kmann wrote:You can believe what you want. If you believe the govt is lying - it's not my job to change your mind. I don't (believe they're lying), I think the statistics they put out are most likely genuine. I'll take them at face value until I have evidence otherwise.
Do you believe in the tooth fairy as well? OF COURSE
the statistics are complete fantasy. First, there's the whole "birth-death model". This is straight from the DoL website
-There is an unavoidable lag between an establishment opening for business and its appearing on the sample frame and being available for sampling. Because new firm births generate a portion of employment growth each month, non-sampling methods must be used to estimate this growth.
Translation: We have no way of knowing how many new jobs were created, so we are guessing.
-Earlier research indicated that while both the business birth and death portions of total employment are generally significant, the net contribution is relatively small and stable. To account for this net birth/death portion of total employment, BLS uses an estimation procedure with two components: the first component excludes employment losses from business deaths from sample-based estimation in order to offset the missing employment gains from business births. This is incorporated into the sample-based estimate procedure by simply not reflecting sample units going out of business, but imputing to them the same trend as the other firms in the sample. This step accounts for most of the net birth/death employment.
Translation: Not only do we guess how many jobs were created in the previous month, we now deliberately exclude a portion of the lobs lost as well.
-The second component is an ARIMA time series model designed to estimate the residual net birth/death employment not accounted for by the imputation. The historical time series used to create and test the ARIMA model was derived from the UI universe micro level database, and reflects the actual residual net of births and deaths over the past five years.
Translation: And finally, we assume a projection based on a best-fit extrapolation of data from the previous 5 years.
The entire foundation of the job creation figure is literally predicated on a guess by some Washington bean counter.
Then there's the way unemployment figure is calculated. For one thing, it doesn't take into account all of those MBA's who are working at Burger King and engineers with foriegn credentials who are driving cabs. In short, the formula does not in any way shape or form deal with people who are underemployed.
For another thing, the formula doesn't count people who have either stopped looking or simply had their benefits expire. Under the current formula, our friend cbxer55 will no longer be considered to be unemployed. I think he might disagree with the government's assessment, though.
They lie in other ways, as well. For example, all of those wounded vets laid up in VA hospitals. They are considered employed for this purpose. Prisoners aren't count at all, not even the ones who are assigned to work crews. Members of organized crime don't get counted at all either. The list goes on and on.
But that's OK. You go right ahead believing those government statistics.
The whole of human history is a refutation by experiment of the concept of "moral world order". - Friedrich Nietzsche