• Here is a link to the full explanation: https://rollitup.org/t/welcome-back-did-you-try-turning-it-off-and-on-again.1104810/

Jobs report missing an entire state. Fail Obama.

althor

Well-Known Member
Laugh, I was wondering when someone was going to point this out.
Been all over the other political sites, RIU is slow to show this kind of information though.
 

SahTiva

Well-Known Member
Were all smokers man what do you expect... I was gonna check the news, but then I got high.
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
well this turned out to be a damp squib

After this morning's surprisingly positive jobless claims number was released, three things happened:
  1. Lots of people felt better about the economy
  2. Democrats cheered because they thought the number would help Obama
  3. Republicans seized on confusing reports that the numbers had "excluded claims from one large state" (probably California) and blasted the number as wrong and misleading.
Since then, the argument has raged on, and there have been a variety of different reports and interpretations.
Well, we're glad to say that we've finally gotten to the bottom of what happened.
We spoke to a source at the Labor Department. According to this source, who is an analyst at the Department, here's what happened:

  • ALL STATES WERE INCLUDED in this week's jobless claims. Assertions that "a large state" was excluded from the report are patently false.
HOWEVER...

  • It is likely that some of the jobless claims in one large state--California--were not included in the claims reported to the Department of Labor this week. This happens occasionally, our source says. When a state's jobless claims bureau is short-staffed, sometimes the state does not process all of the claims that came in during the week in time to get them to the DOL. The source believes that this is what happened this week.

  • The California claims that were not processed in time to get into this week's jobless report will appear in future reports, most likely next week's or the following week's. In other words, those reports might be modestly higher than expected.

  • The source believes that the number of California claims that were not processed totalled about 15,000-25,000. Thus, if one were to "normalize" the overall not-seasonally-adjusted jobless claims number, it would increase by about 15,000-25,000.

  • This week's "normalized" jobless claims number, therefore, would be about 355,000-365,000, not the 339,000 that was reported. This compares to the 370,000 consensus expectation.
In other words, had all of California's jobless claims been processed in time to make the jobless-claims release, this jobless number would still have been better than economists were expecting--but not as much better as it appeared.
Again, the as-yet-unprocessed claims will appear in future reports. So next week's number may well be higher than expected.
So, who's right about today's jobless claims number?
Everyone's right!

  • Jobless claims were better than expected, even after adjusting for an unusual anomaly
  • There was an unusual anomaly that made this week's jobless claims look better than they would otherwise have been.

 

SahTiva

Well-Known Member
obama did that? he was in control of that?
He was in charge of parading false facts in an effort to further his campaign.... otherwise known as lying. Furthermore ostrasizing everyone that questioned it.... even though in the end there was something wrong with it. In other words there is no magical obama jobs recovery, in fact you could argue the exact opposite
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
well this turned out to be a damp squib

After this morning's surprisingly positive jobless claims number was released, three things happened:

  1. Lots of people felt better about the economy
  2. Democrats cheered because they thought the number would help Obama
  3. Republicans seized on confusing reports that the numbers had "excluded claims from one large state" (probably California) and blasted the number as wrong and misleading.

Since then, the argument has raged on, and there have been a variety of different reports and interpretations.
Well, we're glad to say that we've finally gotten to the bottom of what happened.
We spoke to a source at the Labor Department. According to this source, who is an analyst at the Department, here's what happened:


  • ALL STATES WERE INCLUDED in this week's jobless claims. Assertions that "a large state" was excluded from the report are patently false.

HOWEVER...


  • It is likely that some of the jobless claims in one large state--California--were not included in the claims reported to the Department of Labor this week. This happens occasionally, our source says. When a state's jobless claims bureau is short-staffed, sometimes the state does not process all of the claims that came in during the week in time to get them to the DOL. The source believes that this is what happened this week.



  • The California claims that were not processed in time to get into this week's jobless report will appear in future reports, most likely next week's or the following week's. In other words, those reports might be modestly higher than expected.



  • The source believes that the number of California claims that were not processed totalled about 15,000-25,000. Thus, if one were to "normalize" the overall not-seasonally-adjusted jobless claims number, it would increase by about 15,000-25,000.



  • This week's "normalized" jobless claims number, therefore, would be about 355,000-365,000, not the 339,000 that was reported. This compares to the 370,000 consensus expectation.

In other words, had all of California's jobless claims been processed in time to make the jobless-claims release, this jobless number would still have been better than economists were expecting--but not as much better as it appeared.
Again, the as-yet-unprocessed claims will appear in future reports. So next week's number may well be higher than expected.
So, who's right about today's jobless claims number?
Everyone's right!


  • Jobless claims were better than expected, even after adjusting for an unusual anomaly
  • There was an unusual anomaly that made this week's jobless claims look better than they would otherwise have been.



[/COLOR][/LEFT]
yeah im certain you've over looked something
He was in charge of parading false facts in an effort to further his campaign.... otherwise known as lying. Furthermore ostrasizing everyone that questioned it.... even though in the end there was something wrong with it. In other words there is no magical obama jobs recovery, in fact you could argue the exact opposite
 

Omgwtfbbq Indicaman

Well-Known Member
He was in charge of parading false facts in an effort to further his campaign.... otherwise known as lying. Furthermore ostrasizing everyone that questioned it.... even though in the end there was something wrong with it. In other words there is no magical obama jobs recovery, in fact you could argue the exact opposite
false facts? you mean super-pacs that not even romney or obama have control over?
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
Oh sorry I didn't realize 15-25,000 missing people would have absolutely no impact on a percentage... you're completely right.
well absolutely no impact would be wrong but and order of magnitude (and some) would be much closer to the mark

but as i said before "damp squib"
 

newatit2010

Well-Known Member
But last quarter the jobs report showed that O created 835,000 jobs something that hasn't been done in 29 years. any lie is better than none.
 
This guy sahtiva is just a Obama hater 1 of many.. He fails to realize George bush was the man who put the USA in a hole so now anything bad happens while Obama is in office it's his fault even tho the problem started with bush 8 years in office.
 

newatit2010

Well-Known Member
This guy sahtiva is just a Obama hater 1 of many.. He fails to realize George bush was the man who put the USA in a hole so now anything bad happens while Obama is in office it's his fault even tho the problem started with bush 8 years in office.
Do you really think he hates the black muslim or maybe he don't want to see America as a divided muslim country. That's what the O wants.
 
Top