Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 366 posts

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

#341

Post by danaris »

hellojesus wrote: post #330
danaris wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What independent media? Mainstream media companies are owned by very wealthy people, who vote Republican, and put their thumbs on the scales over and over again. You can see that in a myriad of different ways, but at no time in recent memory has it been more blatant than during the last election cycle, with events like Bezos forcing the Washington Post to issue no endorsement rather than endorsing Harris. Like, you c…

There is bias in all media. I used independent media to mean the plethora of single or small member operations that publish their findings on their own blogs, where they are not beholden to shareholders or investors. There are also many emerging podcasts which either directly interview candidates or at least discuss the impacts of policy beyond the nonquestions presented by mainstream journalists. For example, how ma…

> I used independent media to mean the plethora of single or small member operations that publish their findings on their own blogs, where they are not beholden to shareholders or investors.

> The Washington Post is independent media.

You wanna run that by me again, chief?

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

#343

Post by hellojesus »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #337
hellojesus wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is bias in all media. I used independent media to mean the plethora of single or small member operations that publish their findings on their own blogs, where they are not beholden to shareholders or investors. There are also many emerging podcasts which either directly interview candidates or at least discuss the impacts of policy beyond the nonquestions presented by mainstream journalists. For example, how ma…

> The Washington Post is independent media. If you consider WP to be independent, then which news organizations do you consider not independent? Because I think most people define independent as "not owned or controlled by a billionaire".

I used it to mean news not published on behalf of someone else, so I was meaning one to small team operations. WAPO was my non-independent reference, but in the context of it publishing Bezos-directed articles, it is independent of non-Bezos direction.

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

#344

Post by hellojesus »

danaris wrote: post #341
hellojesus wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is bias in all media. I used independent media to mean the plethora of single or small member operations that publish their findings on their own blogs, where they are not beholden to shareholders or investors. There are also many emerging podcasts which either directly interview candidates or at least discuss the impacts of policy beyond the nonquestions presented by mainstream journalists. For example, how ma…

> I used independent media to mean the plethora of single or small member operations that publish their findings on their own blogs, where they are not beholden to shareholders or investors. > The Washington Post is independent media. You wanna run that by me again, chief?

WAPO is independent when discussing how it publishes with respect to Bezos. He is the leader to the small org.

Originally I used it to refer to non mainstream orgs. That was a mistake on my part.

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

#346

Post by jklinger410 »

lovich wrote: post #159
jklinger410 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You of course know that we have a diverse set of metrics for unemployment that capture all of what you are talking about right? If I could never see another passive aggressive response like this again I would die happy.

Active aggression is looked down upon in this forum

How about no aggression at all.

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

#347

Post by pkaye »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #292
pkaye wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The U6 unemployment rate is supposed to cover those who are underemployed. What is usually reported is the U3 unemployment rate which is closest to that used internationally as defined by ILO. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE

Supposed to, but doesn't. The U6 rate includes two new things: part-time workers, and a very strangely-defined category: people who are NOT working at ALL, AND were looking for work previously, AND have stopped looking for 4+ weeks. It doesn't capture the common on-the-street definition of the word "underemployment", such as a tech worker flipping burgers at mcdonald's. Perhaps that category is simply to hard or expe…

Seems like its studied and there are many types of underemployment and they each have difference causes. Its probably tracked somewhere by economists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underemployment

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

#348

Post by amy214 »

ajmurmann wrote: post #166
shafyy wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even better one: real wages, and income and wealth inequality.

Why does wealth inequality matter? If my real wealth doubles and Elon's real wealth doubles, inequality went up, yet everyone is tremendously better off. I think we are using inequality as a very bad proxy for poverty but we have much better metrics for that. I suspect people just dislike it for emotional reasons. I want to point out that Sweden has more billionaires per capita than the US. Yet everyone is fine with…

>Why does wealth inequality matter? If my real wealth doubles and Elon's real wealth doubles, inequality went up, yet everyone is tremendously better off.

You forgot to mention, also the cost of everything doubles and maybe kicks off some good ole hyperinflation

Wealth inequality means all the investment and excess income goes to the top 0.0001%, rather than the average person. Whereas now this may support he average person's purchase of a home, or retirement, or similar, this now supports the billionaire's purchase of a million homes to rent to the common man, earn a fixed profit, to launch rocket ships with a head, two spheres at the base, and veins, where the billionaire with the biggest, longest, firmest rocketship is the winner! That, instead of people having houses and a retirement.

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

#349

Post by al_borland »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #328
al_borland wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elsewhere in the comments it mentions that ADP is weighted more toward the private sector, while BLS is more representative of government jobs. These two things don’t need to be in lockstep.

BLS tracks both numbers, and the private still diverges quite a bit. We saw this again in July. ADP number was -33k private sector jobs, BLS showed growth of 74K for private sector, so massive 100k delta in just the private sector number.

That is quite the delta, but why is it assumed BLS is the more correct one?

From the BLS site on their methodology[0]:

> The Current Employment Statistics (CES) program, also known as the payroll survey or the establishment survey, is a monthly survey of approximately 121,000 businesses and government agencies representing approximately 631,000 worksites throughout the United States.

> All new samples are solicited by computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI), and data are collected for the first 5 months via this mode. After the initiation period, many sample units are transferred to one of several less costly reporting methods that are self-initiated by the respondent.

How is a survey from 121k businesses better than the actual payroll data from a company handling 460k companies[1]?

Isn’t the larger sample generally considered better? Isn’t source data generally considered better than a phone survey of self-reporting?

Looking at the two methodologies, it sounds like BLS data is noise, not ADP.

[0] https://www.bls.gov/bls/empsitquickguide.htm

[1] 2022 data https://mediacenter.adp.com/2022-03-02-ADP-National-Employme...

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

#350

Post by BurningFrog »

MangoToupe wrote: post #81
BurningFrog wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDP is fairly easy to measure, and since a society normally consumes as much as it produces, it's a pretty good measure of average economic health. You're right that there is more nuance you'd wish to see, but it's harder to measure, and I don't know how much it's normally worth.

> it's a pretty good measure of average economic health Median economic health strikes me as far more interesting than mean. I don't really care how well rich people are doing.

Perhaps, but until there is a way of measuring that, GDP/person wins by existing.
Post reply on HN