sandnsea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-14-04 09:16 PM
Original message |
Unemployment - household survey question |
|
Does anybody follow these numbers closely?
They use a household survey to get the unemployment figures. We know that survey doesn't include people who aren't looking for work. We also know they are now including more people as self-employed who actually have desperation "jobs", like mowing lawns and selling stuff on Ebay.
Last week they released a household survey that said there were 600,000 jobs created, or something like that. In contrast to the payroll jobs numbers.
Is this the same household survey? The one where they get the unemployment percentage and the one saying all these jobs were created?
Because if that's the case, no wonder we have such a low unemployment number. I'm not looking for the hidden unemployed. I'm looking for the specific correlation between that 600,000 number and unemployment percentage.
Thanks in advance.
|
trotsky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-14-04 09:28 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I posted a similar question in the Economic Issues forum. |
|
Edited on Sat Aug-14-04 09:30 PM by trotsky
Here's a link - Frodo explained the difference. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x10468On edit: There really is no correlation - it's two completely different ways of assessing employment. The payroll figures are generally accepted as the more accurate.
|
sandnsea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-14-04 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
I know that the payroll number and the 600,000 jobs come from two different places. From Frodo's post, I'm understanding the payroll number came from the establishment survey. The 600,000 jobs came from the household survey. If that's correct, the unemployment number also comes from the household survey.
So what I want to know is something different. A while back they said they were counting more people as self-employed who used to be counted as unemployed. People mowing lawns and such. People who wanted a job and couldn't find one who were doing side work instead. I'm wondering if that's where those 600,000 "jobs" came from, how long numbers like that might have been used, and what the unemployment rate would be without those self-employed numbers.
Thanks for your help.
|
alcuno
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-14-04 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. I remember a discussion on CNBC in May (I think it was May.) |
|
It was before the monthly numbers came out. Anyways, they were saying that the Labor Department was using some new calculation and that the numbers would likely be higher because of it. Probably what you are talking about.
|
Zynx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-14-04 09:30 PM
Response to Original message |
2. The Federal Reserve says that the Household Survey is bunk. |
|
Greenspan himself said that. He only pays attention to the headline number.
|
vetwife
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-14-04 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. 32,000 jobs created for July..Ha only 600 per state and thats not |
|
counting DC and Puerta Rica. Someone should break those numbers down by counties and see how many jobs were really created ! a half a job somewhere flipping burgers with no benefits ! Sounds like a winner to me ! Yeah that is the kind of opportunity I would be dying in the desert for trying to make it to the Land of Opportunity. I think these stats should be sent to Mexico and Cuba and some poor would be immigrant's life could be saved. Not exactly like the streets are lined with Gold here. Its not that I hate America..I love America, I just hate the Right winged and George Bush and their lying tongues.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 07th 2024, 01:04 PM
Response to Original message |