BLS Employment News Release: 119,000 fewer people working means lower unemployment?

[expat_panama]

From the BLS website:

Someone's shrinking the work force...

 

[expat_panama]

...Someone's shrinking the work force...

 

[mascale]

Most likely Europe understands about August, when clearly everyone is obviously unemployed and doing vacation things.

Mostly stupid commentators on business television wanted to make a big deal out of the August Employment Situation.

In real America, the unemployment rate went down 0.2% in the reporting!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many find Great Whites actually in Atlantic Ocean, near to inhabited beaches! Many fleed to undisclosed locations, there to not be counted as shark bait! Relevant critique is where you find it(?). . .some say!)

 

[expat_panama]

...the unemployment rate went down 0.2%...

Absolutely. Unemployment's 'only' 8.1%.

It's a number based on the idea that an additional 586,000 working age people aren't in the work force because they really don't want a job that much. Somehow the 8.1% number doesn't sound as good as the 6.8% rate we had when Obama was elected, and that was back when 6.8% unemployment was 'bad'.

I liked the 6.8% more than the 8.1%.

 

[Trajan]

Mort Zuckerman has a piece in the wsj for tomorrow. Pretty grim, this report was actually a lot worse than it looks, as he says, example- 15k manufacturing jobs took the axe, which figures since manuf. has been contracting ( under 50%) for 3 months. July was revised down by like 25K too.

The disappearing 368,000 from the roles were not retirees either, he checked the books, over 55 employment is up by 3.9 million, while total employment is down by 5 million.....

pretty harsh pickun's.

 

[waltky]

Good employment news - if you're a gov't. employee...

Unemployment Drops to 5.1 Percent—For Government Workers; Lowest Among All Industries
September 7, 2012 - There was good news for American workers in August—if government was their employer.

The unemployment rate for government wage and salaries workers dropped from 5.7 percent in July to 5.1 percent in August. At the same time, the number of government wage and salary workers counted as unemployed dropped by 123,000 people from 1,182,000 in July to 1,059,000 in August. The overall national unemployment rate was 8.1 percent in August. A year ago, in August 2011, there were 1,271,000 unemployed government wage and salary workers. So, the number of unemployed government workers has dropped by 212,000 since then.

The unemployment numbers for government workers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are not seasonally adjusted. The Bureau of Labor Statistics counts someone as a government wage and salary worker if they are not in the military and they are currently employed by any level of government—local, state or federal—or they are unemployed, they are looking for work, and their last job was for any level of government.

The 5.1 percent unemployment rate for government workers was the lowest unemployment rate for any of 17 different categories and subcategories of industries for which employment is tracked and published on a month-to-month basis by the Department of Labor. These include nonagricultural private wage and salary workers; mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction workers; construction workers; manufacturing workers; durable goods manufacturing workers; nondurable goods manufacturing workers; wholesale and retail trade workers; transportation and utilities workers; information workers; financial activities workers; professional and business services workers; education and health services workers; leisure and hospitality workers; workers in other services; agricultural and related private wage and salary workers; and self-employed, unincorporated and unpaid family workers.

Answering questions from reporters on June 8, President Obama said that the private sector was “doing fine” and that the “weaknesses” in the economy were in government. “The private sector is doing fine,” said Obama. “Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government, oftentimes cuts initiated by, you know, governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don't have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in.”

Source

See also:

August Unemployment Report Shows Continuing Stagnation
September 7, 2012 – The August unemployment report showed a labor market that has made virtually no progress all year, with the unemployment rate declining by 0.2 points to 8.1 percent as thousands of Americans gave up looking for work.

“The unemployment rate edged down in August to 8.1 percent. Since the beginning of this year, the rate has held in a narrow range of 8.1 to 8.3 percent. The number of unemployed persons, at 12.5 million, was little changed in August,” the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported Friday. Despite a positive job creation number of 94,000 in August, major employment indicators remained basically unchanged. Unemployment rates for men, women, teens, whites, blacks, and Hispanics all “showed little or no change in August,” according to BLS. Likewise, the number of long-term unemployed – 27 weeks or longer – was “little changed” at 5 million.

Other key figures were significantly worse in August, lead by a drop in the labor force of 368,000 people. More pointedly, the number of Americans BLS reported as being ‘not in the labor force’ grew by 581,000 as people either took retirement or gave up looking for work all together. The number of those working part-time for economic reasons also showed little change, providing further evidence of a labor market plagued by a stubborn stagnation. “The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed at 8.0 million in August. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job,” BLS reported.

Further underscoring the fact that the labor market has stagnated is the report that the numbers of those marginally attached to the labor force – unemployed, not looking for work, but still wanting a job – stayed unchanged from one year ago. “In August, 2.6 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, essentially unchanged from a year earlier.” This number is particularly significant because it captures a segment of people who could and would work, were jobs available for them – as opposed to those who retire early, join the military, or leave the labor force for other reasons.

Source

 

[Mad Scientist]

From the BLS website:

Someone's shrinking the work force...

Yes ExPat, this is how America is run. Just like the Mafia. And the American people just lap it up!

The BLS isn't the only agency doing it. Just as a fish rots from the head down, I suspect all agencies cook their books.

We are in serious deep doo doo.

 

[uscitizen]

119,000 won the lottery?

 

[uscitizen]

How can unemployment rates drop to 5.1% for govt workers?
What is a govt worker?
Can't they do anything else?
They are just workers.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Dems are crowing about lower unemployment when they were screaming about BUsh's much lower UE numbers. The jobs being created are "McJobs", as they claimed about Bush in his first term.
Democrats are the biggest fucking hypocrites to walk the planet.

 

[The Rabbi]

From the BLS website:

Someone's shrinking the work force...

Yes ExPat, this is how America is run. Just like the Mafia. And the American people just lap it up!

The BLS isn't the only agency doing it. Just as a fish rots from the head down, I suspect all agencies cook their books.

We are in serious deep doo doo.

You understand this is not the conspiracy section, right?

 

[edthecynic]

Mort Zuckerman has a piece in the wsj for tomorrow. Pretty grim, this report was actually a lot worse than it looks, as he says, example- 15k manufacturing jobs took the axe, which figures since manuf. has been contracting ( under 50%) for 3 months. July was revised down by like 25K too.

The disappearing 368,000 from the roles were not retirees either, he checked the books, over 55 employment is up by 3.9 million, while total employment is down by 5 million.....

pretty harsh pickun's.

What a moronic way to "check" the number of retirees!!! Wouldn't over 55 employment be up due to working Boomers aging and entering the over 55 group. And how gullible do you have to be to not only swallow such a left-handed way of measuring retirees but also parrot it on a public forum as if it is gospel?

 

[edthecynic]

August Unemployment Report Shows Continuing Stagnation
September 7, 2012 – The August unemployment report showed a labor market that has made virtually no progress all year, with the unemployment rate declining by 0.2 points to 8.1 percent as thousands of Americans gave up looking for work.

“The unemployment rate edged down in August to 8.1 percent. Since the beginning of this year, the rate has held in a narrow range of 8.1 to 8.3 percent. The number of unemployed persons, at 12.5 million, was little changed in August,” the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported Friday. Despite a positive job creation number of 94,000 in August, major employment indicators remained basically unchanged. Unemployment rates for men, women, teens, whites, blacks, and Hispanics all “showed little or no change in August,” according to BLS. Likewise, the number of long-term unemployed – 27 weeks or longer – was “little changed” at 5 million.

Other key figures were significantly worse in August, lead by a drop in the labor force of 368,000 people. More pointedly, the number of Americans BLS reported as being ‘not in the labor force’ grew by 581,000 as people either took retirement or gave up looking for work all together. The number of those working part-time for economic reasons also showed little change, providing further evidence of a labor market plagued by a stubborn stagnation. “The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed at 8.0 million in August. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job,” BLS reported.

Further underscoring the fact that the labor market has stagnated is the report that the numbers of those marginally attached to the labor force – unemployed, not looking for work, but still wanting a job – stayed unchanged from one year ago. “In August, 2.6 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, essentially unchanged from a year earlier.” This number is particularly significant because it captures a segment of people who could and would work, were jobs available for them – as opposed to those who retire early, join the military, or leave the labor force for other reasons.

Source

Gee, the best August since 2006 is bad news to CON$. No surprise there!

August 2003: – 45,000
August 2004: +122,000
August 2005: +193,000
August 2006: +183,000
August 2007: – 18,000
August 2008: – 274,000
August 2009: – 231,000
August 2010: – 51,000 (worsened by Census layoffs)
August 2011: + 85,000
August 2012: + 96,000

 

[expat_panama]

...best August since 2006 is bad news to CON$. No surprise there!...

If a faction wanted people out of work than I'll hate them as much as you do, but the lack of numbers means you made it up. That's ok because this is an economics thread and your comment shows how hate fantasies can distort economic decisions, in particular how the choice in Nov. relates to employment.

You showed how the latest one-month employment level change was the highest August change for the current administration:

...
August 2003: – 45,000
August 2004: +122,000
August 2005: +193,000
August 2006: +183,000
August 2007: – 18,000
August 2008: – 274,000
August 2009: – 231,000
August 2010: – 51,000 (worsened by Census layoffs)
August 2011: + 85,000
August 2012: + 96,000

That may tell us how bad July 2012 was compared to previous July's, but for understanding employment and the choice in November we need to look at totals:

Employment change since ’08 election: down 1,740,000
Population change since ’08 election: up 8,281,000​

If presidential elections affect jobs, then the '08 choice hurt over ten million people.



Maybe we should hate that.

 

[expat_panama]

...look at totals:

Employment change since ’08 election: down 1,740,000

Population change since ’08 election: up 8,281,000​

If presidential elections affect jobs, then the '08 choice hurt over ten million people.

Question for the group: does everyone here understand what these numbers mean?

 

[Trajan]

Mort Zuckerman has a piece in the wsj for tomorrow. Pretty grim, this report was actually a lot worse than it looks, as he says, example- 15k manufacturing jobs took the axe, which figures since manuf. has been contracting ( under 50%) for 3 months. July was revised down by like 25K too.

The disappearing 368,000 from the roles were not retirees either, he checked the books, over 55 employment is up by 3.9 million, while total employment is down by 5 million.....

pretty harsh pickun's.

What a moronic way to "check" the number of retirees!!! Wouldn't over 55 employment be up due to working Boomers aging and entering the over 55 group. And how gullible do you have to be to not only swallow such a left-handed way of measuring retirees but also parrot it on a public forum as if it is gospel?

then rebut him, show us the sources/numbers that say that retirees are responsible for the lower labor force numbers.....


and I am STILL waiting for you to tell me how a retiree who leaves his job, has his job taken by someone who was unemployed, and not be accounted for in any of the numbers?

 

[edthecynic]

...look at totals:

Employment change since ’08 election: down 1,740,000

Population change since ’08 election: up 8,281,000​

If presidential elections affect jobs, then the '08 choice hurt over ten million people.

Question for the group: does everyone here understand what these numbers mean?

Yeah, they mean you have to go back and add the numbers while the Bush policies were in effect, before Obama was even sworn in let alone once his policies took effect, to try to make Obama look bad!!!

Political Animal - The Romney Standard of Presidential Performance

Mitt Romney sat down with CNBC’s Larry Kudlow, and made a curious observation. He said voters who want a strong economy should vote for him, but Americans “ought to give, whichever president is going to be elected, at least six months or a year to get those policies in place.”
At first blush, that may sound fairly reasonable. A president takes office, he or she needs time to put a team in place, craft an agenda, and get to work. What’s more, we generally don’t see the results of economic policies immediately; the agenda needs to time to take effect. In Romney’s mind, six months to a year seems fair.
But let’s go ahead and apply this standard to President Obama, who took office in the midst of the worst global economic catastrophe since the Great Depression….
f we don’t hold Obama’s first year against him, the economy has added over 3.7 million jobs overall during his presidency, and over 4.2 million in the private sector.
That’s not the count by my standard; that’s the count by Romney’s standard.

 

[Trajan]

August Unemployment Report Shows Continuing Stagnation
September 7, 2012 – The August unemployment report showed a labor market that has made virtually no progress all year, with the unemployment rate declining by 0.2 points to 8.1 percent as thousands of Americans gave up looking for work.

“The unemployment rate edged down in August to 8.1 percent. Since the beginning of this year, the rate has held in a narrow range of 8.1 to 8.3 percent. The number of unemployed persons, at 12.5 million, was little changed in August,” the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported Friday. Despite a positive job creation number of 94,000 in August, major employment indicators remained basically unchanged. Unemployment rates for men, women, teens, whites, blacks, and Hispanics all “showed little or no change in August,” according to BLS. Likewise, the number of long-term unemployed – 27 weeks or longer – was “little changed” at 5 million.

Other key figures were significantly worse in August, lead by a drop in the labor force of 368,000 people. More pointedly, the number of Americans BLS reported as being ‘not in the labor force’ grew by 581,000 as people either took retirement or gave up looking for work all together. The number of those working part-time for economic reasons also showed little change, providing further evidence of a labor market plagued by a stubborn stagnation. “The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed at 8.0 million in August. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job,” BLS reported.

Further underscoring the fact that the labor market has stagnated is the report that the numbers of those marginally attached to the labor force – unemployed, not looking for work, but still wanting a job – stayed unchanged from one year ago. “In August, 2.6 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, essentially unchanged from a year earlier.” This number is particularly significant because it captures a segment of people who could and would work, were jobs available for them – as opposed to those who retire early, join the military, or leave the labor force for other reasons.

Source

Gee, the best August since 2006 is bad news to CON$. No surprise there!

August 2003: – 45,000
August 2004: +122,000
August 2005: +193,000
August 2006: +183,000
August 2007: – 18,000
August 2008: – 274,000
August 2009: – 231,000
August 2010: – 51,000 (worsened by Census layoffs)
August 2011: + 85,000
August 2012: + 96,000

ah I see, so the new normal and the talking point to crow over now is- we have created more since 06 in august, with a larger pop., to few to fill out new entrant opportunity , you should work with Wassrman Schultz.

 

[uscitizen]

...look at totals:

Employment change since ’08 election: down 1,740,000

Population change since ’08 election: up 8,281,000​

If presidential elections affect jobs, then the '08 choice hurt over ten million people.

Question for the group: does everyone here understand what these numbers mean?

yeah we have alot of 4 yr olds out there.

 

[The Rabbi]

...look at totals:

Employment change since ’08 election: down 1,740,000

Population change since ’08 election: up 8,281,000​

If presidential elections affect jobs, then the '08 choice hurt over ten million people.

Question for the group: does everyone here understand what these numbers mean?

Yeah, they mean you have to go back and add the numbers while the Bush policies were in effect, before Obama was even sworn in let alone once his policies took effect, to try to make Obama look bad!!!

Political Animal - The Romney Standard of Presidential Performance

Mitt Romney sat down with CNBC’s Larry Kudlow, and made a curious observation. He said voters who want a strong economy should vote for him, but Americans “ought to give, whichever president is going to be elected, at least six months or a year to get those policies in place.”
At first blush, that may sound fairly reasonable. A president takes office, he or she needs time to put a team in place, craft an agenda, and get to work. What’s more, we generally don’t see the results of economic policies immediately; the agenda needs to time to take effect. In Romney’s mind, six months to a year seems fair.
But let’s go ahead and apply this standard to President Obama, who took office in the midst of the worst global economic catastrophe since the Great Depression….
f we don’t hold Obama’s first year against him, the economy has added over 3.7 million jobs overall during his presidency, and over 4.2 million in the private sector.
That’s not the count by my standard; that’s the count by Romney’s standard.

You dont have to go far to make Obama look bad. Over 8% unemployment every month of his term. Lowest workforce participation rate since the early 1980s. Worst recovery out of a recession.
And btw, your answer to Expat's question is simply "no".