If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Buzzfeed)   The monthly U.S. jobs report is wrong ... every month   (buzzfeed.com) divider line 59
    More: Followup, U.S., Bureau of Labor Statistics  
•       •       •

3794 clicks; posted to Business » on 11 Mar 2013 at 9:48 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-11 09:51:51 AM  
Goes to who the media will always lie to you.
 
2013-03-11 09:52:26 AM  
who = show
 
2013-03-11 09:53:44 AM  
"In other words, if you want to know what today's jobs report means for the economy about ANYTHING, reading the headlines is no more useful than flipping a coin."

FTFTFA
 
2013-03-11 09:58:21 AM  
Who am I to question the hard-hitting BuzzFeed journalism. Hey, is that 12 cats who hate their jobs up next?
 
2013-03-11 10:02:13 AM  
I'm just gonna take this chance to complain about buzzfeed links that I can't comment on (featured partners).
 
2013-03-11 10:08:29 AM  
It is Obama's job to create jobs. At least that is what he wants you to believe, citizen. If the numbers are down he is not doing his job.

Drink the Kool Aid, please, gullible citizen.
 
2013-03-11 10:11:50 AM  
That's why it's called an estimate
 
2013-03-11 10:11:52 AM  
Stock market and commodities rising, falling, then rising again. Enjoy the Dow roller coaster. Gold up, silver down. This is madness.
 
2013-03-11 10:19:42 AM  

Lost Thought 00: That's why it's called an estimate


Is there any difference between this and any other early economic projections?
I don't get the point of this article, if there is one.
 
2013-03-11 10:23:00 AM  

jso2897: Lost Thought 00: That's why it's called an estimate

Is there any difference between this and any other early economic projections?
I don't get the point of this article, if there is one.


Well, yeah, but what do you think about the twelve angry cats who hate their bosses?
 
2013-03-11 10:49:24 AM  
So, how can the official unemployment be going down while the jobs situation is getting worse?

Have a look at the labor participation rate.

Have a look at part time jobs vs. full time jobs.
 
2013-03-11 11:05:13 AM  
Then why bother? Why can't we put a metric into place that actually means something? I don't want feel goodies, I want REAL NUMBERS!
 
2013-03-11 11:05:22 AM  
Jobs numbers are revised.  Thanks for that hard-hitting analysis, Willie Herman, BuzzFeed Data Scientist.

Up next, an investigative bombshell - GDP numbers are revised.
 
2013-03-11 11:09:46 AM  

ajgeek: Then why bother? Why can't we put a metric into place that actually means something? I don't want feel goodies, I want REAL NUMBERS!


They do have an accurate metric, but it takes 3-6 months to collect the data. At which point it isn't very useful for prescriptive policy changes.
 
2013-03-11 11:36:29 AM  

ajgeek: Then why bother? Why can't we put a metric into place that actually means something? I don't want feel goodies, I want REAL NUMBERS!


So watch Fox News. It's the only real way to be infromed.
 
2013-03-11 11:44:22 AM  

Pick: It is Obama's job to create jobs. At least that is what he wants you to believe, citizen. If the numbers are down he is not doing his job.

Drink the Kool Aid, please, gullible citizen.


I can never tell if you're trolling or just being sarcastic.

But PLEASE show me where "jobs" are even mentioned in the Constitution.
 
2013-03-11 11:56:21 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: Pick: It is Obama's job to create jobs. At least that is what he wants you to believe, citizen. If the numbers are down he is not doing his job.

Drink the Kool Aid, please, gullible citizen.

I can never tell if you're trolling or just being sarcastic.

But PLEASE show me where "jobs" are even mentioned in the Constitution.


"In the final, dark days of the second millennium, there shall come a dark angel. And he shall be called "Jobs".
He will be subtle, and wicked, and he shall enthrall the hearts of men with bloody rivers of useless gadgets, and mankind shall become enslaved forever"
O, wait. That's the Bible.
 
2013-03-11 11:58:37 AM  

Lost Thought 00: ajgeek: Then why bother? Why can't we put a metric into place that actually means something? I don't want feel goodies, I want REAL NUMBERS!

They do have an accurate metric, but it takes 3-6 months to collect the data. At which point it isn't very useful for prescriptive policy changes.


I find it interesting that the revised numbers are almost universally better than the initial estimates. Any idea why that's the case?

/asking because it sounds like you might actually know something about this
//some of these comments don't even seem remotely related to this thread...
 
2013-03-11 12:00:06 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Jobs numbers are revised.  Thanks for that hard-hitting analysis, Willie Herman, BuzzFeed Data Scientist.

Up next, an investigative bombshell - GDP numbers are revised.


My God... this is worse than Benghazi.
 
2013-03-11 12:02:16 PM  
Thanks to GOP insanity, funny numbers are the rallying cry of the sane.  Whatever they say, shiat ain't getting better for most people.

It not a conservative victory; its not a liberal defeat.

Its a fact.
 
2013-03-11 12:07:54 PM  
"Then why bother? Why can't we put a metric into place that actually means something? I don't want feel goodies, I want REAL NUMBERS! "

Hit the buzzer. Call DC. No metrics, only fantasy.
 
2013-03-11 12:08:45 PM  

Arkanaut: Rapmaster2000: Jobs numbers are revised.  Thanks for that hard-hitting analysis, Willie Herman, BuzzFeed Data Scientist.

Up next, an investigative bombshell - GDP numbers are revised.

My God... this is worse than Benghazi.


Which, in turn, is worse than Hitler.
 
2013-03-11 12:19:16 PM  

nmemkha: Thanks to GOP insanity, funny numbers are the rallying cry of the sane.  Whatever they say, shiat ain't getting better for most people.

It not a conservative victory; its not a liberal defeat.

Its a fact.


Meanwhile, the construction company I work for has been in business for twenty years. We got down to as low as 48 in 2008. Now we're up to 70 and can't find any good carpenters we want to hire in this market. So I'm just gonna say that whatever these numbers are, they're real to me dammit. The difference in now and four years ago is night and day.
 
2013-03-11 12:32:30 PM  

YoungLochinvar: Lost Thought 00: ajgeek: Then why bother? Why can't we put a metric into place that actually means something? I don't want feel goodies, I want REAL NUMBERS!

They do have an accurate metric, but it takes 3-6 months to collect the data. At which point it isn't very useful for prescriptive policy changes.

I find it interesting that the revised numbers are almost universally better than the initial estimates. Any idea why that's the case?

/asking because it sounds like you might actually know something about this
//some of these comments don't even seem remotely related to this thread...


Sadly, I don't. I can guess that it's because they assume relatively constant economic change over time, and so because the economy is improving, a constant projection will tend to underestimate things. I would expect the opposite to be true during a declining economy.
 
2013-03-11 12:43:29 PM  
I actually heard an "economist" say on one of those talking heads shows: "The jobs numbers will be up for last month, unless they aren't"

Can you just admit that you don't have any farking idea what's going on?
 
2013-03-11 12:58:44 PM  

AngryDragon: I actually heard an "economist" say on one of those talking heads shows: "The jobs numbers will be up for last month, unless they aren't"

Can you just admit that you don't have any farking idea what's going on?


I really do hope they have SOME idea what's going on. Because once a month for the last decade some dude calls me from the US DOL and asks me to read him my total employees, total payroll and total hours worked over the phone. So I KNOW they are collecting the data. What they do with it I'm not sure.
 
2013-03-11 01:28:30 PM  
Strange. I submitted an article on "why buzzfeed sucks" yesterday and it didn't go green. I wonder why?

/granted I could have had a snappier headline
//but I think it had more to do with (sponsored link)
 
2013-03-11 01:31:31 PM  
Of course the report is wrong, it continuously fails to give a true status.

At this point each month you should only see the following:

Jobs Report : Still Dead
 
2013-03-11 01:44:51 PM  

nmemkha: Thanks to GOP insanity, funny numbers are the rallying cry of the sane.  Whatever they say, shiat ain't getting better for most people.

It not a conservative victory; its not a liberal defeat.

Its a fact.


Absent any sort of evidence or supporting data on your part, it's an unsubstantiated assertion. From a complete stranger. On the internet.
 
2013-03-11 01:49:33 PM  

Mr_Fabulous: nmemkha: Thanks to GOP insanity, funny numbers are the rallying cry of the sane.  Whatever they say, shiat ain't getting better for most people.

It not a conservative victory; its not a liberal defeat.

Its a fact.

Absent any sort of evidence or supporting data on your part, it's an unsubstantiated assertion. From a complete stranger. On the internet.


Like I said: a fact.
 
2013-03-11 03:01:14 PM  

Lost Thought 00: YoungLochinvar: Lost Thought 00: ajgeek: Then why bother? Why can't we put a metric into place that actually means something? I don't want feel goodies, I want REAL NUMBERS!

They do have an accurate metric, but it takes 3-6 months to collect the data. At which point it isn't very useful for prescriptive policy changes.

I find it interesting that the revised numbers are almost universally better than the initial estimates. Any idea why that's the case?

/asking because it sounds like you might actually know something about this
//some of these comments don't even seem remotely related to this thread...

Sadly, I don't. I can guess that it's because they assume relatively constant economic change over time, and so because the economy is improving, a constant projection will tend to underestimate things. I would expect the opposite to be true during a declining economy.


Yeah, that would make sense.
 
2013-03-11 03:27:55 PM  

FitzShivering: jso2897: Lost Thought 00: That's why it's called an estimate

Is there any difference between this and any other early economic projections?
I don't get the point of this article, if there is one.

Well, yeah, but what do you think about the twelve angry cats who hate their bosses?


I'm more interested in sad Colin Ferrel with the Skrillex hair. I can't get enough if that.
 
2013-03-11 03:30:14 PM  
(Featured Partner)
 
2013-03-11 03:31:39 PM  

BigDamn: I'm just gonna take this chance to complain about buzzfeed links that I can't comment on (featured partners).


I'm curious just how badly those links are doing. Before, I'd occasionally click on one if it seemed interesting, but since I can't comment it just seems pointless to click on the new featured partner links, so I don't bother. Do enough people not care, or are they the least visited links on Fark?
 
2013-03-11 03:36:27 PM  

jso2897: Is there any difference between this and any other early economic projections?
I don't get the point of this article, if there is one.


I believe the point is Rick Romero had some time on his hands and decided to look into the monthly jobs reports.  So here we are.
 
2013-03-11 03:43:17 PM  
I have not and will not click a featured partners link.
 
Xai
2013-03-11 05:10:04 PM  
wow estimated data does not equal actual data. Who knew!
 
2013-03-11 05:11:38 PM  

Mad_Radhu: BigDamn: I'm just gonna take this chance to complain about buzzfeed links that I can't comment on (featured partners).

I'm curious just how badly those links are doing. Before, I'd occasionally click on one if it seemed interesting, but since I can't comment it just seems pointless to click on the new featured partner links, so I don't bother. Do enough people not care, or are they the least visited links on Fark?


I'm sure they get plenty of traffic.  The amount of people on Fark who comment (or read the comments), at least IME, is pretty miniscule compared to the overall population.  Hell, a few of my family members go to Fark regularly and had no idea there even were comments (yes, they're old!)

/weird when a 65 yr old relative starts saying, "did you see on Fark that..."
 
2013-03-11 05:26:00 PM  

YouSaidWhat: I have not and will not click a featured partners link.


For some reason, I can't see the comments for a bunch of other BuzzFeed articles.
 
2013-03-11 06:39:50 PM  
1. Economics is not a science. Never has been, never will be, no matter how much math they use.

2. Perhaps the BLS should revise its survey methods since they are inaccurate. Can weg et Nate Silver in on this?

3. Buzzfeed is lazy. They did one year's worth of data analysis. This would be far more meaningful if it was spread out as far as the numbers could go. We have no way of knowing if this is a recent trend, affected by a tough economy, or whether the data methods have degraded from the time they were originally introduced (See #2)
 
2013-03-11 06:49:27 PM  
Estimates are only estimate?  Since when?
 
2013-03-11 07:04:06 PM  
Even at best, it's just a wild guess. It's always wrong. It always will be wrong.
 
2013-03-11 07:05:41 PM  
This is nothing.  It's only common sense that the report will be revised as the data becomes more exact.  What isn't ever discussed is that the monthly report is a "net" report.  You have to look behind the numbers to see the gross figures of how many jobs were created versus how many jobs were eliminated.  Unfortunately, during the current recovery, while there has been a net gain in job creation in the economy much of that gain has been in low-paying jobs while jobs in the middle-income range show a net loss.
 
2013-03-11 07:26:41 PM  

Arkanaut: Rapmaster2000: Jobs numbers are revised.  Thanks for that hard-hitting analysis, Willie Herman, BuzzFeed Data Scientist.

Up next, an investigative bombshell - GDP numbers are revised.

My God... this is worse than Benghazi.




www.kcconfidential.com

You can't explain that
 
2013-03-11 08:16:34 PM  

BigDamn: I'm just gonna take this chance to complain about buzzfeed links that I can't comment on (featured partners).


Hear hear.
 
2013-03-11 08:19:01 PM  

Ed Willy: 1. Economics is not a science. Never has been, never will be, no matter how much math they use.


Ummm..yes it is...just not an exact science. Never will be. Too many variables. The best one can hope for is identifying trends.

/B.S. Economics
 
2013-03-11 08:26:33 PM  

Mad_Radhu: BigDamn: I'm just gonna take this chance to complain about buzzfeed links that I can't comment on (featured partners).

I'm curious just how badly those links are doing. Before, I'd occasionally click on one if it seemed interesting, but since I can't comment it just seems pointless to click on the new featured partner links, so I don't bother. Do enough people not care, or are they the least visited links on Fark?


The worst part is that they go to ads.  http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/02/28/buzzfeed-using-f e atured-partner-links-on-fark-to-drive-traffic-to-its-native-ads/
 
2013-03-11 09:31:07 PM  
. . . and has been since at least the time of that dolt, Nixon, if not far far longer.

/We get it.  He's black.
 
2013-03-11 10:23:01 PM  
I've run into 3 scams in the last month all interviews they want you to use your personal car, phone, and computer. All three of them I rolled my eyes.

Today I slammed the door to one interviewers office. Fark you dude.
 
2013-03-11 10:54:53 PM  

jso2897: Lost Thought 00: That's why it's called an estimate

Is there any difference between this and any other early economic projections?
I don't get the point of this article, if there is one.


Web views?
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report