ADP jobs report shows 162,000 private-sector jobs added in September

posted at 8:41 am on October 3, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Time to start setting our clocks for 8:30 AM ET on Friday.  That’s when the BLS will release the penultimate jobs report prior to the vote in November.  We’re at T-minus 47:49 hours and counting, which means we have the first of the job-creation indicators from payroll giant ADP.  Their monthly analysis of private-sector jobs growth puts expansion at a tepid 162,000:

Employment in the U.S. nonfarm private business sector increased by 162,000 from August to September, on a seasonally adjusted basis.  The estimated gains in previous months were revised lower: The July increase was reduced by 17,000 to an increase of 156,000, while the August increase was reduced by 12,000 to an increase of 189,000.

Employment in the private, service-providing sector expanded 144,000 in September, down from 175,000 in August.  Employment in the private, goods-producing sector added 18,000 jobs in September.  Manufacturing employment rose 4,000, while construction employment rose 10,000, the strongest since March when mild winter weather was boosting construction activity. The financial services sector added 7,000 jobs in September, marking the fourteenth consecutive monthly gain.

Employment on large payrolls—those with 500 or more workers—increased 17,000 and employment on medium payrolls—those with 50 to 499 workers—rose 64,000 in September. Employment on small payrolls—those with up to 49 workers—rose 81,000 that same period. Of the 64,000 jobs created on medium-sized payrolls, 10,000 jobs were created by the goods producing sector and 54,000 jobs were created by the service-providing sector.

Even if this is the actual expansion number in the BLS report, it’s not much to cheer.  We add ~200K people to the population each month on average, and at the current (historic low) civilian participation rate of 63.5%, we’d need to add 126,000 jobs just to stay in place.  At the rate of adding an additional 36K excess jobs per month, we’d make up the 8 million jobs we’re short now by, oh … early 2031.

However, the ADP report usually — although not always — overshoots the BLS number.  The rule of thumb I use is to take 60% of the ADP prediction and use it as a gauge for what the BLS will report.  That puts this month’s report at 97,200, or perhaps a round up to 100K.  That’s even less to cheer, although it might be tepid enough for Barack Obama to shrug off.  That’s not far off from the consensus this week, reported by CNBC, of 118,000 jobs.  In fact, CNBC notes that ADP is usually excessively rosy:

The private sector created 162,000 jobs in September, a bit better than expected, as the service sector continued to be the economy’s main employment driver, according to the latest ADP numbers. …

Though economists sometimes change their nonfarm payrolls expectation based on the number, ADP’s count can be volatile and dramatically off the government’s official total, which will be released Friday.

In September, ADP raised hopes that the jobs engine was humming along, with the private sector creating 201,000 positions in August. However, when the government released its own count it found that the actual overall total for the economy was just 96,000 new jobs.

Economists expect the nonfarm payroll number for September to be around 118,000.

Gallup, however, takes a much dimmer view:

U.S. nongovernment workers reported worse job creation conditions in September than they have in any month since February. Gallup’s Job Creation Index score of +21 among nongovernment workers is down from +23 in August and a high of +25 in April. At the same time, the job creation climate within state and local government became even more positive, helping to sustain U.S. job creation nationally. …

Nongovernment workers, which include private- and nonprofit-sector workers, continue to report the most job creation overall, but September’s score marks a retreat from the higher numbers of the previous six months and a movement toward the level seen at the start of the year. Because nongovernment workers make up more than 80% of the monthly sample of employed workers, the decline in that sector helped push the overall national average slightly lower in September.

I’d expect something around 95K.  We’ll see what the weekly jobs claim data looks like tomorrow.

Update: A couple of commenters note the adjustment made by the BLS to the total number of jobs, adding 368,000 jobs to the total current employed.  The adjustments from those additions have already been made to past reports, and won’t get dumped into this report.  It will impact the top-line jobless rate, but the impact will be minimal.  In the August 2012 report, there were 142.101 million jobs overall; the addition amounts to 0.26% of that total — not nothing, but not exactly a game-changer, especially if September produces a poor level of new job creation.

Also, I corrected the civilian participation rate above.  It’s 63.5%, not 63.1%.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

First?

SlimyBill on October 3, 2012 at 8:44 AM

The important number is Friday — an uptick of unemployment to 8.2% would really help Romney.

Ironically, the drop from 8.3 to 8.1 past month — all due to a declining work force — actually helped Obama.

Regrettably, MSNBC was correct – low-information voters only looked at the top line.

matthew8787 on October 3, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Gallup: Private-sector job growth stalled.

“The private-sector is doing fine.”

Flora Duh on October 3, 2012 at 8:45 AM

No need to look at any numbers.

It’ll be 7.9%

forest on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

I’d expect something around 95K. We’ll see what the weekly jobs claim data looks like tomorrow.

In other words, virtually unchanged from last month. And that’s assuming that the previous number isn’t revised downward which is almost certain. Of course this is unlikely to hurt Obama much since people have seemingly become numb to this sort of crappy economic news.

Doughboy on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

ADP jobs report shows 162,000 private-sector jobs added in September

MAN! Look at those numbers! Over 100k! America is back baby! Hail Obama!
–msm

Gatsu on October 3, 2012 at 8:47 AM

If ADP says 162,000 that means probably about 90,000 since they alsways seem to dramatically overestimate things. Jobless claims have been trending up so I can’t see the Sept. jobs report being anything good.

eyedoc on October 3, 2012 at 8:48 AM

No need to look at any numbers.

It’ll be 7.9%

forest on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

That would require a buttload of people to leave the workforce in a single month. And BTW, a lot of drive-by media outlets like CNN are starting to cover this trend regularly, so even some low information voters are learning about the real reason behind the decline in the unemployment rate.

Doughboy on October 3, 2012 at 8:49 AM

77K…

PatriotRider on October 3, 2012 at 8:50 AM

Keep on asking my libtard friends the same question–name one thing Obama has done that you want 4 more years of? Result: deer/headlights.

hillsoftx on October 3, 2012 at 8:50 AM

8.3%…

PatriotRider on October 3, 2012 at 8:50 AM

Spin!!!!!!

cmsinaz on October 3, 2012 at 8:50 AM

No need to look at any numbers.

It’ll be 7.9%

forest on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

That would require a buttload of people to leave the workforce in a single month.

No. Just creative accounting.

dirtseller on October 3, 2012 at 8:52 AM

Oh yeah forest.. ..guaranteed

cmsinaz on October 3, 2012 at 8:53 AM

7.9% for September…..no matter what they have to do to get the number down.

….and if not now, then RIGHT BEFORE the vote next month.

PappyD61 on October 3, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Why does ADP even give numbers – they are way off every month.

gophergirl on October 3, 2012 at 8:57 AM

remember, the BLS recently “found” 386,000 jobs they had “missed” from their yearly audit.

those 386,000 jobs will now get lumped in.

BLS, their motto makes it clear: “We put the BS in Labor!”

Justrand on October 3, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Why does ADP even give numbers – they are way off every month.

gophergirl on October 3, 2012 at 8:57 AM

That’s because the lower numbers are always unexpected.

Doughboy on October 3, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Those darn head winds will never end. Will they?

rubberneck on October 3, 2012 at 8:59 AM

ADP said 200,000 jobs in August.

celticdefender on October 3, 2012 at 9:01 AM

7.9%

Dead on. You can bet your mortgage payment on it. (Assuming you’re one of those idiots who still makes his mortgage payment in Obamamerica.)

Fabozz on October 3, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Early CNN this morning C. Romans was saying that 8% unemployment was becoming acceptable now. I fell off the couch and started mumbling to my dog.
8% unemployment ACCEPTABLE !!
Never thought I would hear that one.

Jabberwock on October 3, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Early CNN this morning C. Romans was saying that 8% unemployment was becoming acceptable now. I fell off the couch and started mumbling to my dog.
8% unemployment ACCEPTABLE !!
Never thought I would hear that one.

Jabberwock on October 3, 2012 at 9:06 AM

We’ll find out for sure in 34 days, but the real issue is that the country can’t survive this kind of sustained high unemployment. Not at the rate we’re spending more than we’re taking in.

Doughboy on October 3, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Early CNN this morning C. Romans was saying that 8% unemployment was becoming acceptable now…

Jabberwock on October 3, 2012 at 9:06 AM

It is. Until 24 hours after Romney is sworn in.

Flora Duh on October 3, 2012 at 9:09 AM

(Assuming you’re one of those idiots who still makes his mortgage payment in Obamamerica.)

Fabozz on October 3, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Hey come on now… I am one of those idiots!

watertown on October 3, 2012 at 9:09 AM

It is. Until 24 hours after Romney is sworn in.

Flora Duh on October 3, 2012 at 9:09 AM

I have a feeling that effect will take hold on a bunch of issues personally…

Gatsu on October 3, 2012 at 9:10 AM

It is. Until 24 hours after Romney is sworn in.

Flora Duh on October 3, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Now you’re being silly. The press will start to hound Romney the moment he’s reached 270 electoral votes. And BTW, I’m not kidding about that. I guaran-damn-tee a lot of drive-bys that night will immediately begin talking about the challenges facing his administration and what he needs to accomplish(and the bar will be set very high).

Doughboy on October 3, 2012 at 9:12 AM

Romney should have supported saving GM.

I am having a disconnect in imagining a job creating dynamo who seems a lot more comfy with People, Glamour and The View than even knowing how to talk to businessmen.

I gotta spend time in Ohio.

Without an expensive foreign car and a Steelers jersey.

IlikedAUH2O on October 3, 2012 at 9:12 AM

Seeing that these unemployment numbers are always revised downward later on (when no one is looking), they should hold off publishing the numbers for at least one week. This way, they would be more accurate than they are now.

And I agree with others. The rate will be 7.9% before the election come fire and brimstone or high water.

gasmeterguy on October 3, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Of course this is unlikely to hurt Obama much since people have seemingly become numb to this sort of crappy economic news.

Doughboy on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

Not numb. Many think 95k jobs is just awesome. Sad really.

dogsoldier on October 3, 2012 at 9:18 AM

With those numbers, I think it’s safe to say that the Employment-Population ratio will not show any improvement for the month of September 2012. Depending on just how week the employment growth is in respect to the population growth, it could even go down another tenth of a point, but will most likely stay the same at 58.3%.

Obama is officially worse than Carter.

Take the Employment-Population ratio data from 1977 to present, use Microsoft Excel to average the monthly numbers for each Presidency, and then sort them.

For the last six Presidents, here is the ranking of average Employment-Population ratio by Presidency:

63.4% Clinton Presidency (January 1993 – December 2000)
62.7% G.W.Bush Presidency (January 2001 – December 2008)
62.2% G.H.W.Bush Presidency (January 1989 – December 1992)
59.9% Reagan Presidency (January 1981 – December 1988)
59.1% Carter Presidency (January 1977- December 1980)
58.7% Obama Presidency (January 2009 – August 2012)

Obama is officially worse than Carter.

And the August 2012 numbers, at 58.3, were four-tenths of a point below Obama’s own average. He hasn’t been above his average since August 2009. Obama’s best months were those he “inherited” at the start of his term.

Each and every month of the Obama Presidency has “featured” an Employment-Population ratio that was lower than it ever was under President George W. Bush.

The worst month under Bush was better than the best month under Obama.

ITguy on October 3, 2012 at 9:20 AM

i know that last month the rate decreased ti 8.1% but it was blunted by the fact that immediately afterward R&R started talking about the numbers of peole that had left the workforse and for every 1 that got a job 4 people left the workforce nad how the population in the US increased but the numbers of jobs created didn’t even come up to that increase in the population. there are lots of ways to spin a theoretical 7.9% that some of u say will be the number on Friday

gracie on October 3, 2012 at 9:21 AM

Depending on just how week weak

FIFM.

ITguy on October 3, 2012 at 9:22 AM

The set up has already started. The talking heads on CNBC are acting like one decent employment report this week or in early November will completely change the election. You know the media will do their best. Kramer was so excited; Home values going way up, good ADP report, booming stock market. Based on the talk you’d think GDP was 5% and unemployment was dropping like a rock.

I have no doubt that the unemployment rate will be under 8% before the election. Sure the jobs numbers may not be robust, but the number of people leaving the labor force is consistently high.

Wigglesworth on October 3, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Would someone please be kind enough to gather the last 12 to 24 (maybe 36) months of jobs reports with the intitial report in one column and the revised number on the other, both totalled at the bottom?

I have completely lost count as to the REAL data, because the only number anyone ever gets is the initial number.

NO one (except for Hotair) goes back and pays any attention to the revised numbers.

Collate that data and pass it around.

I bet the numbers would astound.

Tenwheeler on October 3, 2012 at 9:23 AM

No need to look at any numbers.

It’ll be 7.9%

forest on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

That would require a buttload of people to leave the workforce in a single month. And BTW, a lot of drive-by media outlets like CNN are starting to cover this trend regularly, so even some low information voters are learning about the real reason behind the decline in the unemployment rate.

Doughboy on October 3, 2012 at 8:49 AM

What do you think the unilateral killing of work requirements for food stamps is all about? I’m expecting U-3 to be 7.9% on Friday and 7.7% the Friday before the election, all due to people getting on perma-welfare.

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Tenwheeler on October 3, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Did you also want benchmarking?

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 9:26 AM

Early CNN this morning C. Romans was saying that 8% unemployment was becoming acceptable now. I fell off the couch and started mumbling to my dog.
8% unemployment ACCEPTABLE !!
Never thought I would hear that one.

Jabberwock on October 3, 2012 at 9:06 AM

After all, the Peanut Farmer would have KILLED for 8%.

Seriously, every time a ‘Rat is in the Oval Office, 8% unemployment is “acceptable” to the presstitute organs. Every time a Pubbie is there, it’s TEH END OF TEH W0RLD!!!1111!11eleventy!!!1!1

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 9:27 AM

We all know the pattern. Rosy, or rosier than reality, numbers will be released on Friday. I’d bet dinner that The Regime will announce that unemployment is finally under 8% for the first time in almost 50 months. The job gains will get revised down just like they have been for August and September.
Real unemployment is somewhere north of 10%.
But at least we have a dogged and independent press that hounds Obummer over the numbers and why the job pool keeps shrinking.

I would be shocked if Obama doesn’t “announce” the new unemployment number during the debate tonight.

smfic on October 3, 2012 at 9:30 AM

Does anyone know exactly how these jobs are counted? Are they new job positions created, or just a record of people getting hired? If someone gets hired, then quits a week later, and someone else is hired to refill the position, is that one job created, or two?

Salukidog on October 3, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Tomorrow’s Unemployment rate will be 8% or 7.9%

Whatever it takes to get him reelected.

stenwin77 on October 3, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Does anyone know exactly how these jobs are counted? Are they new job positions created, or just a record of people getting hired? If someone gets hired, then quits a week later, and someone else is hired to refill the position, is that one job created, or two?

Salukidog on October 3, 2012 at 9:40 AM

2 of course…we’re talking dimcrat math…

jimver on October 3, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Early CNN this morning C. Romans was saying that 8% unemployment was becoming acceptable now. I fell off the couch and started mumbling to my dog.
8% unemployment ACCEPTABLE !!
Never thought I would hear that one.

When things stay bad for a long enough time, people just tend to believe this is the way things are going to be. That’s been Obama’s strategy for years, telling people that America is in a permanent decline and they just need to get used to it.

eyedoc on October 3, 2012 at 9:51 AM

Keep on asking my libtard friends the same question–name one thing Obama has done that you want 4 more years of? Result: deer/headlights.

hillsoftx on October 3, 2012 at 8:50 AM

…funny isn’t it?…when they go off on Romney or Republicans…and you ask them one or two questions…speech impediments occur!

KOOLAID2 on October 3, 2012 at 9:51 AM

No need to look at any numbers.

It’ll be 7.9%

forest on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

At most. I predict a magical 7.8% figure.

SouthernGent on October 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Expect the report Friday to be surprisingly good- to be revised downward in historic levels the Friday AFTER the election.

michaelo on October 3, 2012 at 9:54 AM

We all know the pattern. Rosy, or rosier than reality, numbers will be released on Friday. I’d bet dinner that The Regime will announce that unemployment is finally under 8% for the first time in almost 50 months. The job gains will get revised down just like they have been for August and September.
Real unemployment is somewhere north of 10%.
But at least we have a dogged and independent press that hounds Obummer over the numbers and why the job pool keeps shrinking.

I would be shocked if Obama doesn’t “announce” the new unemployment number during the debate tonight.

smfic on October 3, 2012 at 9:30 AM

I’ve got it at over 12% once those who aren’t counted as “unemployed” but who want a job are counted (and no, it’s not limited to the 52-week job-search window U-5 uses). In fact, the only time that particular measure was below 11.5% during the Obama administration was January 2009, when it was 11.1%.

Prior to that point, the only time it was above 11% was January 1994, the first month that particular measure was possible. Worse, it had been under 10% between October 1994 and November 2008 (and it had to be rounded up to get there in November 2008).

I believe that the administration gets an advance look the day before the release. As part of that deal, they’re not supposed to comment until an hour after the release. That said, I wouldn’t put it bast Teh SCOAMF to hint at the number if he has it – after all, he has the sole ability to pardon anybody, including himself.

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 9:58 AM

No need to look at any numbers.

It’ll be 7.9%

forest on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

At most. I predict a magical 7.8% figure.

SouthernGent on October 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Whatever it takes to get O reelected, by hook or by crook.

txmomof6 on October 3, 2012 at 9:59 AM

8.3%…

PatriotRider on October 3, 2012 at 8:50 AM

If it really turns out to be 8.3%, no amount of spin for obama will help. This is the last jobs numbers before the election.

ConservativePartyNow on October 3, 2012 at 10:02 AM

If it really turns out to be 8.3%, no amount of spin for obama will help. This is the last jobs numbers before the election.

ConservativePartyNow on October 3, 2012 at 10:02 AM

The October jobs numbers come out Friday, November 2, 4 days before the election.

There will be at least 400,000 Heroes of the Election who stopped looking for work between the second week of July and the second week of September to drive the “unemployment” rate well below 8%.

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 10:08 AM

There will be at least 400,000 Heroes of the Election who stopped looking for work between the second week of July and the second week of September to drive the “unemployment” rate well below 8%.

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 10:08 AM

So, Steve, all those people no longer required to work on welfare are the 400K that have left the work force resulting in a lower unemployment rate? If that’s so, time for R% R to be talking this up now so we can give it a big i told u so to the low info voter.

PS..Thanx for all your input over these past few years.

gracie on October 3, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Seriously, every time a ‘Rat is in the Oval Office, 8% unemployment is “acceptable” to the presstitute organs. Every time a Pubbie is there, it’s TEH END OF TEH W0RLD!!!1111!11eleventy!!!1!1

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Yeah they referred to Bush’s EU numbers as a “depression,” but nooooobody is using that word now, are they?

dogsoldier on October 3, 2012 at 10:24 AM

The unemployment rate has become non-news. It won’t go down before November so Mr. Obama and his pals in the MSM aren’t going to talk about it. The story being pushed is “jobs added”. It doesn’t matter how many — unless it magically makes good on Mr. Biden’s brag of 250,000-500,000 jobs/month. What is vital for Campaign Barry is to be able to say that jobs were added to the economy.

Usually Mr. Obama is careful not to characterize “jobs added” as “jobs growth”. To do so would invite contrasting “jobs added” to the persistent monthly net job losses as people lose their jobs or abandon the work force altogether. As long as there is a topline number for jobs added, Mr. Obama has done his job — why not re-elect him?

Against 43 straight months of 8% or greater unemployment, Mr. Obama posits 30 straight months of jobs added. The BLS originally reported no jobs added in August 2011. That put a big hole in Mr. Obama’s consecutive growth brag. So Campaign Barry found 52K jobs for that month to fill the hole. I’ve searched but cannot find a BLS revision to support that number.

It speaks to the power of the MSM and its complicity with Campaign Barry that 8% unemployment is not an iterated front-page story, that it is absent from the op-ed pages. Of course come November the power of the ballot will banjax that snug partnering of press and politics.

DGB

Damian Bennett on October 3, 2012 at 10:27 AM

No need to look at any numbers.

It’ll be 7.9%

forest on October 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM

That would require a buttload of people to leave the workforce in a single month. And BTW, a lot of drive-by media outlets like CNN are starting to cover this trend regularly, so even some low information voters are learning about the real reason behind the decline in the unemployment rate.

Doughboy on October 3, 2012 at 8:49 AM

No. Just creative accounting.

dirtseller on October 3, 2012 at 8:52 AM

How can you say they would blatantly LIE about such a thing?

Oh right, we’re talking about the Downgrade Regime, folks who have turned lying into high art.

One can easy envision three dominant news stories on Friday:

Of course first the Media will trumpet the ObamaMiracle.

Then Barack’s Media echo chamber will breathlessly report on the reaction to the ObamaMiracle.. And the reaction to the reaction to ObamaMiracle and..

And three we will be blessed with an avalanche of stories on how the ObamaMiracle has devastated the Romney campaign with additional stores on ‘anonymous’ GOP sources seriously “Concerned” about the now devastated Romney Campaign and reaction to the stories on..

Chip on October 3, 2012 at 10:46 AM

7.9% to be revised up after the election to 8.2%.

Bank on it.

jukin3 on October 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Well, when the Regime magically finds that, another gazillion people stopped looking for work(Whether they did or not), then they’ll have “unemployment”below 8% and the rino’s & eSTAB-lishment Republican’s talking point, about “Unemployment above 8% for 42mths”, will be blown out of the water! These eStab’s along with Rove & his clan have been told to use the real Unemployment numbers(U3), but of course, they know more than anybody.Just ask them, they’ll tell you. So either their not really working in the best interest of Republicans and by extension Romney, or they’ve been outsmarted by the “Clown Show” administration in DC. The one thing you can guarantee, is that Obama will have his people get the unemployment numbers below 8%(no matter how unreal those #’s are) and all the ads that ran, touting the over 8% numbers will be debunked & that fact will be touted by the Obama Enemy media, more than anything! Just like the McCain2008 campaign, the eSTAB-lishment Republicans, are made to look like clowns, by the Clowns who can’t even get their stories straight on a terrorist attack on 9/11!
For those following,How to take on the Obama Enemy media: http://paratisiusa.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-those-who-should-know.html?spref=tw

God Bless America!

paratisi on October 3, 2012 at 11:11 AM

7.9% to be revised up after the election to 8.2%.

Bank on it.

jukin3 on October 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Out of Cycle Revision Date: Nov. 7

When no one will be paying attention.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on October 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM

However, the ADP report usually — although not always — overshoots the BLS number. The rule of thumb I use is to take 60% of the ADP prediction and use it as a gauge for what the BLS will report.

Ed, I’m not sure of data behind your statement that ADP report “usually overshoots” the BLS number. I ran the numbers comparing the ADP report and the BLS since Jan 2009. The average difference between ADP and BLS Private change in private employment is +3,600 jobs over that period. Meaning that ADP underreported the BLS Nonfarm change in employment by an average of 3,600. That difference is pretty unremarkable for the kind of large numbers involved.

ADP reported a number less than BLS NonFarm 27 months out of 44. ADP reported a number greater than BLS NonFarm 19 months out of 44. So contrary to your statement, over the last 44 months, ADP has reported a number less than the BLS number more often.

New_Jersey_Buckeye on October 3, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Would someone please be kind enough to gather the last 12 to 24 (maybe 36) months of jobs reports with the intitial report in one column and the revised number on the other, both totalled at the bottom?

I bet the numbers would astound.

Tenwheeler on October 3, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Those numbers are published by BLS: http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesnaicsrev.htm

While the average revision for the past few years has been very small (4K, 16K, 9K, 3K), the average BLS jobs report revision in each year Obama’s been in office has been positive, meaning that later revisions showed more jobs than the initial reports. The claim that the numbers are always revised to be worse when no one is looking is simply false.

tneloms on October 3, 2012 at 12:06 PM

7.9% to be revised up after the election to 8.2%.

Bank on it.

jukin3 on October 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM

I haven’t heard of any systematic revisions in the Current Population Survey, the source of the unemployment numbers.

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 12:21 PM

People leaving the workforce can make the unemployment number look better, but it has absolutely no effect on the Employment-Population ratio.

That is one of several reasons why I like that measurement better than the unemployment number. They can’t fudge the Employment-Population ratio by changing the percentage in workforce.

I’d love to see more attention given to 2 things:

1. Give the majority of the credit and/or blame for any given Fiscal Year to the party which controlled a majority (2+ out of 3) of the budget-making entities: the House, Senate, and Presidency.

2. Look at the Employment-Population ratio instead of the unemployment number.

From January 3, 1995 to January 3, 2007, Republicans held majority control, and passed the FY 1996-2007 budgets. Look at where the Employment-population ratio was during that time, and compare it to where it has been since Democrats took majority control on January 3, 2007 and have been responsible for FY 2008-present.

The economy was doing fine for 12 straight years of Republican majority control. But once Democrats took control of the wheel, they drove the economy into the ditch and have left it sitting there for over 3 years.

ITguy on October 3, 2012 at 12:41 PM

ITguy on October 3, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Using the Employment-Population ratio doesn’t do the ObamiNation any favors. The last time it was this low, there were a lot more single-income/stay-at-home-spouse families. On the other hand, it could be argued that is because there are a lot more retirees now than in 1983, which while true, is nowhere near a majority explanation.

The close bears repeating:

The economy was doing fine for 12 straight years of Republican majority control. But once Democrats took control of the wheel, they drove the economy into the ditch and have left it sitting there for over 3 years.

One slight correction – the ‘Rats have been on the gas with the cliff looming ahead, wheels turned toward it, the last 3 years.

Steve Eggleston on October 3, 2012 at 1:43 PM