"MadDogDave" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.0383a4a8de913cb41afafd9840c25c48@106 2775970.cotse.net...
September 5, 2003
Layoffs Rose Sharply Last Month, Report Says
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The civilian unemployment rate improved marginally
last month -- sliding to 6.1 percent -- as companies slashed payrolls by
93,000. Friday's report sent mixed signals about the nation's overall
economic health.

August was the seventh consecutive month of cuts in payrolls, a survey
released by the Labor Department showed, indicating continuing weakness
in the job market.


Thank Jesus for President Bush!!!!!!!!!!


That's a hell of a thing to lay on Jesus' lap. What did he do to deserve
George Bush?

Notice how the unemployment rate improved...people are so disheartened
they're giving up and not bothering to report.

jps wrote:

"MadDogDave" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.0383a4a8de913cb41afafd9840c25c48@106 2775970.cotse.net...
September 5, 2003
Layoffs Rose Sharply Last Month, Report Says
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The civilian unemployment rate improved marginally
last month -- sliding to 6.1 percent -- as companies slashed payrolls by
93,000. Friday's report sent mixed signals about the nation's overall
economic health.

August was the seventh consecutive month of cuts in payrolls, a survey
released by the Labor Department showed, indicating continuing weakness
in the job market.


Thank Jesus for President Bush!!!!!!!!!!


That's a hell of a thing to lay on Jesus' lap. What did he do to deserve
George Bush?

Notice how the unemployment rate improved...people are so disheartened
they're giving up and not bothering to report.


The economy is in the crapper. Americans tell how things are going by
whether they and the people they know have jobs and any sort of job
security. So far, Bush has no answers for job creation.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

"jps" wrote in message
...
"MadDogDave" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.0383a4a8de913cb41afafd9840c25c48@106 2775970.cotse.net...
September 5, 2003
Layoffs Rose Sharply Last Month, Report Says
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The civilian unemployment rate improved marginally
last month -- sliding to 6.1 percent -- as companies slashed payrolls by
93,000. Friday's report sent mixed signals about the nation's overall
economic health.

August was the seventh consecutive month of cuts in payrolls, a survey
released by the Labor Department showed, indicating continuing weakness
in the job market.


Thank Jesus for President Bush!!!!!!!!!!


That's a hell of a thing to lay on Jesus' lap. What did he do to deserve
George Bush?

Notice how the unemployment rate improved...people are so disheartened
they're giving up and not bothering to report.

The unemployment rate is determined by surveying households. The other
figure is determined by sampling certain businesses. If you sample
households, and the results tell you there were fewer people unemployed in
August than in July, then why do the businesses report a cut in payrolls by
93,000? Simple...that survey ignores small business. Small business is
beginning to hire in pretty large numbers. If the surveyed businesses lay
off a net amount of 93,000 employees, but the unemployment rate falls, then
that means these employees are being absorbed into the job market in small
businesses not accounted for in the original survey. "Unemployment rate" is
the key figure...


I just had an interesting conversation with my dad this evening. He works
for a manufacturing company that supplies the airline industry.
Me: "How's business?"
Dad: "Had a terrible week"
Me: "Sales down?"
Dad: "No...up."
Me: "Why the bad week?"
Dad: "Our productivity is maxed out, and we can't get the product made and
out the door fast enough."
Me: "Why doesn't your manufacturing plant hire more people?"
Dad: "The plant managers want to see some more hard data showing that the
economy is improving."
Me: "Don't they know about all the orders they've been having trouble
filling?"
Dad: "Yup. But they want to make sure it's a real rebound that's taking
place before they hire back everyone they had laid off."
Me: "What are customers saying about you not getting product to 'em?"
Dad: "Some of the orders we had earlier in the year are getting cancelled."
Me: "But that will hurt your future sales...so your "managers" are
self-fulfilling their own prophecy that business might not be that good yet!
Better fire the managers and hire some Republicans that want the economy to
improve...not keep the obviously Democratic managers that are hoping the
economy flounders."
Dad: "I'm beginning to think that's the problem."

That's a micro example of what's also going on in the macro sense...and the
very reason that employment figures lag an increase in GDP by approximately
6 months.

"NOYB" wrote in message
...

"jps" wrote in message
...
"MadDogDave" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.0383a4a8de913cb41afafd9840c25c48@106 2775970.cotse.net...
September 5, 2003
Layoffs Rose Sharply Last Month, Report Says
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The civilian unemployment rate improved marginally
last month -- sliding to 6.1 percent -- as companies slashed payrolls by
93,000. Friday's report sent mixed signals about the nation's overall
economic health.

August was the seventh consecutive month of cuts in payrolls, a survey
released by the Labor Department showed, indicating continuing weakness
in the job market.


Thank Jesus for President Bush!!!!!!!!!!


That's a hell of a thing to lay on Jesus' lap. What did he do to deserve
George Bush?

Notice how the unemployment rate improved...people are so disheartened
they're giving up and not bothering to report.

The unemployment rate is determined by surveying households. The other
figure is determined by sampling certain businesses. If you sample
households, and the results tell you there were fewer people unemployed in
August than in July, then why do the businesses report a cut in payrolls by
93,000? Simple...that survey ignores small business. Small business is
beginning to hire in pretty large numbers. If the surveyed businesses lay
off a net amount of 93,000 employees, but the unemployment rate falls, then
that means these employees are being absorbed into the job market in small
businesses not accounted for in the original survey. "Unemployment rate" is
the key figure...


I just had an interesting conversation with my dad this evening. He works
for a manufacturing company that supplies the airline industry.
Me: "How's business?"
Dad: "Had a terrible week"
Me: "Sales down?"
Dad: "No...up."
Me: "Why the bad week?"
Dad: "Our productivity is maxed out, and we can't get the product made and
out the door fast enough."
Me: "Why doesn't your manufacturing plant hire more people?"
Dad: "The plant managers want to see some more hard data showing that the
economy is improving."
Me: "Don't they know about all the orders they've been having trouble
filling?"
Dad: "Yup. But they want to make sure it's a real rebound that's taking
place before they hire back everyone they had laid off."
Me: "What are customers saying about you not getting product to 'em?"
Dad: "Some of the orders we had earlier in the year are getting cancelled."
Me: "But that will hurt your future sales...so your "managers" are
self-fulfilling their own prophecy that business might not be that good yet!
Better fire the managers and hire some Republicans that want the economy to
improve...not keep the obviously Democratic managers that are hoping the
economy flounders."
Dad: "I'm beginning to think that's the problem."

That's a micro example of what's also going on in the macro sense...and the
very reason that employment figures lag an increase in GDP by approximately
6 months.



Exactly! Companies do not like to lay off workers. They want to make sure that these
are not little farts in the economy they are seeing before they hire more
workers....the last thing they want is to have to lay them off because they misread the
indicators. That is why productivity is up.

An increase in employment is the last thing a growing economy always sees. But it will
come.

Thinking people understand that. People blinded by political bigotry do not.

"Jim" wrote in message
news:Yrb6b.368926$YN5.247563@sccrnsc01...

Exactly! Companies do not like to lay off workers. They want to make
sure that these
are not little farts in the economy they are seeing before they hire more
workers....the last thing they want is to have to lay them off because
they misread the
indicators. That is why productivity is up.

WRONG! The reason productivity is up is because people are working longer
hours and taking fewer holidays in an attempt to keep their jobs and
livelyhoods.

No, actually, *you* are wrong. Productivity is a measure of total man-hours
needed to produce a product. If someone can build 2 widgets per hour
(ie--1/2 man-hour per widget), you don't get increased productivity numbers
by working that guy 50 hours per week, rather than 40 hours. You increase
productivity by figuring out a way to get that guy to build 3 widgets per
hour (1/3 man-hour per widget). Didn't you ever take a business class?





"jps" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
news:Yrb6b.368926$YN5.247563@sccrnsc01...

Exactly! Companies do not like to lay off workers. They want to make
sure that these
are not little farts in the economy they are seeing before they hire
more
workers....the last thing they want is to have to lay them off because
they misread the
indicators. That is why productivity is up.

WRONG! The reason productivity is up is because people are working longer
hours and taking fewer holidays in an attempt to keep their jobs and
livelyhoods.

"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
No, actually, *you* are wrong. Productivity is a measure of total
man-hours
needed to produce a product. If someone can build 2 widgets per hour
(ie--1/2 man-hour per widget), you don't get increased productivity
numbers
by working that guy 50 hours per week, rather than 40 hours. You increase
productivity by figuring out a way to get that guy to build 3 widgets per
hour (1/3 man-hour per widget). Didn't you ever take a business class?

And do you know for certain that your sources are measuring productivity in
this manner? Perhaps in academia but not in the commercial markets. Just
because it's how we were taught to think of defining productivity in school,
that doesn't mean it's the measure being used.

I've heard our increased productivity is indeed due to longer hours and
reduced time off.

I'd like to see your sources and what measures they're really using.

"NOYB" wrote in message
...

Notice how the unemployment rate improved...people are so disheartened
they're giving up and not bothering to report.

The unemployment rate is determined by surveying households. The other
figure is determined by sampling certain businesses. If you sample
households, and the results tell you there were fewer people unemployed in
August than in July, then why do the businesses report a cut in payrolls
by
93,000? Simple...that survey ignores small business. Small business is
beginning to hire in pretty large numbers. If the surveyed businesses lay
off a net amount of 93,000 employees, but the unemployment rate falls,
then
that means these employees are being absorbed into the job market in small
businesses not accounted for in the original survey. "Unemployment rate"
is
the key figure...

"Small business is starting to hire in pretty large numbers" but since those
figures aren't tracked, you have no proof of your theory, right?

Then where do you get your information from and how do you know that it's
not people who've exhausted their unemployment benefits?

"jps" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
...

Notice how the unemployment rate improved...people are so disheartened
they're giving up and not bothering to report.

The unemployment rate is determined by surveying households. The other
figure is determined by sampling certain businesses. If you sample
households, and the results tell you there were fewer people unemployed
in
August than in July, then why do the businesses report a cut in payrolls
by
93,000? Simple...that survey ignores small business. Small business is
beginning to hire in pretty large numbers. If the surveyed businesses
lay
off a net amount of 93,000 employees, but the unemployment rate falls,
then
that means these employees are being absorbed into the job market in
small
businesses not accounted for in the original survey. "Unemployment
rate"
is
the key figure...

"Small business is starting to hire in pretty large numbers" but since
those
figures aren't tracked, you have no proof of your theory, right?

No, the proof is in the unemployment rate. Surveyed businesses layoff
workers, yet the unemployment rate goes down. Why? Because the
unemployment rate surveys households...and that means the people in those
households are working somewhere. Where are they working? Obviously in
businesses not tracked as closely by the payroll data (ie--small
businesses).



Then where do you get your information from and how do you know that it's
not people who've exhausted their unemployment benefits?

Investors Business Daily

Patrick Fearon, an economist with Eaton Vance, says the divergence between
the unemployment rate and company payrolls stems from the way the figures
are calculated.

Payroll data are based on a survey of businesses about the number of people
they employ. The jobless rate is calculated from a poll of households asking
about respondents' employment status.

The volatile household survey showed jobs rose 147,000 in August. Household
employment is up 1.19 million so far this year, compared with the decline of
437,000 in nonfarm payrolls.

The payroll measure "probably does not do a perfect job of capturing new
start-up businesses and self employment. The household survey probably does
a better job of that," Fearon said.

He says this disparity is normal early in a recovery. Many people out of
work "strike out on their own," creating their own businesses and forming
start-ups with a small group.

Those start-ups and home businesses generally aren't included in the payroll
survey.



http://www.investors.com/editorial/feature.asp?v=9/6

NOYB wrote:
"jps" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
...

Notice how the unemployment rate improved...people are so disheartened
they're giving up and not bothering to report.

The unemployment rate is determined by surveying households. The other
figure is determined by sampling certain businesses. If you sample
households, and the results tell you there were fewer people unemployed
in
August than in July, then why do the businesses report a cut in payrolls
by
93,000? Simple...that survey ignores small business. Small business is
beginning to hire in pretty large numbers. If the surveyed businesses
lay
off a net amount of 93,000 employees, but the unemployment rate falls,
then
that means these employees are being absorbed into the job market in
small
businesses not accounted for in the original survey. "Unemployment
rate"
is
the key figure...

"Small business is starting to hire in pretty large numbers" but since
those
figures aren't tracked, you have no proof of your theory, right?

No, the proof is in the unemployment rate. Surveyed businesses layoff
workers, yet the unemployment rate goes down. Why? Because the
unemployment rate surveys households...and that means the people in those
households are working somewhere. Where are they working? Obviously in
businesses not tracked as closely by the payroll data (ie--small
businesses).



Then where do you get your information from and how do you know that it's
not people who've exhausted their unemployment benefits?

Investors Business Daily

Patrick Fearon, an economist with Eaton Vance, says the divergence between
the unemployment rate and company payrolls stems from the way the figures
are calculated.

Payroll data are based on a survey of businesses about the number of people
they employ. The jobless rate is calculated from a poll of households asking
about respondents' employment status.

The volatile household survey showed jobs rose 147,000 in August. Household
employment is up 1.19 million so far this year, compared with the decline of
437,000 in nonfarm payrolls.

The payroll measure "probably does not do a perfect job of capturing new
start-up businesses and self employment. The household survey probably does
a better job of that," Fearon said.

He says this disparity is normal early in a recovery. Many people out of
work "strike out on their own," creating their own businesses and forming
start-ups with a small group.

Those start-ups and home businesses generally aren't included in the payroll
survey.



It's a giggle to watch you grasp at any passing straw as you try to
rationalize the failures of your dumb-as-a-post president.