sam’s best estimate thus far of what actually happened in in June). As was the case in the preceding four months, fewer jobs were added than in preceding years, which goes a long way towards explaining why the trend of reported seasonally adjusted job losses continued.

To be clear: The job market’s performance during the past six months or so has been very sub-par and unacceptable. But that doesn’t change the fact that for the fifth consecutive month, a period during which 2,712,000 jobs have been added (again, an unacceptable number), employers have NOT “gotten rid of” hundreds of thousands of employees, and hundreds of thousands of individuals have NOT been handed a “storm of pink slips.”

When you dig a bit deeper (gee, I thought this is what reporters are supposed to do), this month’s standard malpractice by Aversa was worse than usual:

(chart in article)

As you can see, the overall real-world result has two distinct components. Private employers added 640,000 jobs in June, while the government sector reduced headcount by almost 400,000. I’d be tempted to say that mean, heartless governments issued a “shower of pink slips,” but as you can see from previous years, a reduction of this magnitude is typical for June. The drop likely has a lot to do with the end of the K-12 school year.

[...]

The not seasonally adjusted facts that contradict Aversa’s claims of job gains or losses in the previous paragraph are these:
- Construction, +128,000 (-43,000 seasonally adjusted)
- Manufacturing, +68,000 (-33,000 seasonally adjusted)
- Financial services (finance and insurance, per BLS), +14,400 (-10,000 seasonally adjusted)
- Retailing, +58,000 (-7,500 seasonally adjusted)
- Temporary help, +2,700 (-30,400 seasonally adjusted)
- Trucking (truck transportation, per BLS), +10,900 (-7,400 seasonally adjusted)
- Publishing (publishing industries except Internet, per BLS), +2,200 (-2,300 seasonally adjusted)
- Government, -397,000 (+29,000 seasonally adjusted)

[...]

Next month will be an interesting one, as July is a month when employment typically goes down. If the overall employment situation picks up a bit, leading to seasonally adjusted job gains, will the AP reporter assigned to the task suddenly discover the not seasonally adjusted statistics?

As usual, the MSM is exaggerating any possible bad economic news, and is not telling the real truth about the employment situation.
They’re just trying so hard to create a recession…

Comments

Avatar for Lestat

Generally on this board the argument is made that the seasonally adjusted numbers are the valid ones, not the numbers showing jobs from month to month.

So Robert, how do you propose to judge job growth, on a month to month basis or from the previous year?

Lestat on July 10, 2008 at 09:58 pm

Lestat: For me, it depends on the actual numbers.  For you, it’s how you can spin it to attack the President and lie about the economy.
If you read the article, it says very clearly that rates of hiring are down, but no jobs are actually lost; fewer jobs are being created, but we are still in positive territory.
Let me ‘splain it to you in a way you might be able to understand:
4 new jobs are more than the 3 jobs that existed before, but not as much more than 10 jobs would be, like what happened last year at this time(when conditions were different).  Less growth than at some other time, but growth, nonetheless.
Understand?  I don’th think I can dumb it down any more than that.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on July 10, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Avatar for Lestat

Robert,

For your education.  When analyzing statistics the it is a good idea to eliminate as many variables as possible.  If you do that you are comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges, not apples to oranges.

When looking at statistics that means you should look at the same time last year when making comparisons, not month to month.  Jobs are too seasonal to compare month to month. 

As Mark Twain said “Lies, damn lies and statistics.”

You are making damn lies.

Lestat on July 10, 2008 at 11:06 pm

You are making damn lies.

That would be you.  The number of jobs created increased.  Not as much as last June, but they increased, thus saying that jobs were “lost” is a lie.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on July 10, 2008 at 11:13 pm

To be clear: The job market’s performance during the past six months or so has been very sub-par and unacceptable. But that doesn’t change the fact that for the fifth consecutive month, a period during which 2,712,000 jobs have been added (again, an unacceptable number), employers have NOT “gotten rid of” hundreds of thousands of employees, and hundreds of thousands of individuals have NOT been handed a “storm of pink slips.”

“Added” is the key word here; if you try to say “subtracted”, you would be lying.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on July 10, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Avatar for Lestat

Yes I see the error of my ways.

There has been tremendous growth in jobs this year as opposed to last year.

Bush is a God

You are an idiot.

Lestat on July 10, 2008 at 11:22 pm

Here it is again, idiot:

To be clear: The job market’s performance during the past six months or so has been very sub-par and unacceptable. But that doesn’t change the fact that for the fifth consecutive month, a period during which 2,712,000 jobs have been added…

Can’t you read?


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on July 11, 2008 at 12:51 am
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses. Confirm your email address here.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.