U.S. created 501,000 fewer jobs as of March 2019 than previous reported
Source: Marketwatch
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) - The U.S. economy had 501,000 fewer jobs in March 2019 than previously reported, government revisions show, suggesting that hiring was not as strong in the past year as it seemed. Hiring was weaker in retail, restaurants and hotels. The annual revision is much larger than is typically the case. The preliminary revision in 2018, for example, was just 43,000. Every year the Bureau of Labor Statistics updates its figures based on unemployment data that nearly all employers are required to file with the states. The current revision is one of the largest ever.
Read more: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-created-501000-fewer-jobs-as-of-march-2019-than-previous-reported-2019-08-21?mod=bnbh
Just for emphasis:
The current revision is one of the largest ever.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)TheRealNorth
(9,435 posts)When there is so much winning!
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)they will make stats read any way he wants them to read....job security i guess!
FakeNoose
(32,340 posts)... was Alex Acosta. Does anybody see a pattern here?
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)Can't trust anything this administration says or does. Ever.
sandensea
(21,527 posts)Hence Cheeto's caterwauling about "left-wing" economists cooking the books against him, just the other day.
The fat bastard knew this revision was coming (plus others in the near future, no doubt), and wanted to get ahead of the story.
He's nothing if not predictable.
Peregrine Took
(7,408 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(56,888 posts)CloudWatcher
(1,831 posts)That link failed for me, this one works ...
https://tycho.usno.navy.mil/simpletime.html
Humor: it was wrong!
The page took a few seconds to load the first time, and it was off by about 4 seconds from my NTP-sync'd Macbook. I reloaded the web page and now the web animated display is in sync with the clock on my Mac.
I.e. the animation is cute, but it does not take into account network delays and doesn't correct itself after starting up.
Not sure how I can blame this on Trump, other than lack of accountability/expertise at all levels.
mahatmakanejeeves
(56,888 posts)I'm using Google Chrome on a Dell laptop. I have had issues with government (and one other) URLs that had to have MSIE or Edge or whatever it's called now to work right.
CloudWatcher
(1,831 posts)Interesting! Yes, your URL is fine. It looks like a DNS server is sometimes failing on the name lookup for www.usno.navy.mil. I'm guessing there is/was a ".mil" DNS server being very very slow or just returning no-such-name for it. I had it fail here and also on a virtual linux system that I test with out in the cloud. But kicking DNS a couple of times eventually worked. Ah, and it also (a few times) failed for tycho.usno.navy.mil. A puzzle!
Btw, thanks for the link, pretty cool site (when DNS lets me into it)
onenote
(42,374 posts)ProudMNDemocrat
(16,481 posts)durablend
(7,416 posts)"LYING FAKE MEDIA TRYING TO TEAR DOWN OUR BIGLY GREATEST ECONOMY!!!! BIGGEST JOBS EVER!!!!"
DBoon
(22,285 posts)It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday [
] it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it. [...] The eyeless crature at the other table swallowed it fanatically. passionately, with a furious desire to track down, denounce, and vaporize anyone who should suggest that last week the ration had been thirty grams. Syme, too-in some more double complex way, involving doublethink-Syme, swallow it. Was he, then, alone in the possession of a memory?
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/8887641-it-appeared-that-there-had-even-been-demonstrations-to-thank
That quote from 1984 came immediately to mind
Hugin
(32,778 posts)They're lying to us.
machoneman
(3,951 posts)How do we know this? Because the OrangeFueher accused our last real and duly elected President Obama of doing the very same thing.
Except Obama and his professional staff would have never done this.
Projection much, Trumpy?
Oddly, this will still all come out in the wash as their scramble to hide the real data will not stop the coming recession. And even Wall Street, that bastion of red voters, can't be fooled by these sophomoric attempts to hide the truth!
lapfog_1
(29,166 posts)The week I started there was orientation for new hires... 137 in that week alone...
One of the largest new hire groups in the companies history.
Now... 3 quarters later... there has been a hiring freeze for the last 8 months... and very few replacement hires for people who retired or moved on to other companies.
We are preparing for a recession, even though last quarter was a bang up quarter for us... higher gross income, better margins, flat expenses...
SweetieD
(1,660 posts)Cover up. Who knows what the next few months revisions will be.
Meadowoak
(5,516 posts)Picture. Expect lots of fake numbers in the coming year. They are desperately trying to hide the fact that a recession is near.
Javaman
(62,439 posts)queue the rant by the orange asshole.
but the more he screams, the worse it gets.
we are heading head first into a recession and if the orange asshole pulls another crooked election, I am going on record to say, we are going to hit a depression.
bucolic_frolic
(42,663 posts)It's a strategy. Now the lying can continue with the greatest jobs gains ever. This has quintessential Trump written all over it.
ffr
(22,645 posts)What you see with your own eyes doesn't jibe with what our government says is happening.
Sounds like a cover-up to me to fool enough people into casting ballots for the next Recession Republican.
Freethinker65
(9,930 posts)mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)There's basically never 500,000K jobs created in one month, period, much less the numbers being off by that much. Then the article talks about annual numbers, and 'total number of jobs', not just 'newly created jobs'.
I can't make heads or tails of what's going on by the excerpt, and the excerpt is so poorly written I don't care to read the rest frankly.
NickB79
(19,111 posts)Basically, from March 2018-March 2019, we added 500K fewer jobs that we originally thought.
So say we thought we added 3.5 million jobs in a year. In reality it was only 3 million.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Sounds to me like there was 500,000 less people employed overall in the Month of March, 2019 (a -.3% downward reduction) than the initial estimate.
These are not 'jobs created' numbers, other than tangentially.
Headline doesn't actually match the story.
cstanleytech
(26,080 posts)Clarity2
(1,009 posts)And retail/restaurant/hotel: people are spending less and traveling less. It was inevitable. They gave all the tax cuts to the wealthy. The wealthy are spending on premium retailers. The low and middle class are reigning in spending. It's no surprise Walmart is doing so well. People are trying to stretch their dollars.
global1
(25,167 posts)I'm guessing that he'll be saying that these numbers are fake.
Judi Lynn
(160,215 posts)DrToast
(6,414 posts)The numbers get revised every year. Larger revisions tend to occur around turning points in the business cycle.
If Trump was lying about the numbers, then why would they release corrections?!
Good lord....I thought only the right was susceptible to crazy conspiracies. Guess not.
progree
(10,864 posts)and all the tons of statistics that go with it ( www.bls.gov ) and they also do the annual revisions. It's not like "the Trump administration" produces the jobs report, and some kind of media watch dog or some Inspector General or other knight in shining armor or some such does the revisions, as some seem to think.
I dont trust the BLS numbers!
Well, the BLS just released their annual revisions that involved a decreased job count.
Oh, Im sure those numbers are accurate.
qazplm135
(7,447 posts)you don't lie to then reveal it. What's the point of that, it's worse than just putting the numbers out straight.
wolfie001
(2,131 posts)Donald dump and his fake economy.
progree
(10,864 posts)Job Growth in 2018 Slower Than We Thought, Kevin Drum, political blogger, MotherJones website, 8/21/19
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/08/job-growth-in-2018-slower-than-we-thought/
Tweet from Gregory Daco - with a graph New data reveals slower employment growth (we extrapolated revisions) going into 2020.
Link to tweet
/photo/1
Don't ask me what this means:
" (we extrapolated revisions) going into 2020."
The graph clearly doesn't go any further than July 2019 (well maybe August 2019 but I doubt they have any kind of August numbers)
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)As someone who is older than dirt. Seen this disappearing Jobs Thing at least four times. Only difference,truth in reporting. The Racist Accused Rapist said from the get go,he would Juice the Numbers. After all,it is a Sales point of bragging how great he is and the USA needs to be the greatest.
After six decades of doing Business to Business Sales and Services,one sees the real truth on the ground. Sorry to say,this shit show started with the GOP Tax give away. You can only suck just so much out of people's wallets with out a major economic disaster.
progree
(10,864 posts)All emphasis mine -Progree
https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesprelbmk.htm
CES Preliminary Benchmark Announcement
In accordance with usual practice, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is announcing the preliminary estimate of the upcoming annual benchmark revision to the establishment survey employment series. The final benchmark revision will be issued in February 2020 with the publication of the January 2020 Employment Situation news release.
Each year, the Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey employment estimates are benchmarked to comprehensive counts of employment for the month of March. These counts are derived from state unemployment insurance (UI) tax records that nearly all employers are required to file. For national CES employment series, the annual benchmark revisions over the last 10 years have averaged plus or minus two-tenths of one percent of total nonfarm employment. The preliminary estimate of the benchmark revision indicates a downward adjustment to March 2019 total nonfarm employment of -501,000 (-0.3 percent).
Preliminary benchmark revisions are calculated only for the month of March 2019 for the major industry sectors in table 1. The existing employment series are not updated with the release of the preliminary benchmark estimate. The data for all CES series will be updated when the final benchmark revision is issued [in February 2020 -Progree].
Table 1 shows the March 2019 preliminary benchmark revisions by major industry sector. As is typically the case, many of the individual industry series show larger percentage revisions than the total nonfarm series, primarily because statistical sampling error is greater at more detailed levels than at an aggregated level.
One has to click the link to see the table -- it doesn't paste in a readable way here.
EDITED TO ADD:
Here's the job series they are talking about: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
anyway they haven't changed it (as indicated in the BLS announcement above, they aren't revising the series until February 2020) -- just to check, I compared the March and July numbers with what I had previously downloaded when the jobs reports came out (as for the March one, I looked at the May jobs report that includes March in Table B-1 after the usual 2 revisions they make).
(to see monthly changes: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth )
herding cats
(19,549 posts)Which implies a definite slowing down of growth. It's not light our hair on fire time, but Powell is going to be cutting rates more aggressively.
progree
(10,864 posts)Last edited Wed Aug 21, 2019, 07:54 PM - Edit history (1)
This was created back on August 2 when the July numbers were reported:
Job growth has already slowed down in 2019 so far.
Summary: Average monthly net new jobs created
220,000 Obama's last 30 months (includes all of January 2017)
191,000 Trump's 30 months (February 2017 through July 2019)
165,000 2019 so far (January through July)
141,000 February through July 2019
Job numbers: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
Monthly changes: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth
And yes yes, the unemployment rate is at about 50 year lows, but note that the prime age (25-54) labor force participation rate is below the pre-Great Recession average, going back to about 1987. (And it dropped another 0.2% in July)
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300060
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=12256909
############################################################
To revise, I guess the 501,000 revision is for the 12 month period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2019 (9 months in 2018, and 3 months in 2019)
and like you say that's about 42,000/month average. So I'd revise the "Trump's 30 months" above by 501,000 total fewer jobs (which over 30 months comes to 16,700 fewer jobs/month average)
and revise the "2019 so far" by 501,000/12 * 3 months = 125,250 total fewer jobs (which over 7 months comes to 17,893 fewer jobs per month average)
and the "February through July 2019" by by 501,000/12 * 2 months = 83,500 fewer total jobs (which over 6 months comes to 13,917 fewer jobs per month average)
or something.
If so, it would look something like:
220,000 Obama's last 30 months (includes all of January 2017)
174,300 Trump's 30 months (February 2017 through July 2019)
147,000 2019 so far (January through July)
127,000 February through July 2019
The above isn't final -- I will have to work with the actual job numbers rather than working with the rounded averages from my first table, but should be reasonably close unless I made a big boo boo. And of course assuming that the 501,000 downward revision applies to the period April 2018 through March 2019. (and I can only assume the amount of the revision each month is the same, given no other information).
EDITED 402p ET - corrected Trump's 30 months in above from 178,000 to 174,300.
EDITED 755p ET - See post #56 -- they will be revising the 12 monthly numbers January through December of 2019
So it looks like the entire 501,000 revision (if that number holds) will all be in the 2019 numbers. So what I did above is not quite right.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)I.E. instead of 150,000,000 people being employed in March 2019, there was really only 149,500,000 people employed that month (numbers are for example only).
Correct?
progree
(10,864 posts)I guess for this one, they focused on getting a more comprehensive and accurate total non-farm payroll employment count for the month of March.
I've never studied this benchmark revision stuff before -- I've been aware of it, and know that a year's worth of numbers at https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
changes and they make an announcement that I see when I read the report each Februrary ...
The January 2020 Employment Situation news release comes out the first Friday of February (well usually but not always the first Friday).
Here is the one from early February of 2019 published with the January 2019 Employment Situation that I downloaded when it came out -- http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
Unfortunately that URL is the latest release, in this case the July 2019 situation released Aug 2. I don't know how to find the older releases. The only reason I have the January 2019 Employment Situation is because I downloaded and saved it at the time.
Anyhoo, here it is:
Revisions to Establishment Survey Data
In accordance with annual practice, the establishment survey data released today have been
benchmarked to reflect comprehensive counts of payroll jobs for March 2018. These counts are derived
principally from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), which counts jobs covered
by the Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax system. The benchmark process results in revisions to not
seasonally adjusted data from April 2017 forward. Seasonally adjusted data from January 2014 forward
are subject to revision. In addition, data for some series prior to 2014, both seasonally adjusted and
unadjusted, incorporate other revisions.
The total nonfarm employment level for March 2018 was revised downward by 1,000 (-16,000 on a not
seasonally adjusted basis, or less than -0.05 percent). The absolute average benchmark revision over the
past 10 years is 0.2 percent.
The effect of these revisions on the underlying trend in nonfarm payroll employment was minor. For
example, the over-the-year change in total nonfarm employment for 2018 was revised from +2,638,000
to +2,674,000 (seasonally adjusted). Table A presents revised total nonfarm employment data on a
seasonally adjusted basis from January to December 2018.
All revised historical establishment survey data are available on the BLS website at
www.bls.gov/ces/data.htm. In addition, an article that discusses the benchmark and post-benchmark
revisions and other technical issues is available at www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesbmart.htm.
Table A. Revisions to total nonfarm employment, January to December 2018, seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
And then it has for each month of 2018, January, February, ... , December:
Level as previously published
Level as revised
Difference
Over the month change as previously published
Over the month change as revised
Difference
slumcamper
(1,603 posts)Scruffy1
(3,239 posts)Wouldn't loo0k good on your resume if tou were caught cheating. Even the Koch brothers appointee in charge of BLS is covering his ass. Time for an investigation.
exboyfil
(17,857 posts)Even for back fills now. My boss is stuck with three open reqs.
IronLionZion
(45,256 posts)GOP claimed all these numbers were fake during the Obama years.
mahatmakanejeeves
(56,888 posts){edited} I see progree already did this: Found this from BLS.gov itself
Announcement 2019 CES Preliminary Benchmark Revision
CES Preliminary Benchmark Announcement
In accordance with usual practice, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is announcing the preliminary estimate of the upcoming annual benchmark revision to the establishment survey employment series. The final benchmark revision will be issued in February 2020 with the publication of the January 2020 Employment Situation news release.
Each year, the Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey employment estimates are benchmarked to comprehensive counts of employment for the month of March. These counts are derived from state unemployment insurance (UI) tax records that nearly all employers are required to file. For national CES employment series, the annual benchmark revisions over the last 10 years have averaged plus or minus two-tenths of one percent of total nonfarm employment. The preliminary estimate of the benchmark revision indicates a downward adjustment to March 2019 total nonfarm employment of -501,000 (-0.3 percent).
Preliminary benchmark revisions are calculated only for the month of March 2019 for the major industry sectors in table 1. The existing employment series are not updated with the release of the preliminary benchmark estimate. The data for all CES series will be updated when the final benchmark revision is issued.
Table 1 shows the March 2019 preliminary benchmark revisions by major industry sector. As is typically the case, many of the individual industry series show larger percentage revisions than the total nonfarm series, primarily because statistical sampling error is greater at more detailed levels than at an aggregated level.
{snip the charts}
Last Modified Date: August 21, 2019
{more editing:}
Start here to see the archival data: Current Employment Statistics - CES (National)
Go over to the left hand side of the page. There's a column of topics. Go down the column:
BROWSE CES
SEARCH CES
CES TOPICS
Under CES TOPICS, click on BENCHMARK.
You'll go to Current Employment Statistics - CES (National) Tables Created by BLS - Benchmark Information
In that category, click on Archived Benchmark Articles
They have .pdfs going back to March 2002.
HTH.
Thanks for the thread, UpInArms. Good job.
progree
(10,864 posts)that are widely headlined by the media every month when it comes out (usually the first Friday of the month)
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
anyway they haven't changed it (as indicated in the BLS announcement above, they aren't revising the series until February 2020) -- just to check, I compared the March and July numbers with what I had previously downloaded when the jobs reports came out (as for the March one, I looked at the May jobs report that includes March in Table B-1 after the usual 2 revisions they make).
(to see monthly changes: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth )
MarkmBha1
(31 posts)Hurry, Speaker Pelosi.
mahatmakanejeeves
(56,888 posts)Start here to see the archival data: Current Employment Statistics - CES (National)
Go over to the left hand side of the page. There's a column of topics. Go down the column:
BROWSE CES
SEARCH CES
CES TOPICS
Under CES TOPICS, click on BENCHMARK.
You'll go to Current Employment Statistics - CES (National) Tables Created by BLS - Benchmark Information
In that category, click on Archived Benchmark Articles
They have .pdfs going back to March 2002.
area51
(11,868 posts)knows this economy is bad.
NoMoreRepugs
(9,260 posts)are employed at mandatory retirement establishments how does that figure into the job creation/loss numbers??
duforsure
(11,882 posts)When he claims the opposite. We better hope something is done before he turns into a depression.hopefully 5 or more real republicans switch party and dump Moscow Mitch, and change the direction trump is taking this country.
wiggs
(7,788 posts)Bengus81
(6,907 posts)I can see it where I live,there is NO BOOMING economy.
AKing
(511 posts)might be what's scaring the crap out the orange menace.
Nitram
(22,671 posts)Trump's predictable response.