What is?

[chillin 10+ year member]

I'm guessing the people were there and the jobs weren't. That's what generally dictates unemployment. You know, like when an American factory shuts down to make things in China, the people that once worked at the factory no longer have jobs. If new factories are built or maybe a mall,etc those unemployed people would have jobs to go to.
Obviously there's some people that are lazy and never want to work, but saying where did the people come from is pretty funny.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

That's all I've been saying...those numbers are estimates...not hard facts like Rob was trying to prove

Given the dataset they are working with, those estimates are more accurate than they’ve ever been and will only continue to get more accurate.
Computers.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Given the dataset they are working with, those estimates are more accurate than they’ve ever been and will only continue to get more accurate.
Computers.

It's still just an estimate...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Yeah, I don't know anything about the assistance. I never stopped working.

I didn't say I think NO NEW JOBS HAVE BEEN CREATED. I ask questions... Where did all these people come from suddenly who are willing to work? If there are so many "new jobs" that means, to fill them, there would need to be an equal amount of people for those jobs. Weren't these people there the whole time or did we suddenly have an influx of new workers? If these people were there the whole time... what were they doing BEFORE these "new jobs" appeared out of

Yeah, I don't know anything about the assistance. I never stopped working.

I didn't say I think NO NEW JOBS HAVE BEEN CREATED. I ask questions... Where did all these people come from suddenly who are willing to work? If there are so many "new jobs" that means, to fill them, there would need to be an equal amount of people for those jobs. Weren't these people there the whole time or did we suddenly have an influx of new workers? If these people were there the whole time... what were they doing BEFORE these "new jobs" appeared out of thin air??

What the heck do you mean, “where did they come from?” They are people here who were not employed.
That’s how they figure out the unemployment rate: by countig unemployed people.
When the rate drops, it means less people are out of a job.

If the rate was at, say 5% prior to COVID, spiked to 15% during COVID, then recovered and dropped to 4%, that means there are new jobs being filled.
Filled by people who were out of work before.

If they were “old” jobs, then they sure languished for a really long time. Not logical.

So they are new jobs. Which is a win.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

What the heck do you mean, “where did they come from?” They are people here who were not employed.
That’s how they figure out the unemployment rate: by countig unemployed people.
When the rate drops, it means less people are out of a job.

If the rate was at, say 5% prior to COVID, spiked to 15% during COVID, then recovered and dropped to 4%, that means there are new jobs being filled.
Filled by people who were out of work before.

If they were “old” jobs, then they sure languished for a really long time. Not logical.

So they are new jobs. Which is a win.

You're missing the point. The unemployment rate is made up of two things - the unemployed/the unemployed + the employed. Either or both numbers that make up the unemployment rate can change. Ie the unemployment rate could go despite job creation if people enter the workforce at a greater rate than job creation.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

That's all I've been saying...those numbers are estimates...not hard facts like Rob was trying to prove

I'd say they're hard facts. Maybe imperfect or trailing data, but certainly reliable facts that one can draw conclusions from.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

What the heck do you mean, “where did they come from?” They are people here who were not employed.
That’s how they figure out the unemployment rate: by countig unemployed people.
When the rate drops, it means less people are out of a job.

If the rate was at, say 5% prior to COVID, spiked to 15% during COVID, then recovered and dropped to 4%, that means there are new jobs being filled.
Filled by people who were out of work before.

If they were “old” jobs, then they sure languished for a really long time. Not logical.

So they are new jobs. Which is a win.

Again you said "new jobs". What "new jobs"??? You saying it is people going to new jobs and not just more people going to the same jobs that were there already?

What is this LIST of "new jobs"?

All these people that weren't employed... so why did they suddenly decide to work? I touched on this with the assistance things and you took it personal so tell me, how were these unemployed people getting by?

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Again you said "new jobs". What "new jobs"??? You saying it is people going to new jobs and not just more people going to the same jobs that were there already?

What is this LIST of "new jobs"?

All these people that weren't employed... so why did they suddenly decide to work? I touched on this with the assistance things and you took it personal so tell me, how were these unemployed people getting by?

You can look up job growth (aka the list of jobs). Bls tracks that #.
It's a readily available number and is constantly reported on and moves the markets. Generally, you look at non-farm jobs since farm work is/can be seasonal. Then you can see if jobs were or weren't created, when they were created, etc. If too many jobs are created, the markers react negatively; big business likes a bit of frictional unemployment.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

You can look up job growth (aka the list of jobs). Bls tracks that #.
It's a readily available number and is constantly reported on and moves the markets. Generally, you look at non-farm jobs since farm work is/can be seasonal. Then you can see if jobs were or weren't created, when they were created, etc. If too many jobs are created, the markers react negatively; big business likes a bit of frictional unemployment.

The fed prefers a decent unemployment rate as well

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

The fed prefers a decent unemployment rate as well

The Fed is ultimate big business.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Again you said "new jobs". What "new jobs"??? You saying it is people going to new jobs and not just more people going to the same jobs that were there already?

What is this LIST of "new jobs"?

All these people that weren't employed... so why did they suddenly decide to work? I touched on this with the assistance things and you took it personal so tell me, how were these unemployed people getting by?

The new jobs that are being filled to lower the unemployment further than it has been in 50 years.

Do you think these jobs have just been lying vacant for decades?

I'll try to break it down to the simplest number example possible. It factors in all the variables that go into calculating unemployment rates such as people entering the workforce, people leaving the workforce, businesses closing while others open. ALL variables that the BLS includes in constantly monitoring the US workforce, including their access to the employee tax data reported by the 7million-some businesses that have to report such things.

1,000 available workers.
800 jobs.
= 200 people out of work.
20% rate of unemployment

Over time, the unemployment drops to 15%.
That would mean that there are only 150 people out of work. 850 people employed.

But wait! What's this?!?! HOW can 850 people be employed when there are only 800 jobs?!?!
What IS this sorcery? Two things can't occupy the same space at the same time! It must be a lie to make Biden look good, or lazy welfare recipients finally deciding to go back to work!

No, it's simply because there are new jobs that can be filled by the existing workforce.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

The new jobs that are being filled to lower the unemployment further than it has been in 50 years.

Do you think these jobs have just been lying vacant for decades?

I'll try to break it down to the simplest number example possible. It factors in all the variables that go into calculating unemployment rates such as people entering the workforce, people leaving the workforce, businesses closing while others open. ALL variables that the BLS includes in constantly monitoring the US workforce, including their access to the employee tax data reported by the 7million-some businesses that have to report such things.

1,000 available workers.
800 jobs.
= 200 people out of work.
20% rate of unemployment

Over time, the unemployment drops to 15%.
That would mean that there are only 150 people out of work. 850 people employed.

But wait! What's this?!?! HOW can 850 people be employed when there are only 800 jobs?!?!
What IS this sorcery? Two things can't occupy the same space at the same time! It must be a lie to make Biden look good, or lazy welfare recipients finally deciding to go back to work!

No, it's simply because there are new jobs that can be filled by the existing workforce.

Would you stop trying to educate me. Stop assuming I know nothing.

So I will ask again. What were these unemployed people doing before? How did they survive?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

You can look up job growth (aka the list of jobs). Bls tracks that #.
It's a readily available number and is constantly reported on and moves the markets. Generally, you look at non-farm jobs since farm work is/can be seasonal. Then you can see if jobs were or weren't created, when they were created, etc. If too many jobs are created, the markers react negatively; big business likes a bit of frictional unemployment.

That's all well and good. Just because a business has 100 employees doesn't mean they are at max or even report the max number of employees they could have. These places could simply hire more people to work. These aren't new jobs these are just position they chose to fill at a later time.

Job tracking isn't not accurate and is only estimated at best.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Would you stop trying to educate me. Stop assuming I know nothing.

So I will ask again. What were these unemployed people doing before? How did they survive?

When you ask questions that get answer 5 different ways, but you still don't understand, then it's obvious you need to be educated. When people just cannot "get" a concept, simplified examples or analogies are usually helpful.

Who KNOWS what they were doing before. Maybe they were one half of a two-income household. Maybe they were newer entrants to the workforce who had not been employed yet. Maybe they were living off the grace of others until they could get back on their feet.
There's a million stories in the ***** city.

Regardless, the numbers indicate there are more jobs being filled, which brought unemployment to record lows.

If you want to discredit Biden and claim it's people getting off welfare, then I guess you can credit Biden for reducing the use of welfare.
If you want to somehow say no new jobs exist, then I guess you can credit Biden for somehow getting people to fill jobs that have been empty for a long time.

No matter how you want to spin it, there is a positive from unemployment being lower than it has been in 50 years. And it happened under a Democrat administration.