Great insights! Typical that politicians would twist data to fit their narrative.
Unemployment data is also shady. The BLS counts people as employed even if they work part-time or have a temp job. Even UNPAID work in family enterprises counts as employed. And the BLS data also ignores people who quit looking for jobs because they couldn't get one. Bottom line is that there's a lot more people who want full time work but can't get it. They're not reflected in unemployment numbers
Indeed. And those aspects of the employment figures are what I hear Jeff Snider talk about a lot.
The first time I heard that people who haven't worked in a long time don't count as unemployed, that blew my mind. Not working for a bunch of years seems to be the quintessential definition of "unemployment" yet they don't count because they're supposedly not looking for work? That's kind of crazy to me.
Agree 100%. It is crazy. It only makes sense if you're an incumbent politician trying to convince people that you've lowered unemployment. But the way they calculate unemployment is the same as if a school expelled all the students who weren't gonna graduate...and then claimed that they improved their graduation rate.
Yeah exactly. The figures look amazing, if we just don't count the bad stuff!
Sometimes I get the feeling that these rosy pictures they paint are more for Wall St and keeping the financial system juiced up than anything. I'm talking to my family now, the proverbial man on the street, and they're saying the economy is crap. They don't buy into whatever inane lies comes out of some "projections" or seasonally adjusted models.
Thanks for the charts and insights, though I have considered statistics just another form of potentially manipulated propaganda for a long time now. Change the formula, change what is included, I suspect it is not benign. Michael Hudson has mentioned this, in passing, in some of his videos.
Interesting ... I have a manufacturing business. Throughout the years, every time I have had even a twinkling of a new idea, I write up a summary and napkin business plan, then get an EIN# and give it a name. 99% of these have turned into nothing, yet I’ve never even considered having them marked defunct or unused, or whatever the term is. The government considers these real economic data? The only thing they show is that my accountant makes a little money keeping track of them all.
Here's what I believe is happening. Since 2020 they have not been measuring actual business formations, they've been creating "projections." See this image here
Or I'll just share the most important quote, in which they describe how they make their business formations projections.
"The data on business applications are based on applications for an Employer Identification Number (EIN) through filings of IRS Form SS-4."
&
"High-propensity applications include applications: (a) for a corporate entity, (b) that indicate they are hiring employees, (c) that provide a first wages-paid date (planned wages); or (d) that have a NAICS industry code in accommodation and food services"
Remember, those doordashers have a NAICS industry code in the food services sector... So basically they're just estimating business formation and never took into account how filings for EINs could distort the data. Classic.
Great insights! Typical that politicians would twist data to fit their narrative.
Unemployment data is also shady. The BLS counts people as employed even if they work part-time or have a temp job. Even UNPAID work in family enterprises counts as employed. And the BLS data also ignores people who quit looking for jobs because they couldn't get one. Bottom line is that there's a lot more people who want full time work but can't get it. They're not reflected in unemployment numbers
Indeed. And those aspects of the employment figures are what I hear Jeff Snider talk about a lot.
The first time I heard that people who haven't worked in a long time don't count as unemployed, that blew my mind. Not working for a bunch of years seems to be the quintessential definition of "unemployment" yet they don't count because they're supposedly not looking for work? That's kind of crazy to me.
Agree 100%. It is crazy. It only makes sense if you're an incumbent politician trying to convince people that you've lowered unemployment. But the way they calculate unemployment is the same as if a school expelled all the students who weren't gonna graduate...and then claimed that they improved their graduation rate.
Yeah exactly. The figures look amazing, if we just don't count the bad stuff!
Sometimes I get the feeling that these rosy pictures they paint are more for Wall St and keeping the financial system juiced up than anything. I'm talking to my family now, the proverbial man on the street, and they're saying the economy is crap. They don't buy into whatever inane lies comes out of some "projections" or seasonally adjusted models.
100% agree with you. Polling data also suggests that the general public believes the economy is crap as well
I agree with you and I think that methodologies are intentionally designed as they are, notby mistakes.
That is absolutely possible... I mean, saying someone who hasn't worked in 5 years is not "unemployed" is just stupid.
Thanks for the charts and insights, though I have considered statistics just another form of potentially manipulated propaganda for a long time now. Change the formula, change what is included, I suspect it is not benign. Michael Hudson has mentioned this, in passing, in some of his videos.
I agree that statistics can be used/manipulated to justify all sorts of weird stuff.
How much is nefarious, how much is incompetence? That's a question I wrestle with every day.
Interesting ... I have a manufacturing business. Throughout the years, every time I have had even a twinkling of a new idea, I write up a summary and napkin business plan, then get an EIN# and give it a name. 99% of these have turned into nothing, yet I’ve never even considered having them marked defunct or unused, or whatever the term is. The government considers these real economic data? The only thing they show is that my accountant makes a little money keeping track of them all.
Here's what I believe is happening. Since 2020 they have not been measuring actual business formations, they've been creating "projections." See this image here
https://www.unhedgedcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/projected.jpg
And the page it came from if you're interested
https://www.census.gov/econ/bfs/pdf/bfs_current.pdf
They've been using applications for EINs as a proxy for new business formations. It's rather dry but you can read about it here if you want.
https://www.census.gov/econ/bfs/technicaldocumentation/methodology.html
Or I'll just share the most important quote, in which they describe how they make their business formations projections.
"The data on business applications are based on applications for an Employer Identification Number (EIN) through filings of IRS Form SS-4."
&
"High-propensity applications include applications: (a) for a corporate entity, (b) that indicate they are hiring employees, (c) that provide a first wages-paid date (planned wages); or (d) that have a NAICS industry code in accommodation and food services"
Remember, those doordashers have a NAICS industry code in the food services sector... So basically they're just estimating business formation and never took into account how filings for EINs could distort the data. Classic.