Hiring roars back in June, 2016 with 287,000 gain in new jobs

[Rshermr]

The entire nation of the USA puts about 20 % of its income into these 401k/IRA accounts. .

entire saving rate 5.4% including 401/ira. Sorry to rock your liberal illiterate world !!

Okay, want maths? Here it is. What is 5.4 % of a 10 trillion dollar economy? Then leverage that by a factor of 10, which is conservative in general banking terms. No wonder the global derivative markets are ~ 6 times the total GDP of the entire world.

now, now ed. I want the "maths". But nice try. You need to work on your cut and paste, idiot.

Bull, the effects I lined up are valid and have been valid, in that order.

Actually, posting an economic argument with ed the troll involved is a waste of time. Ed is a simple cut and paste con troll. If you are looking for intelligent life, you are going to be disappointed.

 

[pinqy]

The fact remains that bureaucracies receive their marching orders from the exec branch and the methods which are used to calculate statistics are changed periodically.

Sort of. The executive branch gives the budgets, and can direct broad program or admin changes, but not operational matters. And major changes to statistical methods are suggested by committees and take years to implement.

Neither the President nor anyone in his administration can directly influence the reports.

Again I don't particularly have a problem with BLS personnel, but if you think they are free to calculate statistics of their own volition I think you're kidding yourself.

I'm glad you agree that BLS personnel stick by established guidelines and procedures and cannot just change things or order subordinates to change things. There is a lot of supervision and oversight. And even when/if someone does try to make their own changes, as was the case of a fired Census worker a few years ago, there is usually no effect.

It makes me think of how politicians use the GAO and CBO to calculate the effects of proposed legislation. What people don't realize is that all the criteria are supplied by the politician. "What will the outcome of my legislation be IF inflation remains x, the cost of resource y remains z". These groups are often just calculators using outside supplied criteria.

Statistical agencies cannot do that. BLS employees are specifically forbidden from what if's and BLS cannot comment on the effect of policy.

The most glaring example of changing methods is the inflation rate. The method of calculation has changed drastically over the years. What are the chances they are changed to make the rates less attractive to the electorate?

Zero. Nor were they changed to make the rates more attractive. They were changed in the 1980's and the 2000's because it was clear that the previous methods overestimated inflation. It's not even an argument that a Laspeyres index gives the upper bound of change..it's a plain fact. There is also no question that hedonic adjustment of quality change (when direct adjustment is not possible) is much more accurate than excluding series that have quality change or imputing the change.

Some specifics and details are of course arguable, and the Current Expenditure Survey, which is the source of weights for the CPI is being heavily revised due to known collection and data issues.

Whether we like it or not bureaucracies are political entities and not taking their pronouncements with a grain of salt is foolish.

But rejecting them outright is also foolish.

The original points of the end of the verizon strike. summer hiring and future adjustments(usually down) are all valid points.
Add to that calculating who is in the workforce calls for perhaps more than "grain" of salt.

Those on strike are considered employed for Unemployment rate calculations, and may or may not be considered employed for the official jobs numbers depending on the length and timing of the strike. Summer hiring is adjusted for by seasonal adjustment.

What specifically do you think the issues are with calculating the labor force level or rate?[/quote]

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Also, I thought that the US law caps the 401k/IRA contributions at 20 % of salary, which is where I got my number.

sure, but that does not mean that people contribute 20% to their IRA 4o1k. 1+1=2

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Even if it is just 1 %, it is a huge amount of money compared to individual earning potential in American employment or small business.

saving rate in USA is lower than virtually all developed countries

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The entire nation of the USA puts about 20 % of its income into these 401k/IRA accounts. .

entire saving rate 5.4% including 401/ira. Sorry to rock your liberal illiterate world !!

Okay, want maths? Here it is. What is 5.4 % of a 10 trillion dollar economy? Then leverage that by a factor of 10, which is conservative in general banking terms. No wonder the global derivative markets are ~ 6 times the total GDP of the entire world.

now, now ed. I want the "maths". But nice try. You need to work on your cut and paste, idiot.

Bull, the effects I lined up are valid and have been valid, in that order.

the effects you lined up were submoroic liberal gibberish. Why not start over?

 

[anotherlife]

The entire nation of the USA puts about 20 % of its income into these 401k/IRA accounts. .

entire saving rate 5.4% including 401/ira. Sorry to rock your liberal illiterate world !!

Okay, want maths? Here it is. What is 5.4 % of a 10 trillion dollar economy? Then leverage that by a factor of 10, which is conservative in general banking terms. No wonder the global derivative markets are ~ 6 times the total GDP of the entire world.

now, now ed. I want the "maths". But nice try. You need to work on your cut and paste, idiot.

Bull, the effects I lined up are valid and have been valid, in that order.

the effects you lined up were submoroic liberal gibberish. Why not start over?

Show me a bank that doesn't leverage its fixed income portfolio. There is a real reason why you are allowed only once a year to change your 401k contribution. I am not a liberal, so you must make a better effort to fool me. Hehe.

 

[Uncensored2008]

US created 287K jobs in June vs. 175K expected, unemployment rate at 4.9 pct. The ue rate went up .2%, mostly as a result of increased worker participation levels. Which are normal for the summer months.

June sees huge jobs gains: 287K vs. 175K expected

Part time, minimum wage.....

 

[westwall]

US created 287K jobs in June vs. 175K expected, unemployment rate at 4.9 pct. The ue rate went up .2%, mostly as a result of increased worker participation levels. Which are normal for the summer months.

June sees huge jobs gains: 287K vs. 175K expected

Wow, you guys are real good at using hyperbolic adjectives to describe truly mundane things. This is like the third thread on this pathetic report. But you guys have really, really, low standards.

 

[Rshermr]

US created 287K jobs in June vs. 175K expected, unemployment rate at 4.9 pct. The ue rate went up .2%, mostly as a result of increased worker participation levels. Which are normal for the summer months.

June sees huge jobs gains: 287K vs. 175K expected

Part time, minimum wage.....

Any proof?

 

[Rshermr]

US created 287K jobs in June vs. 175K expected, unemployment rate at 4.9 pct. The ue rate went up .2%, mostly as a result of increased worker participation levels. Which are normal for the summer months.

June sees huge jobs gains: 287K vs. 175K expected

Wow, you guys are real good at using hyperbolic adjectives to describe truly mundane things. This is like the third thread on this pathetic report. But you guys have really, really, low standards.

Not my adjectives. As my link proves. Perhaps if you were capable, before making a fool of yourself, check out the link. And no, 287,000 is not mundane. that many people getting employed is a really, really good deal, at least to those of us who care about those unemployed. So:

sing hyperbolic adjectives to describe truly mundane things.
Please tell us why nearly 300,000 new jobs is mundane to you.

But you guys have really, really, low standards.
Can you tell us why you feel nearly 300,000 jobs are such a low standard?