impartialobserver Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 Another assumption about this that is pure BS.. is that there some sort of top down management from the President or Congress. Each state has a CES analyst and what do they do... add in one column (interstate liable UI Claims). I know.. boring. At the national level, they plug data into two columns (survey results and interstate liable UI Claims) and then the model spits out 346 values (broken down by industry). This idea that someone at the top gives the directive to fudge the numbers is a sign that someone knows nothing about the process. The inputs that change each month.. are public knowledge and have to sum up to the whole. 1 Quote
CdnFox Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 38 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: Another assumption about this that is pure BS.. is that there some sort of top down management from the President or Congress. Each state has a CES analyst and what do they do... add in one column (interstate liable UI Claims). I know.. boring. At the national level, they plug data into two columns (survey results and interstate liable UI Claims) and then the model spits out 346 values (broken down by industry). This idea that someone at the top gives the directive to fudge the numbers is a sign that someone knows nothing about the process. The inputs that change each month.. are public knowledge and have to sum up to the whole. Still can't address your previous lies I take it. Well there you go. I guess you're more interested in spreading this information than you are addressing points or having a conversation. Typical lefty Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
impartialobserver Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 Every year the BLS adjusts the data from the survey based on state unemployment insurance (UI) filings which have data from nearly every employer in the country. These UI filings are a near census for all payroll employment. If the UI data gives a different picture than the survey of employers, then the filings are almost certainly right and BLS revises it data accordingly. 1 Quote
gatomontes99 Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 (edited) https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/outlook/economic-outlook/jobs-report-july-2024#section-header#1 Notices how all the job creation is in low paying services? The jobs democrats create are never the jobs you want. Edited September 3, 2024 by gatomontes99 1 Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
robosmith Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said: https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/outlook/economic-outlook/jobs-report-july-2024#section-header#1 Notices how all the job creation is in low paying services? The jobs democrats create are never the jobs you want. Your graph doesn't show ^this. VERY FEW jobs created are the "LOWER PAYING SERVICES" and NONE in Jul 2024. You need to get your eyes checked. LMAO Quote
gatomontes99 Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 19 minutes ago, robosmith said: Your graph doesn't show ^this. VERY FEW jobs created are the "LOWER PAYING SERVICES" and NONE in Jul 2024. You need to get your eyes checked. LMAO You are reading the Services (High Paying) line. The Services (Low Paying) line is where the lion share of job growth was. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
robosmith Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 4 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: You are reading the Services (High Paying) line. The Services (Low Paying) line is where the lion share of job growth was. No, I was reading the manufacturing jobs (gold) as low paying services. I need to get my eyes checked. 1 Quote
impartialobserver Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 (edited) The data is CES in the chart above. So first, it is an estimate not a count. Second, there is a reason why on a month to month basis.. the highest job gains are going to be in restaurant, hotel, personal services, and retail. It is no grand conspiracy.. Edited September 3, 2024 by impartialobserver Quote
gatomontes99 Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 2 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: The data is CES in the chart above is CES so first, it is an estimate not a count. Second, there is a reason why on a month to month basis.. the highest job gains are going to be in restaurant, hotel, personal services, and retail. It is no grand conspiracy.. It isn't a conspiracy. It is data that shows job growth isn't in the best fields. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
impartialobserver Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 (edited) 4 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: It isn't a conspiracy. It is data that shows job growth isn't in the best fields. I know your types.. the reason that employment in sectors other than manufacturing/mining/construction grows (in absolute terms) less than "services" on a month to month basis is because someone in DC is pulling levers and playing puppeteer. Edited September 3, 2024 by impartialobserver Quote
Nationalist Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 6 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: I know your types.. the reason that employment in sectors other than manufacturing/mining/construction grows (in absolute terms) less than "services" on a month to month basis is because someone in DC is pulling levers and playing puppeteer. Aren't they? Sure looks like they are. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
impartialobserver Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 2 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Aren't they? Sure looks like they are. You have quite the inflated view of politicians. Seriously.. you think that they are this smart? If so, you need to work with one. It has to do with the nature of the industries. Opening a new restaurant or expanding your staff is a whole lot easier than opening a new mine. 1 Quote
gatomontes99 Posted September 3, 2024 Report Posted September 3, 2024 10 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: I know your types.. the reason that employment in sectors other than manufacturing/mining/construction grows (in absolute terms) less than "services" on a month to month basis is because someone in DC is pulling levers and playing puppeteer. Lol...so much for being impartial. But, no. I am a facts and data guy. The data shows that manufacturing and other better paying jobs are not growing. The reason those jobs aren't growing is because businesses borrow to create those jobs (typically). Interest rates are still high, so borrowing is tougher. That creates headwinds which causes job growth to slow. That isn't my opinion. That is how the economy works. It is also something I have been saying since we started raising interest rates. Our problem was supply met with a huge cash demand. High interest rates were never going to stop inflation. Rather, high interest rates increased inflation by slowing recovery of supply. That opinion needs an asterisk. At 2.0 to 2.5% bonds started seeing increased demand. That did help with the printed money portion of the inflation. After that, it was all harm to supply. Back to jobs. Jobs are down because we raised the rates so far that it hindered growth. All we have to do is drop the interest rate (incrimentally) to 2.5% and jobs will recover. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
impartialobserver Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 (edited) 8 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Lol...so much for being impartial. But, no. I am a facts and data guy. The data shows that manufacturing and other better paying jobs are not growing. The reason those jobs aren't growing is because businesses borrow to create those jobs (typically). Interest rates are still high, so borrowing is tougher. That creates headwinds which causes job growth to slow. That isn't my opinion. That is how the economy works. It is also something I have been saying since we started raising interest rates. Our problem was supply met with a huge cash demand. High interest rates were never going to stop inflation. Rather, high interest rates increased inflation by slowing recovery of supply. That opinion needs an asterisk. At 2.0 to 2.5% bonds started seeing increased demand. That did help with the printed money portion of the inflation. After that, it was all harm to supply. Back to jobs. Jobs are down because we raised the rates so far that it hindered growth. All we have to do is drop the interest rate (incrimentally) to 2.5% and jobs will recover. Been around the block long enough to sniff out your types. Jobs are down.. what time period? july 2024 (seasonally adjusted) 158723000 june 2024 (seasonally adjusted) 158609000. Do some simple math.. the top number is greater than the bottom. Edited September 4, 2024 by impartialobserver Quote
gatomontes99 Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 23 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: Been around the block long enough to sniff out your types. Jobs are down.. what time period? july 2024 (seasonally adjusted) 158723000 june 2024 (seasonally adjusted) 158609000. Do some simple math.. the top number is greater than the bottom. Good paying jobs growth is slowing down. Growth has slowed. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
impartialobserver Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 (edited) 10 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Good paying jobs growth is slowing down. Growth has slowed. Can you quantitatively delineate what is a good job? No opinions or links. Lets see something mathematically driven that shows what is good and what is not. You also know that CES is not the best data source... Edited September 4, 2024 by impartialobserver Quote
CdnFox Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 59 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: I know your types.. the reason that employment in sectors other than manufacturing/mining/construction grows (in absolute terms) less than "services" on a month to month basis is because someone in DC is pulling levers and playing puppeteer. Oh look who's back shilling for the dems. We're talking about the jobs the dems "created". this is THEIR claim mind you - that biden had the bestest job growth ever in all of space time. And the reality is that gov't jobs got a major boost (thanks gov't spending!) and low end retail jobs got a boost. Which means the job growth wasn't terribly great. Hey, it's still growth but it's pretty lackluster. Careful, you're hypocrisy is showing. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
CdnFox Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 Just now, impartialobserver said: Can you quantitatively delineate what is a good job? Sure. A job that provides better than current average earnings and benefits (health. pension) sufficient for soemone to live a high mid or upper middle class lifestyle while still providing room for modest savings with a reasonable career path for future growth that is stable and still provides for a reasonable work life balance. Hint - MacDonald's fails. Oh - which reminds me - "Must not have to blow the boss to advance". The closer a job comes to meeting that criteria, the more you can say it's a 'good job'. Wasn't all that hard was it. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Nationalist Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 1 hour ago, impartialobserver said: You have quite the inflated view of politicians. Seriously.. you think that they are this smart? If so, you need to work with one. It has to do with the nature of the industries. Opening a new restaurant or expanding your staff is a whole lot easier than opening a new mine. I've known and worked with a few. Which is exactly why I suspect deviouness. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
gatomontes99 Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 20 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: Can you quantitatively delineate what is a good job? No opinions or links. Lets see something mathematically driven that shows what is good and what is not. You also know that CES is not the best data source... Look, I'm not going down some rabbit hole because you have a personal preference. The data is what the data is. Don't like it? Give us the data you like. You've been real vocale about that chart being wrong so show us what is so perfect in your eyes. 1 Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
impartialobserver Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 16 hours ago, Nationalist said: I've known and worked with a few. Which is exactly why I suspect deviouness. It takes intelligence, foresight, planning in order to orchestrate something like this. the ones that I have worked with have a difficult time understanding the difference between seasonally adjusted and not seasonally adjusted data. Not that complex and yet they fumble all over themselves. Quote
CdnFox Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 28 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: It takes intelligence, foresight, planning in order to orchestrate something like this. the ones that I have worked with have a difficult time understanding the difference between seasonally adjusted and not seasonally adjusted data. Not that complex and yet they fumble all over themselves. Childish to think that all politicians are brainless. I'm sure some are I know some aren't. Many are pretty intelligent people just like any people. People who say that all politicians are stupid are generally speaking the same who might say there's liars, damn liars, and staticians sooooo..... Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
impartialobserver Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 1 minute ago, CdnFox said: staticians this is too funny. Quote
CdnFox Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 7 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: this is too funny. Because it's true? Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Michael Hardner Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 22 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: this is too funny. People who believe in being static. The Opposite of Progressive I'm guessing. 2 Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.