Job Losses Way Below Estimates

[ax]

I guess ADP must have miscounted by about 200K...

"U.S. stock futures shot higher Friday following far-lower-than-forecast monthly job losses of 345,000, reinforcing recent hopes that the economy will expand later in the year."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-...f-payroll-data

[TRake]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

I think they mixed up the numbers. It should have been 543,000.
I am a little confused. How do you get a .5% increase in unemployment for the month, greater increase than the previous month, but lose less jobs.

[Master Shake]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

I guess ADP must have miscounted by about 200K...

"U.S. stock futures shot higher Friday following far-lower-than-forecast monthly job losses of 345,000, reinforcing recent hopes that the economy will expand later in the year."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-...f-payroll-data

Wait for the "adjustment" later this month.

Jesse has a couple of recent posts on the cooking of the unemployment numbers.

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/

[ax]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

Wait for the "adjustment" later this month.

Jesse has a couple of recent posts on the cooking of the unemployment numbers.

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/

April and March revised up 82K, this one should be interesting. Perhaps marktet doesn't quite believe it. As far as unemployment percentage going up, still hundreds of thousands of net job losses, this adds to the rate.

[sishya]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

Why is this thread not getting any traction ? Are all assuming that this is a Govt cover up of actual bad data ? is everything a conspiracy now ?

[dummass]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

Yes :cool:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1414...e?source=email

[Judas]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

Yup.

http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/0...rspective.html

Moreover, the internals of today’s report, in a word, were awful. Not only are businesses still cutting jobs but they are also reducing the hours that their employees are working; the private workweek hit a new record low of 33.1 hours (from 33.2 hours in April). So, total labour input was much weaker than the headline payroll suggests and this is vividly illustrated in the aggregate-hours worked index, which fell 0.7% MoM and something ‘green shoot’ advocates will not like discuss since this was actually worse than the 0.3% MoM drop in April; this takes the three-month trend to a -8.6% annual rate. Think about that for a moment because what goes into GDP is total hours worked and productivity — so the latter better continue to hang in there or else we are going to be seeing some nasty output data going forward that may well take Mr. Market by surprise. Put another way, if companies had held hours worked constant in May instead of cutting them, to achieve the total labour input they achieved last month would have required — get this — a 927,000 payroll cut. ‘Green shoot’ indeed.

[jtabeb]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

Why is this thread not getting any traction ? Are all assuming that this is a Govt cover up of actual bad data ? is everything a conspiracy now ?

People know the game is up.

Yes.

Yes.

[BadJuju]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

is everything a conspiracy now ?

Who are you working for?! :mad::p

[flintlock]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

What I can't figure out is, how do they track unemployed people from small businesses like mine. I had a long time employee who I then switched to working as a contract worker. So technically he was self employed. He can't collect unemployment, so its not reported that way. I had him down to working a few days a week until the first of the year when I had to let him go completely. Now he manages to find sporadic work on his own, but is for all practical purposes unemployed. How do these types get counted? He certainly didn't ring up the government and tell them he had no work. I think there has to be hundreds of thousands of people just like him out there. Not everyone works for the government or businesses that report their payroll. There's a lot of independent contractors. Are they counted? I think this is really important because in residential construction the majority of workers are hired this way, as subcontractors. And we all know how bad that industry was hit. Something tells me the numbers are way under reported. Do the unemployment numbers count illegal aliens? They also have been hard hit. I find the Shadowstats 20% unemployment more believable than 9.4%.

[ax]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

Why is this thread not getting any traction ? Are all assuming that this is a Govt cover up of actual bad data ? is everything a conspiracy now ?

Thanks for the love sishya, I often wonder that about my enlightening threads

[jtabeb]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

Yup.

http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/0...rspective.html

Moreover, the internals of today’s report, in a word, were awful. Not only are businesses still cutting jobs but they are also reducing the hours that their employees are working; the private workweek hit a new record low of 33.1 hours (from 33.2 hours in April). So, total labour input was much weaker than the headline payroll suggests and this is vividly illustrated in the aggregate-hours worked index, which fell 0.7% MoM and something ‘green shoot’ advocates will not like discuss since this was actually worse than the 0.3% MoM drop in April; this takes the three-month trend to a -8.6% annual rate. Think about that for a moment because what goes into GDP is total hours worked and productivity — so the latter better continue to hang in there or else we are going to be seeing some nasty output data going forward that may well take Mr. Market by surprise. Put another way, if companies had held hours worked constant in May instead of cutting them, to achieve the total labour input they achieved last month would have required — get this — a 927,000 payroll cut. ‘Green shoot’ indeed.

The only "green shoots" were are seeing are the pieces of undigested grass sticking out of this stinking pile of HORSESHIT report.

[metalman]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

ave. duration unemployment...



a new record!

[don]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

What I can't figure out is, how do they track unemployed people from small businesses like mine. I had a long time employee who I then switched to working as a contract worker. So technically he was self employed. He can't collect unemployment, so its not reported that way. I had him down to working a few days a week until the first of the year when I had to let him go completely. Now he manages to find sporadic work on his own, but is for all practical purposes unemployed. How do these types get counted? He certainly didn't ring up the government and tell them he had no work. I think there has to be hundreds of thousands of people just like him out there. Not everyone works for the government or businesses that report their payroll. There's a lot of independent contractors. Are they counted? I think this is really important because in residential construction the majority of workers are hired this way, as subcontractors. And we all know how bad that industry was hit. Something tells me the numbers are way under reported. Do the unemployment numbers count illegal aliens? They also have been hard hit. I find the Shadowstats 20% unemployment more believable than 9.4%.

From the financial industry- Morgan Stanley tells their employees they have no payroll, all commissions- to the real estate biz- all commissions- to the auto industry- all sales commissions- they be a lot, I'm a thinkin'.

[thunderdownunder]

Re: Job Losses Way Below Estimates

ave. duration unemployment...



a new record!

Could you please extend the Vertical axis so we can see up under the page top - May I suggest 52 weeks Duration without work as suitable