873,000 new jobs in September!?

[jimmy olsen]

Can that possibly be right? 

http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/05/news/economy/september-jobs-report/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/06/opinion/nocera-jobs-report-cooked-or-correct.html

[Razgovory]

You got a problem with that?

[jimmy olsen]

You got a problem with that?

No, but the number seems wildly implausible. Even if growth was roaring along at 6% I'd be skeptical.

[Grinning_Colossus]

Most of them are crappy part-time jobs for the college set.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah.  It's broadly in line with previous months - especially if you take into consideration the upward revisions of July and August.

It's not that good a number, Tim.  It's solid, but not outstanding.

[jimmy olsen]

Yeah.  It's broadly in line with previous months - especially if you take into consideration the upward revisions of July and August.

It's not that good a number, Tim.  It's solid, but not outstanding.

We've had trouble matching population growth at 150k a month, what are you talking about. I don't think I ever saw a number that high, not even during the Clinton years.

[Admiral Yi]

I heard 140,000.

[jimmy olsen]

I heard 140,000.

Looking over it again, they're using two different sets of numbers. The more commonly used one is 114k

[Martinus]

Yeah.  It's broadly in line with previous months - especially if you take into consideration the upward revisions of July and August.

It's not that good a number, Tim.  It's solid, but not outstanding.

We've had trouble matching population growth at 150k a month, what are you talking about. I don't think I ever saw a number that high, not even during the Clinton years.

Can you fucking read? The CNN article you posted explains where the number comes from. Did you just read the headline and posted here?

Btw, if unemployment is to fall, you have to create more jobs than the population growth. You know that, right? 

[Richard Hakluyt]

Monthly figures should always be taken with a pinch of salt. There are also seasonality factors, at a guess September is often a good month for new jobs as students find crappy jobs in their college towns.

Now The Economist is currently displaying some limited optimism about the US and UK economies, but with the way the Eurozone is and the worries about China I'm not expecting much. This "crisis" is over 5 years old now, I reckon we are going to do a Japan until something big changes things 

[Sheilbh]

I heard 140,000.

Looking over it again, they're using two different sets of numbers. The more commonly used one is 114k

And the larger figure derives from a household survey, so it's far more volatile.

The figure that matters is, taking the revisions into account, par for the course.

[Neil]

Perhaps the jobs are election-related.

[Phillip V]

Btw, if unemployment is to fall, you have to create more jobs than the population growth. You know that, right? 

False. Unemployment can also fall if people stop looking for work.

For example, a solution is sending women back to the kitchen/bedroom.

[DGuller]

Monthly figures should always be taken with a pinch of salt. There are also seasonality factors, at a guess September is often a good month for new jobs as students find crappy jobs in their college towns.

I think the numbers are seasonally adjusted.

[The Brain]

Monthly figures should always be taken with a pinch of salt. There are also seasonality factors, at a guess September is often a good month for new jobs as students find crappy jobs in their college towns.

I think the numbers are seasonally adjusted.

Isn't that playing God?