Comments on: Payroll data mixed despite the bullish headline job loss figure http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html a finance news and opinion site Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:52:07 +0000 hourly 1 By: Dissident Voice : Will There be Zimbabwe-Type Hyperinflation in the USA?http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5496 Dissident Voice : Will There be Zimbabwe-Type Hyperinflation in the USA? Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:05:05 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5496 [...] determination to airbrush any unpleasant news about the recession. Here’s a better summary of the unemployment numbers from Edward Harrison at Credit Writedowns: The Business Birth-Death [...] [...] determination to airbrush any unpleasant news about the recession. Here’s a better summary of the unemployment numbers from Edward Harrison at Credit Writedowns: The Business Birth-Death [...]

]]> By: Initial claims hit lowest in 5 months, continuing claims hit record - Credit Writedownshttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5466 Initial claims hit lowest in 5 months, continuing claims hit record - Credit Writedowns Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:34:53 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5466 [...] My takeaway from this is that seasonal adjustments may be driving the continuing claims figure higher and misleading analysts into believing people are not finding jobs.  The same dynamic is also apparent in the unemployment numbers where the unadjusted establishment survey showed a job increase of 319,000 in May while the seasonally-adjusted figure showed we lost 345,000 jobs.  You should note that the Birth/Death model added 220,000 jobs to the unadjusted number so the number is not as bullish as it seems (see my Friday post "Payroll data mixed despite the bullish headline job loss figure"). [...] [...] My takeaway from this is that seasonal adjustments may be driving the continuing claims figure higher and misleading analysts into believing people are not finding jobs.  The same dynamic is also apparent in the unemployment numbers where the unadjusted establishment survey showed a job increase of 319,000 in May while the seasonally-adjusted figure showed we lost 345,000 jobs.  You should note that the Birth/Death model added 220,000 jobs to the unadjusted number so the number is not as bullish as it seems (see my Friday post "Payroll data mixed despite the bullish headline job loss figure"). [...]

]]> By: Edward Harrisonhttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-7832 Edward Harrison Sat, 06 Jun 2009 16:36:48 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-7832 fundana. Point taken. This is a bit of misleading point. I did mention that non-farm payrolls INCREASED on an unadjusted basis as they had done in April as well. The aggregate add in jobs was 590,000, 446,000 of which came from the birth death model:<br><a href="http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm</a> fundana. Point taken. This is a bit of misleading point. I did mention that non-farm payrolls INCREASED on an unadjusted basis as they had done in April as well. The aggregate add in jobs was 590,000, 446,000 of which came from the birth death model:
http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm

]]> By: fundanahttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-7831 fundana Sat, 06 Jun 2009 16:21:28 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-7831 You can't add the brith/death adjustment number to the nfp number. The B/D estimate is notn seasonally adjusted while the nfp data is seasonally adjusted. You can't add the brith/death adjustment number to the nfp number. The B/D estimate is notn seasonally adjusted while the nfp data is seasonally adjusted.

]]> By: Edward Harrisonhttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5617 Edward Harrison Sat, 06 Jun 2009 10:36:48 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5617 fundana. Point taken. This is a bit of misleading point. I did mention that non-farm payrolls INCREASED on an unadjusted basis as they had done in April as well. The aggregate add in jobs was 590,000, 446,000 of which came from the birth death model:<br><a href="http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm</a> fundana. Point taken. This is a bit of misleading point. I did mention that non-farm payrolls INCREASED on an unadjusted basis as they had done in April as well. The aggregate add in jobs was 590,000, 446,000 of which came from the birth death model:
http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm

]]> By: fundanahttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5616 fundana Sat, 06 Jun 2009 10:21:28 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5616 You can't add the brith/death adjustment number to the nfp number. The B/D estimate is notn seasonally adjusted while the nfp data is seasonally adjusted. You can't add the brith/death adjustment number to the nfp number. The B/D estimate is notn seasonally adjusted while the nfp data is seasonally adjusted.

]]> By: Edward Harrisonhttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5437 Edward Harrison Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:36:48 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5437 fundana. Point taken. This is a bit of misleading point. I did mention that non-farm payrolls INCREASED on an unadjusted basis as they had done in April as well. The aggregate add in jobs was 590,000, 446,000 of which came from the birth death model:<br><a href="http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm</a> fundana. Point taken. This is a bit of misleading point. I did mention that non-farm payrolls INCREASED on an unadjusted basis as they had done in April as well. The aggregate add in jobs was 590,000, 446,000 of which came from the birth death model:
http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm

]]> By: fundanahttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5436 fundana Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:21:28 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5436 You can't add the brith/death adjustment number to the nfp number. The B/D estimate is notn seasonally adjusted while the nfp data is seasonally adjusted. You can't add the brith/death adjustment number to the nfp number. The B/D estimate is notn seasonally adjusted while the nfp data is seasonally adjusted.

]]> By: Edward Harrisonhttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5432 Edward Harrison Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:48:42 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5432 Gary, it is an increase. Here's the progression of private non-farm payrolls since the beginning of the year (in thousands): <br><br>132,302 Jan; <br>132,138 Feb; <br>132,077 March; <br>132,348 April; <br>132,667 May<br><br>The bottom was March. Gary, it is an increase. Here's the progression of private non-farm payrolls since the beginning of the year (in thousands):

132,302 Jan;
132,138 Feb;
132,077 March;
132,348 April;
132,667 May

The bottom was March.

]]> By: Garyhttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5430 Gary Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:17:43 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/06/payroll-data-mixed-despite-the-bullish-headline-job-loss-figure.html#comment-5430 "BULLISH: The headline jobs number of a 345,000 loss comes from the establishment survey and is seasonally adjusted. The unadjusted numbers were even more bullish, showing an increase of 319,000 jobs."<br><br>Did you really mean to say that the unadjusted numbers showed an "increase of 319,000 jobs" or might it have shown a "decrease of only 319,000 jobs?" I would find an increase of 319,000 jobs, even if it is unadjusted, to be insanely bullish.<br><br>Thanks “BULLISH: The headline jobs number of a 345,000 loss comes from the establishment survey and is seasonally adjusted. The unadjusted numbers were even more bullish, showing an increase of 319,000 jobs.”

Did you really mean to say that the unadjusted numbers showed an “increase of 319,000 jobs” or might it have shown a “decrease of only 319,000 jobs?” I would find an increase of 319,000 jobs, even if it is unadjusted, to be insanely bullish.

Thanks

]]>