Initial US employment reports overstated by 439,000 jobs in 2023

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

Actually, I said here the Nov report was a good report as long as it didn't have any negative revisions (which the 1st one is negative).

I just don't look at the headline number. If you see some weakness in the report, it needs to be paid attention to. For example, we lost a lot of full-time jobs last year. Multiple job holders are at all-time highs. Hours worked per week continue to go down. Also, 2023 saw a doubling of government jobs per month compared to 2022. In fact, the government averaged more jobs added per month than any other sector.

Any economist is going to tell you they would prefer to see the government not be the leading job growth of our economy.

Lets go over your claims of the 3 major bills.

Infrastructure bill, I am mixed on this bill. I think our infrastructure needs updating but I also think the federal government is the biggest waste of money. Local is only slightly better but as long as the money is being issued to local first, that is about as good as it's going to get. With that said, construction only slightly trended up in total jobs added in the past 3 years. I wouldn't call this 1.5 trillion going to infrastructure a major job growth by any imagination for what it cost... With that said, I am guessing a lot of these projects are still in the planning phases so that could change. But again I do agree it was something that needed to be done.

I see zero proof green energy agenda by Biden has been anything positive. Many of these companies are currently holding on by a thread. Many of the projects are even being canceled or still delayed. Just like when Obama pushed something similar, so many of the companies ended up bankrupt. Here is one article for you:
https://www.reuters.com/sustainabil...y-agenda-faces-mounting-headwinds-2023-11-24/

I am ok with the Chips Act but it didn't get signed until August 2022. Also, what part of this bill would you say is significant for job growth? A lot of it went to companies already established and producing chips or to research. I would like to see us a bit more independent in this sector so I like the overall goal of it.

Go look at charts with job growth that have highlighted times of recessions. Virtually everytime, jobs had a nice upward movement, and then while IN the recession we see a decline in jobs. That is why it's important to look at any underlying weakness in the report each month if any.

 

Silly. There are 14M more jobs than when Biden started and 4M more total jobs over peak pre covid… you know how many more government jobs there are? It’s 132,000 more government jobs now. Out of 4M added. That has actually reduced the share of government jobs.

All Employees, Government

So, are you really looking at underlying weakness?

Second. Multiple job holders are 5.3% which was 5.2% the month before covid under Trump. It’s lower than several months under Trump pre-covid.

Multiple Jobholders as a Percent of Employed
So, are you really looking at underlying weakness?

 

You are all over the place on this, and much of it isn't true or is misleading. For example, multiple job holders as a percentage of employees is nowhere near record highs. Are you trying to make a claim about the full number without accounting for the expansion of the labor force in terms of raw numbers? That would be highly misleading if you were doing that.

Then you complain about work weeks being shorter, after complaining about how people have multiple jobs. Regardless, it is currently varying between 34.3 and 34.4, which is pretty much what happened for the last decade minus the pandemic.

Government jobs did not double. You are making a claim about levels. But I suspect that you are trying to make a claim about the first derivative.

 

Pay more attention to what I typed before you respond.

Multiple Jobholders, Primary Job Full Time, Secondary Job Part Time
\

Guess you'll need to show me where I mislead about multiple job holders...

Hours worked per week going down is just happening. Even though Multiple job holders are going up, it's still under 6% of the total labor force. Most people by far do not want to work two jobs. Still doesn't change the fact hours worked per week have had a slow trend down.


Average Weekly Hours of All Employees, Total Private

This is directly from the BLS report for government jobs just 5 days ago:

Government employment increased by 52,000 in December. Employment continued to trend up in local government (+37,000) and federal government (+7,000). Government added an average of 56,000 jobs per month in 2023, more than double the average monthly gain of 23,000 in 2022.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
Page 3.

 

Okay, so you were misleading. You were using a raw statistic in a growing market. That is misleading. You were attempting to give the perspective that the state of having multiple jobs is more likely now than it used to be. That is false.

There is no trend down. In 2007, the average work hours was 34.4. In 2023, it was 34.4. Same figure in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2017, and 2019.

Yes, that is the first derivative, not the levels. You were discussing levels with your language.

 

Why do people want to keep using numbers from 2020 like that is any indication of something Biden really did? Again if you are going to give Biden credit for jobs added, you have to give Trump credit too since in the same exact year, the V shape jobs added was already well on its way. Simply ending lockdowns and letting people get back to work is all government had to do.

The total percentage of multiple job holders has not changed much but it's still at an all-time high. The trend has been up for over 12 months and now .1% higher than before the pandemic. If it holds, then not a problem. As I have stated multiple times, all of this is stuff to look at and monitor. I am not saying we need to sound the alarm yet but there has been weakness in the reports the last 6-8 months. I have said that for the past 3 months. Simply we need to watch this since jobs usually don't start falling until we are already in a recession. I would prefer we hit the soft landing and hope the feds cut rates sooner rather than later.

 

Wait so where did I mislead again? I said it was at all-time highs. Was I wrong? Is there not a trend in the last 8 months of multiple job holders going up? Just because you don't like the truth doesn't make it not true...

LOL ok going from 35 hours a week in 2021 to 34.3 now is not a trend... gessh the chart is freaking right there man. Now if it holds here, then all is good. Still don't ignore what has happened the last 4-5 months...

It's like you guys want to ignore anything recently and pretend that all is good. Often it's small signs of weakness that can help indicate something is wrong. Look at almost any job data chart that shows recessions and you'll see it.

 

I already put out how you are being misleading. I suspect that if I said "there are more people with one job now than ever before" you would say that is misleading due to the growth of the labor market overall. You are using a level statistic to create a false impression. The reality is that multiple job holding is pretty in line with historical averages as a proportion of the labor force. All you have really showed with that comment is that the labor force is historically large.

Wait, you complain about using pandemic era numbers, then you want to use them as a baseline when convenient? Again, this is a fairly standard workweek outside of the pandemic era. Would you say that we have had an upward trend since 2008?

Again, here are the facts: both work hours and likelihood of holding multiple jobs are well within historic norms. You are trying to spin away from that set of facts.

 

I guess you don't understand why average hours worked went up during the pandemic and has come down since then?

 

Your first paragraph entirely changed the discussion. You crowed about government jobs. They aren’t a driver of additional employment.

I have no issues with the second paragraph.

 

So let's update this. As expected, multiple job holders decreased substantially in January (the multiple job holders number used last week are generally the not seasonally adjusted numbers). It fell by 563K in the past month. Do you still consider this a weakness?