Economy added 255,000 jobs in July

Maybe it would be better if he had a Congress that was more interested in improving the economy than burning the country down just to make President Obama a "one-term" president.

I think everybody would prefer the stable growth to a few months of +3% growth right before the worst recession since the great recession.

Which one would you prefer?

The Gateway Pundit is simply the worst source of information on the internet.

 

LMAO, you just used BLS numbers and now claim they are "fudged".

Typical conservatives double standard hypocrisy.

 

LOL, you claim the BLS is unreliable and use a bogus comparison of a month to month without accounting for seasonal changes.

Numbers not adjusted for seasonal variation give misleading month to month data because seasonal factors affect the figures.

So, for example, why didn't we see you cheering the fact that 1.2 million jobs were added in April on an unadjusted basis?

However, you can compare fairly unadjusted figures on a year of year basis:

Jul 2015: 141774
Jul 2016: 144185

http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cesbtab1.htm

That's a 2.4 million increase over last year. An excellent rate of job creation.

 

OK, here is the non seasonally adjusted data from the same 3rd party source YOU used!



Here is the source data.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02000000

 

Any economist will say when you increase the supply of a commodity like labor its price goes down. When you decrease the supply of a commodity its price goes up.

 

Well, not if they are educated to any degree.

An economist will say when you increase the supply of a commodity like labor its price goes down, all other things being equal, and depending upon the elasticity of demand.

You can increase the supply of a commodity like labor, but if the demand for labor increases more than the supply, its price will go up, everything else being static.

 

Actually, this is:



https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=6w5p

And there is a direct link so you can double check it, play with it, comment on it, or whatever.

 

I accurately pointed out that there were no actual job gains, in fact there was a big loss. The reported "gains" were statistical fudge, called "seasonal adjustments" inserted into the job count. You can't deny that. You are just defending the fudge factor that turned a loss into a gain.

 

Geeze, you are slow today.

1. There were job losses last month, a lot of them.
2. The "seasonal adjustments" are fudge factor added into the numbers.
3. The only reason a "gain" was shown, was because of the fudge factor, large enough to turn an actual loss into a published "gain".

If you still aren't following, let me know and I'll explain it again. Here, I'll show you graphically:

Without the fudge factor of "seasonal adjustments" we lost jobs last month, a bunch of them:



With the fudge factor of "seasonal adjustment" what is actually a job loss, turns into a "gain"!



The gain wasn't actual jobs, it was fudge added to the loss of an amount sizeable enough to turn substantial job loss into a modest gain.

 

It is the official BLS numbers, without the fudge of "seasonal adjustment."

 

Ah, I see. So where did you get your degree in stats?

 

Jeez you are slow today.

Jobs rise and fall with events like school, summer, Christmas hiring, etc. The same thing happens every year.

Saying that we lost a million jobs in July is meaningless because we always lose a million or so jobs in July.

But we gained 2.4 million since last year.

What's your point, other than showing you can cherry pick data?

- - - Updated - - -

We lose a million jobs more or less every July. Are you trying to make some point?

- - - Updated - - -

We lose about a million jobs every July.

What's your point?

 

That's my point. We didn't gain jobs last month, we lost jobs last month, well over a million. And we lost 87,000 more jobs this July than we lost last July.

 

So what? We lose about a million jobs every single July, because of season factors -- people taking time off in the summer. It's nothing unusual or remarkable.

So what? Again, what's your point?

We've gained an healthy 2.4 million additional jobs over the past year. That's the *only* valid point you can make if you're going to look at data that is not adjusted for repetitive seasonal variations.

 

That we didn't gain jobs we lost jobs last month. And those wage "gains" Obama was crowing about? Gone! The revisions are in. His crowing about 4.2% real wage "gains" were actually real wage LOSSES of minus 0.4%.



Hillary is always initially for wars and interventions and we can't afford them anymore, not in blood, not in treasure.

Are the people of the United States ready to risk a ground war or even nuclear war in defense of Riga? Is there any reason on earth for the United States to risk nuclear war over Crimea or Donbass? No!

We can no longer afford these terrible trade deals that ensure only the largest and most connected companies can sell and compete overseas while in exchange allowing for the import of foreign goods in a favored manner for the benefit of those same largest and most connected companies.

We can no longer afford these open border policies that flood our labor markets and puts downward pressure on our wages.

The horrible bailouts that maintained and improved the wealth of the 1% while doing nothing for or even destroying the wealth and livelihoods of the 99%.

And all the corruption and lies. We are so sick of the corruption and lies. All the turd polishing. Our wages suck, our economy sucks and our government is completely corrupt, both sides. But man do they like war. Open borders and lots of wars.

 

The 255K number is false. The BLS surveys people that already have jobs and uses a phony model, to get a skewed result.
Obama can also make sure the numbers come out sweet, so the 255K number is really suspect. Ask all the parents with college grads living at home, if those numbers sound right!

 

So what? We lose about a million jobs every single July, because of season factors -- people taking time off in the summer. It's nothing unusual or remarkable.

So what? Again, what's your point?

- - - Updated - - -

I know. The numbers are always false unless they indicate something negative. Then they're fine to use.

It's a lot easier being a Republican when you employ rank double standards and hypocrisy.

 

Well after you weed out 20% of the workers you can get a chart to go in any direction you want!

From your link:
This measure accounts for approximately 80 percent of the workers who contribute to Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

 

Yeah. Total Non-farm Payroll. That is what everyone uses, including BLS and has used for decades.

Same numbers here:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t17.htm

 

If all those jobs that Obama's lackeys claims were added from the time Obama took office till now, the 95 million Americans out of work would be working and the annual GDP would be above 5%. Rather we have the would housing in 51 years and the worst economy since 1936.

 

I took a longer look at both series and the adjustments look consistent and do serve to smooth the fluctuations. So fair point.

 

And how exactly does that change the fact that it is only 80% of workers?????

 

assuming that the demand for labor goes up (which i dispute) then would it not be better for the worker for the supply to sty the smeor less? That means the value of their work goes even higher.

 

How much did those jobs pay... enough to cover daycare?

 

Those are good questions:

1. Why Non-Farm employees instead of all employees?
2. Employment that doesn't contribute to GDP? What kind of jobs are those?

I dug around a little last night for answers, didn't really find anything. If you find something, please share it.