Two Surveys. Two different views on job creation in JULY

[ringmastery]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/07/business/07data.html

July was a poor month for job creation in the United States.

July was an excellent month for job creation in the United States.

That tale of two employment reports is true, and it continues a trend that has persisted for two and a half years. The discrepancies have made it possible for Republicans to herald a job recovery and for Democrats to deny one exists

Both sets of statistics were issued by the government's Bureau of Labor Statistics, but they come from very different surveys. One, the establishment survey, which questions 160,000 employers, paints the bleak picture. The other, the household survey, which questions 60,000 people about whether they or other family members are working, paints the better picture.

Which is right? Because of its smaller sample size, the household survey is always more volatile, and month-to-month changes can be deceptive for that reason. So economists normally pay more attention to the establishment survey. But the fact that they differ so drastically may mean that reality lies somewhere in between.

[chicagojoe]

1. As for all this "job creation" talk...

...are jobs created by American companies in foreign countries counted in these figures ?
For example, if Halliburton hires, say, 3,000 Iraqis, are these included in the "new jobs" that are always announced ?

[AndyTiedye]

2. Do You Have to Have a Working Landline Phone to be Surveyed?

I bet a lot of unemployed people don't these days.

Their survey probably doesn't get to people who have no phone,
or only a cellphone.

[WindRavenX]

3. Job creation stats are a poor indication of the economy...

...although I am seeing signs that more people are being EMPLOYED then previously, the QUALITY of those new jobs are much, much poorer than jobs that were being created several years ago. This is, IMO, why we are seeing, under the Bush II administration, a shrinking of the middle class- those blue-collared jobs that allowed a family of four to survive well on a 40-60K a year salary w/some (perhaps not all) benefits are no longer being created. What you are seeing today are people struggling to survive on lower paying jobs and, most important, NO BENEFITS.
Sure, more people may be working. But these jobs are not allowing working people to live as they once did.
I seriously worry about this because I graduate from college in three years and I have nightmares/panic attacks about trying to survive in this world :scared:

[papau]

4. Greenspans says household survey not to be trusted on job creation

60000 phone calls to estimate a number that is around 140,000,000.

Norris at the NYT simply states the facts - but the conclusion that "reality lies somewhere in between" is Bull.

A phone question are you employed will always gin up more "yes" because of social pressure to say "yes".

[BillZBubb]

5. Exactly!

There is built in bias towards employment in the household survey. Recently unemployed would have a tendency to claim they are still employed if they are actively looking for a new job. There is a psychological stigma attached to answering yes, I am unemployed. Sort of like asking "are you a failure?"

There are also sample size problems as well as sampling bias (you've got to have a telephone and you've got to answer).

It could also be easily manipulated for political purposes. The household survey is garbage. That's why Repugs love it.

The survey of businesses is very accurate, because the businesses have to state their employment truthfully under the law. They can't fudge and it's harder to distort the data.

[tritsofme]

6. I was under the impression that the Household Survey was done

at least partly in person.

Is it purely a telephone survey?