Live data from Hacker News

Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

cnbc.com

101–110 of 366 posts

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#101
post #93
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Average wages section of the jobs report would reflect this change. Not if someone else at the top got paid more.

If the same amount of wages are getting paid out and its merely getting reallocated as to whom, that's a very different scenario from people getting laid off to reduce labor costs. Unemployment is meant to track how many people are working, not income equality.

Perhaps we need better metrics actually tracking income inequality, because tracking employment rate without that seems pretty disingenuous as a metric of aggregate economic health.

Or rather, we should be reporting such metrics that we surely must track already together.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This response is a bit less than helpful. Could you provide an example of a metric from this diverse set that fits what the OP is asking for? I feel like there are at least two use cases from their post: * a metric that measures if people's jobs are paying enough to put food on the table * a metric that measures whether people's employment matches their education?

Your first query is simply real wages. There are several real wage metrics in the bls data set. Here is a commonly referenced one: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q Your second query is more subjective. Most people would probably point you at the U6 underemployment number as that’s the most famous one. I like the employment projections series for this kind of question though https://www.bls.gov/emp/

That real weekly wage data is basically why Trump almost and then did get reelected in one chart.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#103

The ADP payroll report is noise . It is based on the payroll data from ADP only . The assumption of this report is that companies that use ADP to process their payroll are completely representative of the entire economy and that there is no regional, sector, or company stage bias to their customers. A firm with ADP laying employees off and 3 new firms with the same number of employees being founded and using a differ…

Noise is the absence of a signal. A biased signal is fine, just account for the bias.

ADP is huge and covers a broad range of sectors. It would be a very interesting result (and a very extraordinary claim) if the employment data from non-ADP companies went in the opposite direction of ADP. I certainly see no evidence that firms underrepresented in ADP's data are hiring prodigiously.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Economists get things wrong all the time. It’s not about others not possibly have thought of it already, it’s about the fact that policy and politics is still driven by other measures that are inaccurate.

Just because economists get things wrong, does not imply that therefore they can be, and need to be, corrected by computer programmers with superficial understandings of the field. You can both be wrong.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even the good old GDP per capita covers your case. Absolutely not. If corporate revenue increases, but wages stay the same, GDP per capita goes up, yet the workers aren't any better off. All that extra money is being absorbed by the ones at the top. Median disposable household income is probably the best measure.

In this episode of how economists lie to us all…

I mean it's basically their job.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#106

We really need better ways of measuring economic health. I could lose my six-figure job, turn around, and get hired on as a server at Applebee's for minimum wage, and the "unemployment" rate would stay the same. Not to mention that it doesn't include those not actively looking for work. Either way, "full employment" doesn't mean much unless you take into account whether people are actually able to live a stable lifes…

If every ex-6-figure worker has to work at Applebee's to make ends meet... then who's eating at Applebee's?

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#107
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the same amount of wages are getting paid out and its merely getting reallocated as to whom, that's a very different scenario from people getting laid off to reduce labor costs. Unemployment is meant to track how many people are working, not income equality.

Perhaps we need better metrics actually tracking income inequality, because tracking employment rate without that seems pretty disingenuous as a metric of aggregate economic health. Or rather, we should be reporting such metrics that we surely must track already together.

This is akin to saying that we need a better metric than CPU temperature to track internet download speed.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It works ok in the short term. Note that most democracies (especially the current best performing ones) are extremely young despite the idea being ancient. You see this on smaller scales as well. Most of people's complaints about "capitalism" are really about the short sighted decisions corporate leadership often make because it has to answer to an anonymous mob of shareholders. The only thing that actually works is…

The benefit of democracy is that it has somewhat of a self-correcting mechanism build in and it functions without violence. Autocracies don't have that. You say Democracies have a short track record. While this is true in the grand scheme of things, each individual non-Democracy that came before did as well. Rulers conquered each other's countries, usurped the current leaders etc. quite regularly. I'm not sure I'd co…

Autocracies have plenty of self-correction mechanisms. Generally each level is sustained by some kind of grudging consent from the levels above and below.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#109
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure household debt is a great indicator. Someone that has a mortgage will have much more household debt than a renter, but also not have to pay rent. This would need data to contextualize.

Don't matter. You still have the debt. If you lose your job in a depression, odds are no much other people will be in the market to buy your home.

The amount of equity you have in your home matters. Most recessions do not take 20% off home values, so people with conventional loans are pretty safe. Even the Great Depression just cut valuations about 35%.

If you lose your job in a depression there will be plenty of people willing to buy assets at a discount. If you have equity in your home then your position will be net positive. About half of all mortgages have an outstanding balance less than 50% of the home's value.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#110
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Content management system guid I presume, versus a title slug that can drift during editing and publishing. Archive.today link added for the cautious.

Yeah, but WTF is bluematrix.com? If I see a bank name as a subdomain of a domain I don't recognize, alarm bells go off.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN