Minimizing the (un)employment report - The Bureau of Labor Statistics released its
January Employment Situation Report. According to the BLS, the employment situation was “essentially unchanged.” Buried in the report was the offhand mention that we had “a small January movement in nonfarm payroll employment (-17,000).” Small movement? The
expectations were for a 70,000 increase!
Omitted from the report was the
CES Birth/Death Model, which normally puts a positive spin on the employment report. Not this time! According to this model,
all sectors of the economy suffered losses, with the grand total 378,000 jobs lost in January. Maybe this is a statistical fluke, but you can imagine some bureaucrat storming into the statisticians' offices and saying,
“Fix it!” There
will be revisions in next month's report.
You may ask why the employment figures seem worse than reported.
The fact is your perceptions are closer to the truth than the reported figures. The reasons are several.
First, service jobs in restaurants and checkout lanes in grocery stores have the same weight as manufacturing and construction jobs, which pay much more.
Second, once unemployment benefits run out, those persons fall off the statistical survey. Another possible reason is that the
length of unemployment between jobs is growing.
And finally, the CES Birth/Death model has been applied in the past to provide “
statistical smoothing” of the (un)employment figures, in order to give the appearance of incrementally smaller changes.
Market Oracle The U.S. manipulates statistics? Oh, the horror!