unemployment drops to 7.8%

[gwb72tii]

looks like Sept job numbers weren't all they were crackerd up to be
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49620569

[rwh11385]

looks like Sept job numbers weren't all they were crackerd up to be
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49620569

You really just choose to read anything according to what conclusion you would like rather than for meaning.

Recalibrating a model does not change the underlying data points. The scaling may have been revised but relative growth should be the same. And the model trying to align with the better established metric does not change the target metric.

[rwh11385]

Surprise, surprise, today's ADP report revises the September jobs back up, to exactly the BLS report's numbers... aka they are benchmarking to the BLS model probably.

And even as Moody's is helping ADP be tighter to the BLS model,
ADP: US adds 158,000 jobs in October in sign economy is 'holding its own'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/01/adp-us-job-growth-october

US companies added 158,000 jobs in October, far higher than expected, according to the latest survey from payrolls processor ADP.

Analysts had been expecting the private sector to add 88,000 jobs in October.

ADP's figures came amid further evidence of a pickup in the economy. The labor department announced there were 363,000 initial claims for jobless benefits in the latest week, fewer than the 369,000 economists expected.

Manufacturing also expanded at a faster pace in October than expected, according to the Institute for Supply Management's (ISM) factory index. The index climbed to 51.7 last month, its highest level since May and up from 51.5 in September.

Zandi said September's number had been revised up to 114,000 from 88,000 after adding in more retail jobs. That would bring the number exactly in line with last month's nonfarm figures.

Zandi said he suspected a slowdown in government hiring could lead to October's non-farm figure coming in at between 130,000 and 140,000.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158429/economic-confidence-best-2008.aspx

Gallup's U.S. Economic Confidence Index improved to -14 for the week ending Oct. 28, the highest level of weekly confidence in the economy since Gallup began Daily tracking of economic confidence in 2008.

Edit: And China's PMI is back to expanding.

The National Bureau of Statistics and China Federation of Logistics and Purchasing’s PMI index rose to 50.2 in October from 49.8 in September

[Good & Tight]

Quote:
Zandi said September's number had been revised up to 114,000 from 88,000 after adding in more retail jobs. That would bring the number exactly in line with last month's nonfarm figures.

Zandi said he suspected a slowdown in government hiring could lead to October's non-farm figure coming in at between 130,000 and 140,000.

Correct me if I am wrong but, retailers always high more employees "seasonal help" during the holidays to keep up with customer demand, only to be layed off after the holidays.

[rwh11385]

Correct me if I am wrong but, retailers always high more employees "seasonal help" during the holidays to keep up with customer demand, only to be layed off after the holidays.

Yes definitely. But the models generally control for that. However, unusually early seasonal retailing would make a bump up beyond that. (BLS kinda seemed that way a bit) So that rise might make a relative drop going into Oct when the seasonality accounts for that, for example. (same thing with kids leaving work for school and seasonality accounting for that, early school year was a negative for August but the effect caught up in Sept)

The real reason I quoted what to point out their Sept numbers were exactly the BLS figure, in case people didn't remember.

Considering the recalibrated ADP model hit the number it did, it's a good sign and hopefully the BLS figure reflects that.

[Frog]

Facts? Republicans don't believe in facts.. Facts have a liberal bias.

[rwh11385]

Facts? Republicans don't believe in facts.. Facts have a liberal bias.

Hahaha.



Well gwb and joshh, you can take your pick of metrics or sources:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158495/payroll-population-rate-october.aspx

The U.S. Payroll to Population employment rate (P2P), as measured by Gallup, was 45.7% for the month of October, up from 45.1% in September, and reflecting the highest percentage of Americans with good jobs since Gallup began Daily tracking of U.S. employment in 2010.

These results are based on Gallup Daily tracking interviews, conducted by landline and cell phone, with approximately 30,000 Americans throughout the month.

The October growth in P2P employment in the U.S., coupled with the decline in unemployment, is a promising indicator that the jobs situation is improving, and more Americans are returning to work and are finding the good jobs they desire.

Unlike unemployment rates, the number cannot improve if people drop out the workforce. Any increases in P2P in the coming weeks will be a true indicator that employers are creating good jobs and improving both the economic situation and the wellbeing of American workers.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158483/unadjusted-unemployment-down-october.aspx

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/...i5lw-u3ola.gif

U.S. unemployment, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment, fell to 7.0% for the month of October, down significantly from the 7.9% measured at the end of September. Gallup's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate is 7.4%, improved more than a half a point from September.

These results are based on Gallup Daily tracking interviews, conducted by landline and cell phone, with approximately 30,000 Americans throughout the month -- 68.3% of whom in October reported being active in the workforce.

Seasonally unadjusted unemployment of 7.0% is the lowest Gallup has recorded since it began collecting unemployment data in January 2010. It is also more than a full point and a half improvement over the October 2011 rate, when unadjusted unemployment was 8.4%.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 171,000 in October, and the unemployment rate was essentially unchanged at 7.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment rose in professional and business services, health care, and retail trade.

The civilian labor force rose by 578,000 to 155.6 million in October, and the labor force participation rate edged up to 63.8 percent. Total employment rose by 410,000 over the month. The employment-population ratio was essentially unchanged at 58.8 percent, following an increase of 0.4 percentage point in September.

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) fell by 269,000 to 8.3 million in October, partially offsetting an increase of 582,000 in September.

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised from +142,000 to +192,000, and the change for September was revised from +114,000 to +148,000.

[tjts1]

"Its Obama's faul!" in

3.
2
1
GO!

[joshh]

Hahaha.



Well gwb and joshh, you can take your pick of metrics or sources:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158495/payroll-population-rate-october.aspx

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158483/unadjusted-unemployment-down-october.aspx

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

You mean you want one of use to continue to point out that the economy is still limping along and not growing fast enough to make the growth needed to make a significant difference in actually helping the rest of the 23 million that are unemployed/underemployed. Damn, I think I just did that yet again....lol. But you're too focused on "growth is growth".

[rwh11385]

You mean you want one of use to continue to point out that the economy is still limping along and not growing fast enough to make the growth needed to make a significant difference in actually helping the rest of the 23 million that are unemployed/underemployed. Damn, I think I just did that yet again....lol. But you're too focused on "growth is growth".

So somewhere in that broken English I'm attempting to understand... Seems that your conspiracy theory and "mathematical impossibility" argument is resorting back to your "it's positive but not positive enough" argument?

Moving the Goal Posts much?

[joshh]

So somewhere in that broken English I'm attempting to understand... Seems that your conspiracy theory and "mathematical impossibility" argument is resorting back to your "it's positive but not positive enough" argument?

Moving the Goal Posts much?

Oh good you got my point finally. Too bad you can't use logic and agree with it. Oh and still sticking with the attacks as usual...lol.

[rwh11385]

Oh good you got my point finally. Too bad you can't use logic and agree with it. Oh and still sticking with the attacks as usual...lol.

The point of this thread was to argue that there was mathematical impossibilities in the Sept jobs report and you wanted to use Jack Welch's logic to attack the credibility of it.

Yet, after being shown that you were clueless about the methodology of the report, and the October jobs report was in line with the Sept one - as well as other sources backing it up... you resort back to your argument from another thread and gave up the argument in this thread entirely.

Joshh, you are not one to talk about using logic, ever. Your inability to understand that you have changed arguments after the first was beat underlines that.

[joshh]

The point of this thread was to argue that there was mathematical impossibilities in the Sept jobs report and you wanted to use Jack Welch's logic to attack the credibility of it.

Yet, after being shown that you were clueless about the methodology of the report, and the October jobs report was in line with the Sept one - as well as other sources backing it up... you resort back to your argument from another thread and gave up the argument in this thread entirely.

Joshh, you are not one to talk about using logic, ever. Your inability to understand that you have changed arguments after the first was beat underlines that.

After I had to show you that a simple survey of 60k homes that can easily be "I worked an hour this week"....ok you're a part time employee. Is false statistics of the labor force...lol. Logic...you need some.

[rwh11385]

After I had to show you that a simple survey of 60k homes that can easily be "I worked an hour this week"....ok you're a part time employee. Is false statistics of the labor force...lol. Logic...you need some.

Does your criticism of the survey methods provide support for the mathematical impossibility that you claimed?

Does your past criticism of bad statistics hold true now when number of the part-time workers decreased significantly and replaced by full-time employment?

[joshh]

Does your criticism of the survey methods provide support for the mathematical impossibility that you claimed?

Does your past criticism of bad statistics hold true now when number of the part-time workers decreased significantly and replaced by full-time employment?

What to post up all your graphs now and spare me some time...lol.