Are the jobs numbers correct?
Previous jobs reports have been subject to huge revisions. One oddity in the latest report might indicate a future revision as well.
So, let's summarize...unemployment fell from 8.3% to 8.2% because 330,000 people left the workforce but the full unemployment number,the one that counts discouraged workers who have stopped looking for work and workers in part-time jobs who are looking for full-time jobs fell in March to 14.5% from 14.9%. This cannot be mathematically correct and is also illogical. It simply does not compute that more people (330,000) dropped out of the workforce, but the "full unemployment" rate improved from 14.9% to 14.5%.
Clearly our government's employment numbers are bogus. Why isn't the press investigating this?
Does anyone really know what is going on for real?
Unemployment, Gas prices,
The whole thing just sucks and that the whole thing in a nut shell.
Are the people who are no longer on unemplyment counted?
Those people are still looking and are not counted. When are we going to wake up and realize we are continually being bamboolzed by the media and the Democrats?
The sad thing about all of this, is that the general public has pretty much lost faith in our political process. It seems like every one in politics is only interested in getting re-elected and is not doing what is truly best for our country.
What a stupid article.
"The nation's jobs picture got a weaker-than-expected shot in the arm Friday, following a report from the Labor Department that showed the economy created 120,000 jobs in March well below analyst expectations of 200,000 newly created positions."
Maybe the truth is coming out afterall and the economy is not as "robust" as the so called "experts" would like everyone to believe. Any of course since the number came in well below the estimated 200,000 it is assumed there has to be an error. However, if the number came in above the 200,000 estimate then the "experts" would explain it as a much improved economy etc. Getting an accurate new job creation number should not be all that difficult. Since every company is required to fill out certain paperwork and then report to the government when a new employee is hired it should be a simple calculation as to the actual new hirers per month. It will be interesting to see how much "damage control" the Labor Dept does before next Monday to help eliminate a drop in the market due to the negative report. I look for them to come up with an excuse that something wasn't calculated correctly etc. and there will be a revised report showing that there were close to 250,000 jobs created so of course then the investors will "cheer" the good news and the market will "soar".
The Unemployment Rate will go to 0% if they just keep eliminating the people who have run out of eligibility for benefits. Who are they kidding? If you lose everything and have to live under a bridge you no longeer count as unemployed?
Barak Obama is the worst thing that has ever happened to the poor people in this country. He doubled the price of gas in three years and spend Billions of $ on electric cars which no poor person will ever be able to afford.
There are more people on food stamps than ever before and less people with helath insurance than before he passed Obamacare.
All of the numbers are just made up by some moron like Timmy the Geek Geitner.
Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire
This is O-BLAH-BLAH controled media at its finest, just like states can't have the same laws the feds can.( look at what was passed in Az. but shot down by the feds.)
jlum..... Didn't you hear? The recession ended 2 years ago. Just ask O-BLAH-BLAH or his lame-stream media.
I just wish the media was not so afraid of O-BLAH-BLAH, and would actually report the real news.
So when the Jobs numbers are up,-no need to question validity, but when they're down, well the numbers must be wrong- perfect.
If you understand how the BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics) estimates the unemployment rate then you might have an idea of just how “off” these numbers could be.
As for the “count” error, the BLS site says it may be as large as +/-290,000, and that is a very large “margin” of error. Unfortunately that number tends to indicate that the “Bureau” is using the population count of 290 million from the 1990 census, which is now 22 years old.
Reading through the BLS information there appears to be a 5 (Five) year lag in the application of the latest Census data. That means that every year the margin errors grow larger and larger. They never catch up to the actual population.
The 1990 Census data was not fully applied to BLS numbers until 1995. The 2000 Census data was not fully applied until 2005. So I am assuming that the 2010 Census is not currently applied to the 2012 BLS figures. So it’s always under reported either way.
The BLS computes the unemployment rate using the “CPS –Current Population Survey”. They take 60,000 homes and 110,000 people from 2025 geographic areas and the select 824 areas to be the sample set. When you cross check those numbers with their “methodology explanation” you get a completely different set of numbers used to estimate Employment and Unemployment.
The worst part of this is that the BLS states that “Since monthly unemployment totals have ranged between about 7 and 11 million in recent years, the possible error resulting from sampling is not large enough to distort the total unemployment picture.” 2008 and 2009 were not “normal years”.
Their web site says that their data was last update on 10/16/2009 and 4/13/2003 for methodology explanation.
Too many assumptions are being made on previous sample errors. Do I think the numbers are wrong …yes, yes I do.
Now are we ever going to get the true story from the stock market . you know the true numbers an so on, they only give us what they want us to see.
I wonder how long it will take congress to figure out to get around the new insider trading law?. Are they going to show us their portfolio monthly or quarterly????????
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
These companies won't soar like other plays in the sector, but they make for great income sources.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.
Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.
Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.