So pretty much all of the job additions for July and August were governmental jobs.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/us-...b71a_story.html

 

That's excellent news.

Yeah, about time we stop cutting our own legs out from under us by laying of thousands of public sector employees.

So pretty much all of the job additions for July and August were governmental jobs.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/us-...b71a_story.html

 

Of course. Trickle down government.

what's the relevance of witesoxfan's quote?

 

lol...no idea how that got there

That's excellent news.

 

I found it most entertaining that apparently the government didn't know about the 63,000 people it hired for two months or so. That and the whole hiring right before the elections to make the numbers look good, thing.

So pretty much all of the job additions for July and August were governmental jobs.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/us-...b71a_story.html

 

Where are you getting "pretty much all?" It looks like a small (relative to the idea of "most") portion based on those quotes to me

Where are you getting "pretty much all?" It looks like a small (relative to the idea of "most") portion based on those quotes to me

 

63,000 of 83,000 new jobs added were governmental.

A separate government survey of companies and government agencies showed they added 114,000 jobs in September. And it turns out that 86,000 more jobs were added in July and August than the government had initially estimated.

 

Is this not an aggregate number of "companies" and "government agencies?"

 

It also shows that federal, state and local governments added 10,000 jobs in September and a revised 63,000 jobs combined in July and August. The government’s initial estimates had shown government job losses for July and August

 

So the government hiring 73,000 in the past three months = most?

 

I'm willing to have read these wrong, I just don't see it

 

It says we averaged 146,000 jobs created PER MONTH over the past three months....meaning 73,000/438,000 over the past three months are government jobs....?

Edited October 5, 201213 yr by Jake

Regardless, it would be good news. If the private sector gains of the past 2 years had not been offset by government losses we would be in much better shape.

A separate government survey of companies and government agencies showed they added 114,000 jobs in September. And it turns out that 86,000 more jobs were added in July and August than the government had initially estimated.

 

Is this not an aggregate number of "companies" and "government agencies?"

 

It also shows that federal, state and local governments added 10,000 jobs in September and a revised 63,000 jobs combined in July and August. The government’s initial estimates had shown government job losses for July and August

 

So the government hiring 73,000 in the past three months = most?

 

I'm willing to have read these wrong, I just don't see it

 

It says we averaged 146,000 jobs created PER MONTH over the past three months....meaning 73,000/438,000 over the past three months are government jobs....?

 

He was talking about the august and july revisions.

He was talking about the august and july revisions.

 

Gotcha! I was conflating "job additions" with "job growth"

 

143k/mo is AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMGZZZZZZZZZZZ DORRRRRRRRRRIUULSSSS! OBAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAA@@!@@$

 

f***ing sheeple.

 

A real recovery would have 5X that much per month, but alas, you're all brainwashed into thinking that this is WONDERFUL - right before the election. If I can predict what was going to happen a year ago, and I'm supposed to be the stupid one, WTF does that make you all? Brainwashed.

 

143k/mo is AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMGZZZZZZZZZZZ DORRRRRRRRRRIUULSSSS! OBAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAA@@!@@$

 

f***ing sheeple.

 

A real recovery would have 5X that much per month, but alas, you're all brainwashed into thinking that this is WONDERFUL - right before the election. If I can predict what was going to happen a year ago, and I'm supposed to be the stupid one, WTF does that make you all? Brainwashed.

you're a crazy person. lol

A separate government survey of companies and government agencies showed they added 114,000 jobs in September. And it turns out that 86,000 more jobs were added in July and August than the government had initially estimated.

 

Is this not an aggregate number of "companies" and "government agencies?"

 

It also shows that federal, state and local governments added 10,000 jobs in September and a revised 63,000 jobs combined in July and August. The government’s initial estimates had shown government job losses for July and August

 

So the government hiring 73,000 in the past three months = most?

 

I'm willing to have read these wrong, I just don't see it

 

It says we averaged 146,000 jobs created PER MONTH over the past three months....meaning 73,000/438,000 over the past three months are government jobs....?

 

July and August were revised 86000 higher. Government jobs were revised to 63000 higher. Re-read the original statement.

July and August were revised 86000 higher. Government jobs were revised to 63000 higher. Re-read the original statement.

 

I got it, my fault

143k/mo is AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMGZZZZZZZZZZZ DORRRRRRRRRRIUULSSSS! OBAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAA@@!@@$

 

f***ing sheeple.

 

A real recovery would have 5X that much per month, but alas, you're all brainwashed into thinking that this is WONDERFUL - right before the election. If I can predict what was going to happen a year ago, and I'm supposed to be the stupid one, WTF does that make you all? Brainwashed.

 

oh hey it's kapkometbot.

I found it most entertaining that apparently the government didn't know about the 63,000 people it hired for two months or so. That and the whole hiring right before the elections to make the numbers look good, thing.

 

 

Where are you getting "pretty much all?" It looks like a small (relative to the idea of "most") portion based on those quotes to me

 

 

July and August were revised 86000 higher. Government jobs were revised to 63000 higher. Re-read the original statement.

 

I think you are still misunderstanding the math here. The govt number was revised UP TO 63000. So unless it was REVISED UP FROM Zero, which is not what the article says. So no, unless the previous number was zero, you are not correct.

 

It doesn't make SS2k5's point interesting. It's not like "Government job" is one entity. These would be hundreds of state local and federal agencies reporting. The monthly data's first number is rarely accurate. It's a lot of data to put together in one week, so they do revisions. They didn't start doing this in September 2012.

 

But also, July Aug woudl feature a lot of seasonal teacher hiring. If you look at the past year of data it's clear the seasonal adjustments aren't amazingly accurate. But nonetheless, for the first time in 2 years the public sector hadn't negated some of the private gains. That's a good thing for the recovery.

Yeah I don't get what's supposed to be "entertaining" about "the government" not knowing about every single public-sector employee in the country instantaneously.

I think you are still misunderstanding the math here. The govt number was revised UP TO 63000. So unless it was REVISED UP FROM Zero, which is not what the article says. So no, unless the previous number was zero, you are not correct.

 

BLS data agrees with me. Page 5

 

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

BLS data agrees with me. Page 5

 

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

 

July-18

August-45

September-10

 

That's 63M, but what were those numbers revised from? Isn't that what you need to look at?

July-18

August-45

September-10

 

That's 63M, but what were those numbers revised from? Isn't that what you need to look at?

 

Its not revised data. It is raw data, that has been revised.

I think I'm still missing it. There's 63M government jobs in July and August, but there's 163+97 private jobs in those same months. 63M doesn't represent a majority of the jobs added in those months.

Its not revised data. It is raw data, that has been revised.

Right. That now shows 63k added. What did it say BEFORE the revisions? If it said zero, then you'd be right that of the 86k REVISED ADDITIONS, 63k were government jobs. If it showed, say, 60k before, then only 3k of the 86k bump was government. You are confusing your numbers here. The only way you are right, is if that number was zero before the revisions.

 

Right. That now shows 63k added. What did it say BEFORE the revisions? If it said zero, then you'd be right that of the 86k REVISED ADDITIONS, 63k were government jobs. If it showed, say, 60k before, then only 3k of the 86k bump was government. You are confusing your numbers here. The only way you are right, is if that number was zero before the revisions.

 

That is the number. 63k added.