Worst unemployment report in years

What technical recession? Lol just making stuff up as we go.

 

1Q2022 and 2Q2022 GDP contracted. Most economists call that a recession, when you have two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. No. I didn’t make anything up. You just happen to be a low information voter.

 

forgive my confusion. I thought we were talking about right now again since everything is so terrible and you called out the COVID recession in your post. Aren’t COVID and technical recession the same thing - I only ask to understand your personal definitions here because your shorthand isn’t a universal language. I guess you’re making a distinction between 2020 and 2022?

 

I am pretty sure @okeechobee is right that recessions follow periods of low UE. It makes sense. When you've 4% UE, there is little room for growth.* I don't see recessions as bad. It's a the bidness cycle. We (gov) tries desperately to smooth the cycle for mainly political reasons.

*it's like a drunk against a wall. there is really only 1 way to fall. Pretty hard to have much expansion with super tight labor mkts. I think pretty good productivity gains helped the latest GDP #s.

In general, I think this obsession with the "scoreboard" is bad. For instance, trying to min UE usually involves horrible econ policy.

 

You never answered the question.

Hey what happens when it’s a positive revision, guess that doesn’t mean there were more jobs than estimated.

someone better tell yahoo news we don’t add up the jobs gained each month.

The US labor market just had one of its best years of the decade. 5 charts tell the story.


2.7 million were added in 2023. The initial headline numbers would have been over 3 million jobs added but guess what, there was over 300k in revisions after each month received 3 revisions each.

So that very simply means, bls overestimated 300k jobs in 2023 from their initial headline number.
Nonfarm Payroll Employment: Revisions between over-the-month estimates, 1979-present

My goodness this is elementary stuff.

 

No one should be cheering for this. Especially since Trump will likely just try to spend our way out of it.

Is it not normal for the one side to point out the failures of the other side in charge that lead us to a recession?

 

It’s a running total genius. Keep working it out and it will dawn on you…. Or it won’t.

The most recent estimate is 158,723,000 employed people. When you revise the 3 prior months it is still 158,723,000. Are you following?

If the prior estimate was 150,000 too high or 150,000 too low the current estimate is still 158,723,000. At any point in time the estimate is only off by the most recent estimate error, having been adjusted for all previous updates.

Error just isn’t additive. According to you if they estimated numbers everyday you’d add up all the error from everyday and have millions of missing jobs. It’s moronic.

 

WOW, big gov. so, you favor BIG GOV trying to keep us from recessions? As a con, I'd STRONGLY prefer taking the agony with the ecstasy rather than having BIG GOV "make everything all right." You were a fan of 12 years of EZ money just to avoid - gasp - neg growth in GDP?

this is a gross misrep of Keynes who may be the most BIG GOV hatin' economist ever, but it makes a good pt.

 

Most Republican voters love big government when the end goal is something they agree with, especially if a Republican is in charge

 

Not sure where you got that from. I prefer gov stay as far away from the economy as possible. That was the point of my post. Trump is not a conservative when it comes to spending.

 

Truly, I mean truly amazed. There is no way you don’t get this.

Like you have to be doing this as a troll.

They do monthly revisions, not daily. It’s literally there on the bls website.

If headline number is 158k but after 3 revisions it’s 150k, that means very simply they overestimated by 8k for that month. That means that month added 150k jobs and that is what will be attributed to total jobs gained that year.


ok Im done. Maybe somebody else here can help you.

 

The "Covid recession" was not a real recession. It was obviously caused by a virus and snapped right back to the tune of 33% annualized growth in 3Q2020, which is not how real recessions end. 2022 was more of a true recession, but it was a very mild recession which is why I am giving it a pass. I think most economists would agree that the current cycle begins in late 2010 with expansion lasting up through today. The problem with that is that the average economic expansion lasts 7 years, not 14 years and so what that means is that the economy is already way overdue for a deep recession. The onset of that recession was prolonged by the Covid stimulus money which is finally drying up. The recession being predicted the past two years was always going to come, it was just a matter of when, because it was already long overdue.

FWIW, the unemployment rate has been ticking up for a year now. It was at 3.5% July 2023 and is now 4.3%. New job creation has been steadily declining for the past two years.

 

Embarrassing for you. Explains a lot. If they did daily estimates or weekly estimates your math would suggest millions of missing jobs. You’re lost dude. Lost.

 

The cynic in me believes the main reason Biden finally took action on the border is his people told him there was no way the economy was going to feed enough new jobs to cover the influx of migrants into the country. Like everything else, he reacted too late. You get a huge influx of border crossings like that over a 3 year period and it's not as if jobs just grow on trees.

 

Where in the world am I saying daily or weekly estimates?
Even if so, how in the world does that automatically suggest a loss of millions of jobs?

BLS is monthly, comes out at the start of each month and is their estimate for jobs added the month prior. Because it’s obviously partly modeled, they allow for 3 revisions of the course of 3 months as they gather more data.

Please for the love of god if your trolling, it’s no longer fun haha.

 

Look man. I am explaining to you why you can’t add up error. If you change the frequency of measurement you get a different answer. That why you show mean error. It’s an actual real thing. You just aren’t catching on why you can’t add error.

 

According to BLS, it’s not error. It’s just they have more data gained over the next 3 months that changes the total jobs for that month.


And of course you can add up error, otherwise how would you never know what needs adjusting?

 

They make estimates for the data they haven’t received and replace the estimates as the data comes in. The error is in those estimates.

When you evaluate the error over multiple time periods averages are used because they are not additive.

A simple example is you are estimating the height of a growing kid monthly. If you are 2 inches short in your estimate each month the kid isnt 2 feet taller than you though. 2 inches times 12 months. Thats what you are arguing. Now replace the kid’s height with total jobs in the US.

 

You are simply going back and forth with a butthurt Democrat. Things will likely get much worse the next 3 months and that means a certain Harris loss.