Could some who follow statistical irregularities, take advantage of relative unawareness of the many, prior to collective realization?

There’s been some suggestions that the payrolls report

had been distorted by the way the Bureau of Labor Statistics

accounts for business births and deaths

 

There’s been talk that the birth/death model

 a little-noted detail in the monthly report

 came in with a huge statistical discrepancy for this month

 effectively adding as many as 220,000 jobs to the reading

 

In a conference call with reporters, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis

...insisted the BLS number was correct

 and that no changes would be needed

 

Market Reaction Hints At False Note In Jobs Report

Bob O'Brien

Barrons, June 5, 2009

  

 

 

What is the likelihood

that the Bureau of Labor Statistics Birth/Death adjustment

which guesstimates employment at new businesses

added 220,000 hypothetical jobs in May 2009

including 43,000 new construction positions

as new small business loan availability cratered

77,000 in Leisure and Hospitality jobs

as hotel occupancy hit new lows

and 7,000 Financial Services positions

 

if 174,000 jobs were estimated in May 2008?

   

Is it conceivable

that the US created more construction and leisure/hospitality jobs

in April and May of 2009

than in April & May of 2002, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 2008

considering current economic circumstances?

 

 

Birth Death

Get your facts first

and then you can distort them as much as you please

 

Mark Twain

 

If US GDP grew 2% in 2007

as the economy created 1,300,000 new jobs

 

and 2008 GDP growth was 1.3%

but the economy lost 2,600,000 jobs

 

how could the Bureau of Labor Statistics

Birth/Death job growth benchmark guestimate revision

in January 2008

 

only fall to 356,000

 

from 378,000 in 2007?

 

A man generally has two reasons for doing a thing

one that sounds good and a real one

 

J P Morgan

 

Is it conceivable

that the Birth/Death adjustment

could add 904,000 hypothetical jobs in 2008

on top of 883,000 in 2007?

 

The Birth Death Adjustment and Unemployment

If monthly unemployment appears to have peaked in January 2009

coincident

with the Birth/Death Adjustment’s semi-annual benchmark revision

which subtracted 356,000 jobs (Month 13)

 

could the appearance of cyclical low water mark be misconstrued

if the Birth Death Adjustment added 134,000 jobs in February

114,000 in March

226,000 April

and 220,000 in May as the unemployment rate spiked?

   

The great majority of mankind

are satisfied with appearance as though they were realities

and are often more influenced by the things that seem

than those that are

 

Niccolo Machiavelli