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

U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

barrons.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 514 posts

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#171

Post by logifail »

estearum wrote: post #154
logifail wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no longer Citation needed. POTUSes come and go, BLS figures have been suspect for a long time.

BLS figures have been suspect for a long time as of a month ago.

I'm not sure why you'd claim that. BLS figures have been revised downwards repeatedly over recent years.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/21/economy/bls-jobs-revision...

"US job growth during much of the past year was significantly weaker than initially estimated, according to new data released Wednesday.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ preliminary annual benchmark review of employment data suggests that there were 818,000 fewer jobs in March of this year than were initially reported."

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#172

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ashleyn wrote: post #157
cs702 wrote: post #53

If unemployment continues to rise, and the one-time impact on prices of tariffs leads to self-reinforcing high inflation, we'll have stagflation : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation I sure hope not , because stagflation would be extremely unpleasant for everyone. Central banks like the Federal Reserve would be forced to raise interest rates, to put stress on businesses and consumers, so businesses find themsel…

If inflation is lower than the rate the federal reserve hikes rates to, you can ride out stagflation in money market funds and other types of income-generating investments. The real pain is when it doesn't. Stocks decline, cash declines, and there really is nowhere to hide. TIPS? I-bonds? Both are indexed to the CPI, which policymakers have loudly signaled they are okay gaming and manipulating for political favour.

You’re vastly underestimating the income and political effects of stagflation. Historically speaking, one doesn’t ride it out. It’s fixed fast or the system collapses.

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#173

Post by trod1234 »

cjfd wrote: post #166
cs702 wrote: post #53

If unemployment continues to rise, and the one-time impact on prices of tariffs leads to self-reinforcing high inflation, we'll have stagflation : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation I sure hope not , because stagflation would be extremely unpleasant for everyone. Central banks like the Federal Reserve would be forced to raise interest rates, to put stress on businesses and consumers, so businesses find themsel…

[flagged]

Its hard to ascribe individual responsibility in that way when the only two choices were existentially awful.

"You elected an idiot president...", the choices were Communism, or Fascism; which is recoverable and better for people. Certainly not the former, but to be clear neither are a real choice when you vote for democracy, and not voting is a vote for both fascism/communism at the same time.

Such was a similar failure and rise of demagogues that ruined Rome.

First-passed-the-post voting is fundamentally flawed, and so is ranked choice...

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#174

Post by CGMthrowaway »

logifail wrote: post #22

Q: Hasn't the US monthly jobs figure frequently been revised downwards over recent years, regardless of which administration was in charge? (edit - see for instance Aug 2024: https://seekingalpha.com/news/4142722-why-was-there-such-a-b... )

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesnaicsrev.htm

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#175

Post by dragonwriter »

trod1234 wrote: post #173
cjfd wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Its hard to ascribe individual responsibility in that way when the only two choices were existentially awful. "You elected an idiot president...", the choices were Communism, or Fascism; which is recoverable and better for people. Certainly not the former, but to be clear neither are a real choice when you vote for democracy, and not voting is a vote for both fascism/communism at the same time. Such was a similar fai…

[flagged]

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#176

Post by JumpCrisscross »

franktankbank wrote: post #96
edoceo wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is back to basics mean here? Forgetting metrics, for a national economy, seems not good.

Incentivize our basic necessities and come down hard on fraud. If a bridge needs to be rebuilt pay to have it done. If shipping infrastructure needs to be modernized pay to have it done. If we need more mining get it done. Get it done and get it done fast. If bids are won but they go and fuck all the money away send them to jail. This is how stuff worked before people became obsessed with metrics.

> If a bridge needs to be rebuilt pay to have it done. If shipping infrastructure needs to be modernized pay to have it done

This is what they did in Weimar Germany, Erdogan’s Turkey and Argentina. You’re describing massive deficit spending and inflation.

> If bids are won but they go and fuck all the money away send them to jail

Add in Ba’athist Iraq.

Also, guess what you do to fuck over your competitors in this system? You sabotage their supply chains. The politically connected wind up with all the tenders because they’re the only ones who can build.

> This is how stuff worked before people became obsessed with metrics

Literally never how it has worked in any functioning society. When you see this sort of strong arming, it describes a society in decline. The Late Roman Empire. The British in Suez. The French in Indochine. The Russians in Ukraine.

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#177

Post by wredcoll »

pavlov wrote: post #114
franktankbank wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incentivize our basic necessities and come down hard on fraud. If a bridge needs to be rebuilt pay to have it done. If shipping infrastructure needs to be modernized pay to have it done. If we need more mining get it done. Get it done and get it done fast. If bids are won but they go and fuck all the money away send them to jail. This is how stuff worked before people became obsessed with metrics.

When exactly was this golden age of getting things done fast without metrics and corruption?

Oh yes, the famously non corrupt years of standard oil or randall hearst?

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#178

Post by logifail »

jeffbee wrote: post #133
logifail wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how can departments like BLS screw up to this extent My null hypothesis might be that the BLS works for the government, so how can they not be under (implicit) pressure to goal-seek their figures. Once the figure has been published, and widely reported, it can be revised downwards months later, few will care. The system may be broken by design.

This is the furthest thing from a null hypothesis. This is dressing your conscious biases in sciensism.

> This is the furthest thing from a null hypothesis

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it"

Q: Why would one trust initial BLS jobs figures under this - or indeed any other - administration?

> This is dressing your conscious biases in sciensism

BLS figures being revised downward month after month after month is data, not bias.

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#179

Post by nxm »

thatguy0900 wrote: post #146
baron816 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good news is that these economic problems are entirely the result of bad policies and can be reversed. If we were to also raise broad based taxes, it would allow the Fed to cut interest rates, stoking long term investment, loosen up the housing market (which would allow more people to move), lower the Federal deficit, and improve the trade balance (as if that actually mattered).

The bad news is that we're only one year into the 4 years of bad policy(if we're lucky) and the policy itself will probably continue to get worse

We survived with 30% inflation ok key goods during the Biden years due to endless spending, we’ll survive this one too. You’re welcome to short the market though if you feel strongly otherwise

Re: U.S. added 911k fewer jobs in year through March than reported earlier

#180

Post by wredcoll »

bananalychee wrote: post #70
logifail wrote: post #22

Q: Hasn't the US monthly jobs figure frequently been revised downwards over recent years, regardless of which administration was in charge? (edit - see for instance Aug 2024: https://seekingalpha.com/news/4142722-why-was-there-such-a-b... )

It's not without precedent, but the fact that initial job numbers have been consistently inflated over the last 3 years and that the magnitude of the downwards revisions is on par with 2008-2009 for two years in a row (and growing) is concerning.

How exactly were they inflated?
Post reply on HN