U.S. May Payrolls Rise 75,000; Unemployment Rate 4.6%

[papau]

The labor force participation rate (employed or seeking employment)66.1 percent for a fourth month. May Conference Board survey showed a drop the percentage of consumers who said jobs were plentiful -percentage saying jobs are hard to find now highes this year, and percentage expecting better employment opportunities in the next six months fell.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000006&sid=aGXLNtbGjCgI&refer=home

U.S. May Payrolls Rise 75,000; Unemployment Rate 4.6% (Update2)
June 2 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. economy added fewer jobs than expected for a second month in May and wage growth slowed, suggesting employers were wary of stepping up hiring at a time when growth shows signs of cooling.

The 75,000 gain in payrolls followed a revised 126,000 April increase that was lower than the government initially reported (138,000), Labor Department figures showed today. Economists expected a 170,000 increase. The unemployment rate fell to 4.6 percent last month from 4.7 percent. <snip>

May's unemployment rate, which is based on a survey of households while the payrolls report comes from a survey of employers, was the lowest since July 2001. The household survey showed a 288,000 gain in employment last month.

Workers' average hourly earnings rose 0.1 percent, or 1 cent, after a revised 0.6 percent increase in April. Economists expected a 0.3 percent gain. Wages rose 3.7 percent from May 2005. <snip>

[Deja Q]

1. And I bet the jobs generated were retail.

And we know how enemployment works; after 6 months you're no longer counted.

Our national rate must be much higher than 4.7%.

[democraticinsurgent]

8. but big corps "awash in cash"

according to an article in the Columbus Dispatch earlier this week. Those big companies have so much cash they have no idea what to do with it, was the thesis of the article, which i'm unable to link to at the moment because their search engine won't work for me.

"Oh my. What are we gonna do with all this money? Dang, all the good islands are taken.

I know, how about let's just, uh, keep it!"

Unemployment 4.6%? Bah. Double it.

And so much for trickle-down ecomics.

75,000 jobs doesn't even come close to keeping up to par.

[corporatemedia]

10. Actually, no. Retail didn't do too well, but if you're interested in ....

MINING, you're all set.

"Nonfarm employment edged up in May (+75,000), and the unemployment rate
was little changed at 4.6 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S.
Department of Labor reported today. Employment continued to trend up in some
service-providing industries and in mining, while retail trade and manufac-
turing lost jobs. Average hourly earnings were up by 1 cent in May following
a gain of 10 cents in April"

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

[Darkhawk32]

2. Unemployement dropped? That's impossible.

The break-even gain in jobs is around 140,000, so how can a 75,000 gain make unemployment drop?

Answer: It can't. Cookin' the books again.

[Roland99]

4. Nothing's unpossible with this gang of thieves!

I created this chart a couple of months ago based on BLS numbers:




See that? 160,000 jobs PER MONTH are needed just to maintain equilibrium with population growth!!

Last month was 85,000 jobs SHORT!




BTW, don't forget ol' John Williams' article on unemployment:

http://www.gillespieresearch.com/cgi-bin/bgn/article/id=341

[papau]

16. Discouraged worker change would add 504000 in 2004 - where is any later

data for how much in May 2006 we should increase the number of unemployed to reflect the removal of this change in counting rules? (discouraged worker - one who was willing, able and ready to work but had given up looking because there were no jobs to be had - if more than a year out of work force - is not counted these days).

John Williams admits the lower inner city sampling for the survey is offset by corrective statistical adjustments, so that is not a problem. His opinion that the household survey is more accurate implies the household surevey's 4.6% unemployment and 288,000 job gain is more accurate than the payroll survey's 75,000 job gain. That opinion is just his opinion - and contrary to mine and many others. The fact that universe of companies in the payroll survey is steady is a source of strength, not weakness. Study after study has shown small businesses add the most jobs, and also lose the most jobs - daily, and that job growth corresponds/tracks large company growth/small company growing into being a large company.

The idea that birth/death reflects an adjustment by the BLS for decreases in payroll that might be only a company forgetting to report is Bull.

CES Net Birth/Death Model

In 2006, the CES sample includes about 160,000 businesses and government agencies drawn from a sampling frame of Unemployment Insurance tax accounts which cover approximately 400,000 individual worksites. The active CES sample includes approximately one-third of all nonfarm payroll workers. The sample-based estimates are adjusted each month by a statistical model designed to reduce a primary source of non-sampling error, which is the inability of the sample to capture, on a timely basis, employment growth generated by new business formations.
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.

Note that May 2005 adjustment was an addition to the payroll survey of 191,000 pretend jobs, and that May 2006 increase the adjustment for pretend jobs to 211,000.
Without the pretend jobs, employment dropped 161,000. Contrast this with the Household survey's 288,000 GAIN! :-(

2005 Net Birth/Death Adjustment (in thousands) Supersector Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Total 206 191 176 -72 125 50 57 21 63

2006 Net Birth/Death Adjustment (in thousands) Supersector Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
total -193 116 135 271 211

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. It's all BS!

Almost all new jobs are in the service industry and they suck compared with the jobs being lost. In addition, there are millions not being counted as "unemployed" because they have been dropped from the rolls.

[still_one]

11. I agree, except this is a pathetic number

the 75000 new jobs created does NOT even keep up with the number of jobs lost, so it is a net loss

[Lost4words]

13. I haven't had a real job in 5 years! former IT professional.

screwed out of a living wage so corp america can gain profits. After this long out of work, employers wont even look at me. My wife is earning 1/3 of her after 3 years of looking and we have taken in other members of our family who have lost everything.

Fucked by my countries profit hungry corporate government. Frankly the picture of Hadifa victims replaced with the countries top outsourcing CEOs would give me cheer.

My greatest enemy in my life,the ones who have done the most damage to my family are within our borders.

If another member of the armed services says he is fighting for freedom my head will explode. They are fighting on behalf of our corporate oppressors. And are no friend of mine.

When the class wars start count me with the proletariat!

[WI_DEM]

5. Yes, the incredible Bush economy even when they doctor the numbers

people know the truth. Is it any wonder that people don't give Bush good numbers on handling the economy or on which way the nation is moving? The reason is too many people have to work two or more jobs just to make a living and that wages are not keeping up with prices. And don't forget gas prices!

[Triana]

6. And that's according to bu$hit's New, Improved ....

..."MaketheMonkeyLookGood" method of jobs calculation. (ie: counting jobs that *might* be there, sometime later. Maybe).

[Lost4words]

7. Lies Lies and more Lies from these lying liars!

:puke:

[still_one]

9. That is pathetic, but I wouldn't be surprised if they spin it as good news

they will say that that shows that inflation is not a problem, and interest rates will not go up then

I certainly hope the people in this country realize that the real jobs have been off-shored, and the corporations for the most part are selling the country down the river with the help of bushco. November should be very interesting, and should measure how dumb the people in this country really our.

[corporatemedia]

12. "Weak jobs report brightens Street" - CNN Money

http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/02/markets/stockswatch/index.htm

See, if there were lot's of jobs, those people on Wall Street would be very unhappy.

[Lost4words]

14. we cant have wall street unhappy, they will complain to jr & co

[fasttense]

15. Fake numbers for a fake government.

Our politicians don't bother running the government anymore than they bother giving accurate information on the economy. The other day our local newspaper reported that county unemployment rate dropped to 9% from 12%. Now I ask you, how could the largest county in TN have a 12% unemployment rate while the US was at 4%. This is just BS.

And you know the county is under reporting the number of unemployed. The article said people who have not found a job in a year are no longer counted and the survey goes out to only high employment rate areas thus avoiding the inner city and rural poor.

[mike923]

17. Is there any way to audit these numbers?

If what you say is true, and can be proven, wouldn't this be another nail in the coffin for the GOP? There are huge resources available on our side, why can't someone produce a real jobs report and show where exactly they are lying in black and white?

I think it would be a huge PR boost during an election year.

[papau]

19. Audit is not the problem - numbers collected and statistics done by honest

smart folks in government.

Reviewing changes in procedure requires us knowing procedure changes - now that could use an audit -

And at the technical level, I'd especially like to know the reason why for the "birth/death" numbers, and the reason why the Household survey always overstates employment and understates unemployment.

[Robbien]

22. The 10-20m immigrants figure in this somehow

The jobs they are holding are counted as jobs, but the number of undocumented immigrants are not included in the total working population. So of course the unemployment rate would be skewed.

[leftofthedial]

18. this is the biggest load of crap

someone needs to prominently debunk the employment lies

The middle class is being methodically destroyed and almost no one is even commenting. Instead they trot out this transparently false bullshit.

[expatriot]

24. just because the middle class is being squeezed it doesn't mean we don't

all have jobs. the economy can suck at full employment, look at the quality of life under one of Stalin's five year plans.

[Psephos]

20. It's not exactly bad news

I wish there were more jobs, I wish there were better jobs, I wish we all could have free big screen tvs, too.

But I'd rather see the numbers going in this direction than the other.

Peace.

[Up2Late]

21. Wow, that some GOOD Spin Bloomberg! Way to go! Here's Reuters...

It's got a little spin in it, but not nearly as much a the Sh*t pollisers at Bloomberg.

Weak job growth in May signals cooling economy

Fri Jun 2, 2006 01:55 PM ET

By Tim Ahmann

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. employers added only 75,000 new jobs in May, the Labor Department said on Friday in a report that signaled slower economic growth and led financial markets to slash bets on further interest-rate increases.

May's nonfarm payroll gain was the weakest since hurricane-depressed October and marked the third straight month in which employment growth had slowed.

The unemployment rate, however, was a bright spot. It unexpectedly slipped to 4.6 percent -- the lowest since July 2001 -- from 4.7 percent in April.

Overall, however, the tone of the report was weak and eased concerns the U.S. economy, which grew at a sizzling 5.3 percent annual rate in the first quarter, would continue to move forward so strongly as to fuel inflation. "This conveys further evidence that a slowdown is well in hand," said Richard DeKaser, chief economist at National City Corp. in Cleveland.

(more at link)

<http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=12412457&src=rss/businessNews>

[expatriot]

23. It's that damn illegal alien invasion!

It is estimated that they make up AT LEAST 5 per cent of our workforce and growing every day... if we deport all of them, it is common sense arithmatic that we'd have a negative 0.4 percent unemployment rate!

<:sarcasm:>

On a depressing thought note, just think how strong the anti-immigrant, xenophobic forces would be if we had something like a nine or ten percent unemployment rate.

[BadgerKid]

25. Anyone listening to Bob Brinker?

He seems pretty happy with the report, but he's ignoring callers' complaints like those mentioned here. I didn't hear him acknowledge that people out of a job and not looking are not considered unemployed. When callers claimed that illegal aliens could be taking jobs away, he says that there are no statistics in this report that support that notion. He suggests that people are in disbelief and looking to "blame" someone for the low unemployment numbers and denies that someone is fudging the numbers in order to reflect well on the administration. Nancy Peolsi fans, he calls them.

It seems that the repubs are doing very well dividing people.