<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dissecting the NonFarm Payroll Data</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/</link>
	<description>Macro Perspective on the Capital Markets, Economy, Geopolitics, Technology, and Digital Media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:38:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Ritholtz</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-2/#comment-253548</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Ritholtz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 20:10:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253548</guid>
		<description>No, that is incorrect. If you retire, you are no longer in the labor pool. A retirement makes the Unemployment rate go lower.

Second, you are confusing cause and effect. Immigration doesn’t cause hiring to increaese. people emigrate to where the jobs are.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, that is incorrect. If you retire, you are no longer in the labor pool. A retirement makes the Unemployment rate go lower.</p>
<p>Second, you are confusing cause and effect. Immigration doesn’t cause hiring to increaese. people emigrate to where the jobs are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: owenbluesky</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-2/#comment-253537</link>
		<dc:creator>owenbluesky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 19:34:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253537</guid>
		<description>Most of the comments in this posting are assuming a static world from 2000-2007.  This is not the case.  

First, some have noted the fact that net immigration, legal and illegal is down.  This was a major driver for net employment growth required to maintain a static employment situation.  

Also note that folks deciding to retire early and take that SocSec and or reduced Pension have certainly increased (see below).  Also take into account that normally folks decide to return to grad school or trade school or other training opportunities in recessions.   Tack on the fact that alot of lesser skilled folks in 2 wage  families might decide to opt out of the employment scheme (sexist maybe how many 55 year old women whose spouse/partner are earning 50k+ have decided they don&#039;t want to take that crepe job at McD&#039;s just to make an extra 1500 a month).  

Our B and D as well as most of the employ/unemploy stats are established based upon a need for what, 100-150 k jobs just to stay static. Thus, if the assumptions in paragraph 1 are anywhere close to true, then yes our unemployment situation is and will improve dramatically. My anectdotal evidence for the above turns out to be relatively easy to prove.  In my IT office of 25 folks, one decided to retire this year at 62 instead of facing a layoff.  Net -1 unemployed.  Anyother will retire June 2011, we are planning on rehiring that position.  My niece of 24 yrs has finally found a job as a nanny for 35k a year for some Seattle MS techies, my other niece has just found a job at an NGO, a 3rd niece is going to quit her job as a financial advisor for a major mutual fund company and return to school to be a physical therapist, my unemployed nephew in San Diego has finally found 2 p/t sales jobs both could morph into f/t positions.  Thus, of the 30 odd folks in my sphere of knowledge, 5 have resolved employment situations.   

I&#039;d recommend the folks who have bought into the meme of the world is ending (accurate 2-3 years ago) might want to reevaluate their positions vis a vis a changing and dynamic demographic world.  We are at the very peak of baby boomers starting to bail out.  As that accelerates the employment situation will change dramatically.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Most of the comments in this posting are assuming a static world from 2000-2007.  This is not the case.  </p>
<p>First, some have noted the fact that net immigration, legal and illegal is down.  This was a major driver for net employment growth required to maintain a static employment situation.  </p>
<p>Also note that folks deciding to retire early and take that SocSec and or reduced Pension have certainly increased (see below).  Also take into account that normally folks decide to return to grad school or trade school or other training opportunities in recessions.   Tack on the fact that alot of lesser skilled folks in 2 wage  families might decide to opt out of the employment scheme (sexist maybe how many 55 year old women whose spouse/partner are earning 50k+ have decided they don&#8217;t want to take that crepe job at McD&#8217;s just to make an extra 1500 a month).  </p>
<p>Our B and D as well as most of the employ/unemploy stats are established based upon a need for what, 100-150 k jobs just to stay static. Thus, if the assumptions in paragraph 1 are anywhere close to true, then yes our unemployment situation is and will improve dramatically. My anectdotal evidence for the above turns out to be relatively easy to prove.  In my IT office of 25 folks, one decided to retire this year at 62 instead of facing a layoff.  Net -1 unemployed.  Anyother will retire June 2011, we are planning on rehiring that position.  My niece of 24 yrs has finally found a job as a nanny for 35k a year for some Seattle MS techies, my other niece has just found a job at an NGO, a 3rd niece is going to quit her job as a financial advisor for a major mutual fund company and return to school to be a physical therapist, my unemployed nephew in San Diego has finally found 2 p/t sales jobs both could morph into f/t positions.  Thus, of the 30 odd folks in my sphere of knowledge, 5 have resolved employment situations.   </p>
<p>I&#8217;d recommend the folks who have bought into the meme of the world is ending (accurate 2-3 years ago) might want to reevaluate their positions vis a vis a changing and dynamic demographic world.  We are at the very peak of baby boomers starting to bail out.  As that accelerates the employment situation will change dramatically.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Transor Z</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-2/#comment-253471</link>
		<dc:creator>Transor Z</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 13:26:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253471</guid>
		<description>Tinkering with unemployment numbers:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26493859/Is-the-Duration-of-the-Current-Recession-Distorting-U3</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tinkering with unemployment numbers:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/26493859/Is-the-Duration-of-the-Current-Recession-Distorting-U3" rel="nofollow">http://www.scribd.com/doc/26493859/Is-the-Duration-of-the-Current-Recession-Distorting-U3</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Ritholtz</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-1/#comment-253351</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Ritholtz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:09:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253351</guid>
		<description>Ah, dear Jurgen -- heh heh  -- you underestimate me!

My approach is similarly unchanged:  Read the data, Interpret what it means, figure out where its wrong and/or where the crowd is misinterpreting it. Apply that Variant perspective to an investing thesis.

My market positions have been flexible, with several well timed bullish calls (See &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/10/bullish-bears/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/10/10-bullish-charts-signals-indicators/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/03/bear-market-rally-3/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/03/twelve-year-lows/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; -- you get the idea).

Perhaps it is you who has wised up -- 

And my views on conspiracy theorists consistent over the years -- I&#039;ve been pretty vocal they are nonsense:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2006/09/calling-all-conspiracy-theorists/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Calling All Conspiracy Theorists!&lt;/a&gt; (September 29th, 2006)

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/02/experts-crashes/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Experts, Crashes, Media, Skepticism&lt;/a&gt; (February 19th, 2009)

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/01/ppt-the-president’s-working-group-on-financial-markets/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;PPT: The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets&lt;/a&gt;   (January 8th, 2010)  

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/01/santoli-biderman-is-clueless/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Barron’s Santoli: Biderman is Clueless&lt;/a&gt; (January 16th, 2010)    

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/11/the-hubris-of-economics/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Hubris of Economics&lt;/a&gt; (November 4th, 2009)&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, dear Jurgen &#8212; heh heh  &#8212; you underestimate me!</p>
<p>My approach is similarly unchanged:  Read the data, Interpret what it means, figure out where its wrong and/or where the crowd is misinterpreting it. Apply that Variant perspective to an investing thesis.</p>
<p>My market positions have been flexible, with several well timed bullish calls (See <a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/10/bullish-bears/" rel="nofollow">this</a> and <a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/10/10-bullish-charts-signals-indicators/" rel="nofollow">this</a> and <a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/03/bear-market-rally-3/" rel="nofollow">this</a> and <a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/03/twelve-year-lows/" rel="nofollow">this</a> &#8212; you get the idea).</p>
<p>Perhaps it is you who has wised up &#8212; </p>
<p>And my views on conspiracy theorists consistent over the years &#8212; I&#8217;ve been pretty vocal they are nonsense:</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2006/09/calling-all-conspiracy-theorists/" rel="nofollow">Calling All Conspiracy Theorists!</a> (September 29th, 2006)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/02/experts-crashes/" rel="nofollow">Experts, Crashes, Media, Skepticism</a> (February 19th, 2009)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/01/ppt-the-president’s-working-group-on-financial-markets/" rel="nofollow">PPT: The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets</a>   (January 8th, 2010)  </p>
<p><a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/01/santoli-biderman-is-clueless/" rel="nofollow">Barron’s Santoli: Biderman is Clueless</a> (January 16th, 2010)    </p>
<p><a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/11/the-hubris-of-economics/" rel="nofollow">The Hubris of Economics</a> (November 4th, 2009)</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jurgen</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-1/#comment-253298</link>
		<dc:creator>Jurgen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:52:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253298</guid>
		<description>Wow!

I have never expected such a good constructive analysis from Barry Ritholtz -- well known conspiracy theories perma-bear. You have surprised me Barry. I was completely wrong underestimating your abilities. You have definitely wised up over the years.

Thanks

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow!</p>
<p>I have never expected such a good constructive analysis from Barry Ritholtz &#8212; well known conspiracy theories perma-bear. You have surprised me Barry. I was completely wrong underestimating your abilities. You have definitely wised up over the years.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Jones</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-1/#comment-253261</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 14:53:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253261</guid>
		<description>The question isn&#039;t what &quot;would be a bigger surprise&quot;, but &quot;what is already priced into the market&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The question isn&#8217;t what &#8220;would be a bigger surprise&#8221;, but &#8220;what is already priced into the market&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GreatWarrior</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-1/#comment-253242</link>
		<dc:creator>GreatWarrior</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 13:08:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253242</guid>
		<description>   About the Employment #. 

     Have you factored in the Census temporary hiring this year? I heard they gonna hire 1.4 million people just to count USA citizens this year, like 3x the previous number. Obama must be deperate ....

Check this article. A complete Fraud from the Obama. 
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&amp;sid=aEws7wrt8FY0&amp;pos=6</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>About the Employment #. </p>
<p>     Have you factored in the Census temporary hiring this year? I heard they gonna hire 1.4 million people just to count USA citizens this year, like 3x the previous number. Obama must be deperate &#8230;.</p>
<p>Check this article. A complete Fraud from the Obama.<br />
<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&#038;sid=aEws7wrt8FY0&#038;pos=6" rel="nofollow">http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&#038;sid=aEws7wrt8FY0&#038;pos=6</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KidDynamite</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-1/#comment-253240</link>
		<dc:creator>KidDynamite</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 13:02:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253240</guid>
		<description>barry - you wrote &quot;2009 benchmark revision reveal employment in 2009 was far worse than originally believed — revised data showed nearly 600,000 more jobs lost than previously reported.&quot; 

wasn&#039;t it more than 900k worse than previously reported?  are you planning a follow up post on these birth/death adjustments now that the actual data is out?  i&#039;m still somewhat confused as to WHERE these numbers actually show up - in what metric. in other words, the UI rate doesn&#039;t just jump when the extra 900k jobs lost are suddenly counted.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>barry &#8211; you wrote &#8220;2009 benchmark revision reveal employment in 2009 was far worse than originally believed — revised data showed nearly 600,000 more jobs lost than previously reported.&#8221; </p>
<p>wasn&#8217;t it more than 900k worse than previously reported?  are you planning a follow up post on these birth/death adjustments now that the actual data is out?  i&#8217;m still somewhat confused as to WHERE these numbers actually show up &#8211; in what metric. in other words, the UI rate doesn&#8217;t just jump when the extra 900k jobs lost are suddenly counted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mgkurilla</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-1/#comment-253226</link>
		<dc:creator>mgkurilla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 05:53:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253226</guid>
		<description>Barry,

Any thought to comparing the BLS numbers with state income tax and sales receipt collections along with the Federal income tax and see if there&#039;s any correlation? I would bet there&#039;s little with the initial release and maybe a bit with the revised numbers. The painful reality thast no one wants to accept is that BLS &quot;survey&quot; data is probably useless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Barry,</p>
<p>Any thought to comparing the BLS numbers with state income tax and sales receipt collections along with the Federal income tax and see if there&#8217;s any correlation? I would bet there&#8217;s little with the initial release and maybe a bit with the revised numbers. The painful reality thast no one wants to accept is that BLS &#8220;survey&#8221; data is probably useless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Payroll Report &#124; Contrarian Musings</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/02/dissecting-the-nonfarm-payroll-data/comment-page-1/#comment-253145</link>
		<dc:creator>Payroll Report &#124; Contrarian Musings</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:24:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=51011#comment-253145</guid>
		<description>[...] on double dip fears I suspect you will be disappointed with that decision a few months from now. As Barry Ritholz put it: Ask yourself what outcome would surprise the most people — the economy sliding in a double dip [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] on double dip fears I suspect you will be disappointed with that decision a few months from now. As Barry Ritholz put it: Ask yourself what outcome would surprise the most people — the economy sliding in a double dip [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

