04 Feb 12
2 edits
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperDo the math on the Seasonally adjusted Not in Labor Force totals in that table.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm#cps_empsit_a01.f.1
Pretty hard to argue with the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Doesn't it make you angry that that blog blatantly lied to your face and you fell for it? Doesn't it make you not want to read their BS anymore?
Of course not.
Dec 2011: 86,697,000
Jan 2012: 87,874,000
Increase of 1.177 million. ZH rounded that to 1.2 million.
This table shows it a little more clearly...
http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.htm
(right most column)
04 Feb 12
Originally posted by SleepyguyThe Not In Labor Force increased (AND) the Labor Force increased, because the population increased. 1.2 million people did not move from one side to the next.
Do the math on the Seasonally adjusted Not in Labor Force totals in that table.
Dec 2011: 86,697,000
Jan 2012: 87,874,000
Increase of 1.177 million. ZH rounded that to 1.2 million.
This table shows it a little more clearly...
http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.htm
(right most column)
We gained 243,000 new jobs even after losing 18,000 government jobs. The size of the labor force has an effect on unemployment numbers, but it has nothing to do with the fact that we gained 261,000 private sector jobs.
04 Feb 12
Originally posted by SleepyguyWhat would be the expected increase based on population growth, and what is the uncertainty in the one-month figure? (it is based on an estimate)
Do the math on the Seasonally adjusted Not in Labor Force totals in that table.
Dec 2011: 86,697,000
Jan 2012: 87,874,000
Increase of 1.177 million. ZH rounded that to 1.2 million.
This table shows it a little more clearly...
http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.htm
(right most column)
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 194030
04 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperWe've actually been losing government jobs steadily all year, which has slowed the recovery considerably. And we have more cuts to come, which could do some serious harm. The Republicans aren't stupid. Cynical maybe, but not stupid.
The Not In Labor Force increased (AND) the Labor Force increased, because the population increased. 1.2 million people did not move from one side to the next.
We gained 243,000 new jobs even after losing 18,000 government jobs. The size of the labor force has an effect on unemployment numbers, but it has nothing to do with the fact that we gained 261,000 private sector jobs.
- Joined
- 07 Mar 09
- Moves
- 27965
04 Feb 12
Originally posted by KunsooNone of this matters. Conservatism is dead in America and all Republican candidates are less exciting than cadavers. Heck, Republicans aren't even voting for those idiots. By the time the October surprise comes they'll already be measuring their nominee for a wooden box. If they want to retain any representation at all in Congress then they'll start rubber stamping everything Obama sends to the hill. Most Americans would rather plan a romantic weekend with a leper than vote for their current Congress critter. There's a strong swell gathering momentum offshore.
We've actually been losing government jobs steadily all year, which has slowed the recovery considerably. And we have more cuts to come, which could do some serious harm. The Republicans aren't stupid. Cynical maybe, but not stupid.
04 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by SleepyguyThe number of discouraged workers rose from 945,000 in December to 1.059 million in January according to the BLS. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf p. 8
In other news...[quote]The number of Republicans in the country inched up half a percentage point in January, while the number of Democrats dipped to the lowest level ever recorded by Rasmussen Reports.
During January, 35.9% of Americans considered themselves Republicans. That’s up from 35.4% in December and the highest number of Republicans measured si ...[text shortened]...
Edit: And I wonder how many of them are just Dems switching parties to vote for Ron Paul!!11!!
That's 114,000 not 1.8 million. At the same time, 3.325 million re-entered the work force.
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 194030
05 Feb 12
Well, it'll get pretty comical. Either you'll see lots of "the numbers aren't really that good arguments" coming from Republicans like you see in this thread. Or, the Republicans will try to take credit for it.
The latest - it was the Republican governors who saved the economy!
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/mcdonnell-gop-governors-deserve-credit-for-the-recovery-not-obama.php?ref=fpnewsfeed