FED says 2 million lost jobs correct - GOP's Household survey gain wrong

[papau]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/22/business/yourmoney/22view.html

ECONOMIC VIEW
Two Tales of American Jobs
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS


<snip>The puzzle is the enormous divergence between the two surveys that are used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to measure job creation and unemployment. The payroll survey, which is based on a monthly poll of 400,000 employers, shows a loss of more than two million jobs since 2001. The household survey, based on questions posed to people in 50,000 households, shows an increase of more than 500,000 jobs over the same period.<snip>

The household survey also seems to support a political theory: that many people dropped from the company payrolls are not unemployed but rather self-employed. While the payroll survey suggests economic malaise, the household survey implies entrepreneurial energy.<snip>
Unfortunately for the optimists, the Federal Reserve has just thrown cold water on the household data. It concludes that the gloomy payroll data is essentially accurate and that the household survey is probably off base.<snip>

The Fed's conclusion was that the household survey's results have been inflated by overestimates of population growth.<snip>

Indeed, the Bureau of Labor Statistics lowered its population estimate in January. Plugging the new estimate into the previous household surveys, the bureau found nearly half the apparent increase in jobs during the last three years vanished.<snip>

[seasat]

1. The employment survey can also overestimate jobs.

The problem with conservatives criticizing the establishment survey is that it may be an overestimate. They only count if there is a job at a particular company while the household survey counts if an individual is employed. If that person has two jobs, then the establishment survey will count them twice while the household survey will only count them once.

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. I think these are the revised figures from the Household Survey

(all figures seasonally adjusted, in thousands):

labor force+non-labor force but want a job:
Jan 2001 143787+4407=148194
Jan 2004 146863+4747=151610

employment:
Jan 2001 137790
Jan 2004 138566

'real' unemployment rate:
Jan 2001 7.0%
Jan 2004 8.6%

For employment to have kept pace with those wanting a job, there would need to be another 2.4 million jobs, now.