Lying with Statistics: the September Jobs Report

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

One month before the presidential election, there was suddenly a major reversal in unemployment trends that have taken place during the entire administration of the Obama presidency. The figures indicate explosive growth is taking place in the U.S. economy and this has occurred overnight. The explanation of where this growth is coming from or how it has happened is illusive.

Unlike the previous four years, large numbers of jobs were supposedly created last month. Actually that's not exactly the case. The household survey reported 873,000 jobs were created, whereas the business survey reported 114,000 — a typical amount. In previous months, the household survey has actually indicated major job losses. The mainstream media has failed to report this. However, when a number suddenly appears that lacks credibility in the same survey, but that number is positive, it apparently is worth reporting. 

Where did these jobs come from?  It's not clear from the report. It was specifically stated that "manufacturing employment edged down in September". There was a loss of 16,000 jobs, so there is no evidence that U.S. manufacturing is on the upswing. Based on the following statement, 600,000 people were hired part-time last month: "The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) rose from 8.0 million in August to 8.6 million in September". This is a huge change. Where are these part-time workers employed and what were they hired to do? Will they be fired the day after the election?

Perhaps even more amazing is that the BLS reported that the U.S. labor force grew in September 2012 for the first time in years. From August 2007 to August 2012, the U.S. labor force shrank like it would during a depression with a total 9,602,000 people leaving it. It abruptly increased by 418,000 last month. What caused such a large number of people to suddenly influx into the labor force? GDP last quarter barely grew indicating a stagnant U.S. economy.

The number of unemployed persons, at 12.1 million, supposedly decreased by 456,000 in September. The BLS stated that the unemployment rate fell to 7.8% —  the first time it has been below 8.0% since just after President Obama took office. The continual multi-year unemployment rate of over 8.0% has been a major issue in the presidential election.

The numbers in the September employment report are quite fantastic and there is no basis for believing them. Disreputable statisticians can easily produce highly unreliable numbers. If statistics are inconsistent with the past, with each other, have no traceable explanation or seem contradictory with real world observations, they are suspicious. In the case of the September employment report all four criteria have been met. The quality of U.S. economic numbers have been decaying for the last 30 years. They seem to currently be making the transition from manipulation to outright fantasy.

Disclosure: None


Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

U.S. Employment in Long-Term Downtrend

 

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

The August employment report released on September 7th was not particularly good by any measure. While the month to month changes seem lackluster, the longer term picture is truly dismal.

The headline numbers indicated that 96,000 jobs were created in August and that the unemployment rate declined from 8.3% to 8.1%. The previous two months were revised down by 41,000 however. Manufacturing employment was down 15,000 from July. "Food Services and Drinking Places" was the category with the biggest gains, adding 28,000 jobs last month.

Underneath the surface, the picture wasn't mediocre, it was negative. Looking at the total number of people listed as Employed in Table A indicated that 119,000 fewer Americans had jobs in August than in July. This comes from the Household survey and receives little attention from the mainstream media. This number was negative in the July release as well. Why isn't this reported?  Well perhaps the media doesn't trust people to know whether or not they actually have a job.

What happened to employment between July and August though was minor compared to the weakening jobs picture over the last five years. It was in August 2007 that the Fed cut the discount rate, which was the beginning of its attempts to stimulate the economy. By the end of 2008, the Fed's Fund rate was at zero and a number of special programs had been implemented to handle the Credit Crisis. The first quantitative easing program had begun and a second round took place after that. In respect to jobs, the figures indicate that the Fed's efforts have been an utter failure.

In August 2007, 145,794,000 people were employed in the U.S. Last month, five years later, 142,101,000 people had jobs. So after all of the Fed's efforts and all the stimulus programs implemented by the Obama administration, there were 3,693,000 less jobs in the United States.   In his Jackson Hole Speech in August, Fed Chair Ben Bernanke stated the Fed's efforts "increased private payroll employment by more than 2 million jobs". Oh really?  Why don't those jobs show up in the government's own statistics Mr. Bernanke?

What caused the unemployment rate to be reported as lower in August than in July was a decline in the labor force. It shrank by 368,000. This is only a continuation of a multi-year trend though. In August 2007 there were 79,319,000 people not in the U.S. labor force. By last month, 88,921,000 didn't have jobs. That's an increase of 9,602,000 in five years. Yet, at the same time the employable population has grown substantially.

What about during just the Obama administration? His employment record is a big issue in the current presidential election after all. The labor force population has increased from 234,552,000 to 243,555,000 or by 9,003,000 so far during Obama's term. The current participation rate of 63.5% (low for the last few decades) would indicate that approximately 5,717,000 jobs should have been created to keep employment at a steady state. When Obama took office in January 2009, 142,099,000 Americans were employed. As of August 2012, 142,101,000 Americans were employed. There was a net increase of only 2,000 jobs. This represents a huge relative loss since the U.S. needed 5.7 million jobs just to maintain the same level of employment. More jobs would have been needed to make things better.

At his Jackson Hole speech Bernanke stated how concerned he was at the unemployment problem in the United States and that the Fed was willing to do more. Considering how little impact the Fed's high risk money-printing policies have had and how little seems to have resulted from the numerous stimulus programs that have been implemented, there is no reason to believe either will be improving the economy in the future. They are good for juicing stock prices however — at least in the short term. In the long run the gains will prove to be illusory.

Sources for the above from Table A of the August 2007,  January 2009 and August 2012 Employment Situation report from the BLS. The URLs for the websites are:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/history/empsit_09072007.txt
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02062009.htm
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm


Disclosure: None


Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

U.S. Employment — The Spring of Discontent

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

According to the BLS, the U.S. economy created only 69,000 jobs in May 2012. The previous two months were revised down, March from 154,000 to 143,000, and the April from 115,000 to 77,000. Although the U.S. economy is not creating enough jobs for new entrants into the labor force, the BLS claimed the unemployment rate was only 8.2%.

Early in the year, the mainstream media was filled with reports of the recovering job market and a U.S. economy on the upswing. The average reported monthly job gain was 226,000 a month in the first quarter — a healthy amount if it were true. There was more than enough reason to believe it was not true however. The jobs numbers are seasonally adjusted and the winter was unusually warm meaning the usual large layoffs in industries like construction didn't take place. Nevertheless, the BLS adjusted its figures as if they had.

If the better figures in the winter were created by seasonal adjustments and not a better economy, then the spring figures should consequently be weak. This is exactly what has happened. The telltale sign can be found in the May Construction employment number — down by 28,000 last month when it should have been strong.

Almost all the job gains came from only two sources last month, Health Care and Social Services (33,000)  and Transportation and Warehousing (36,000). Health Care is the only category that consistently added jobs during the Great Recession. If the BLS numbers are projected out to the distant future, almost every American in the labor force will eventually be employed in this field.

As usual, comparisons with five years ago indicate that the U.S. economy is still in serious trouble. There were almost 3.7 million less people employed last month than in May 2007. At the same time, the over-16 noninstitutional population has increased by nearly 11.5 million or around 192,000 per month. Yet, the BLS claims that the U.S. labor force has grown by a little over 2.2 million or approximately 37,000 a month. There is a major disconnect between those numbers and it indicates that a lot more Americans are unemployed than the BLS headline number indicates.


Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

The Only Suprise for March Employment Was that it Wasn't Even Worse

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

According to the BLS, the U.S. created only 120,000 non-farm jobs in March. The mainstream media cited this figure as a surprise because it was well below expectations. The real surprise was that the number wasn't even worse.

Winter month employment numbers came in at the 200,000 level and this was trumpeted as evidence that the economy was finally gaining steam. There were two problems will this line of reasoning. The first is that the U.S. needs to create approximately 150,000 jobs a month for the unemployment rate to stay even (this balances the loss of people retiring with new students and legal immigrants entering the job market).  In order to put any serious dent in the massive amount of unemployment that exists the monthly number of jobs being created needs to be well over 200,000. The second problem was the unusually warm weather during the winter that magnified the impact of the seasonal adjustments.

If seasonal adjustments boosted the numbers in January and February, then lower numbers should be expected in the normally warmer spring months. The weak March number seems to be bearing this out. It is interesting to note that the Retail Trade category lost 34,000 jobs in March. This does not support the idea that retail sales have actually been strong as has been claimed, but that the numbers have instead been artificially boosted by inflation. Retail employment is prone to large swings due to seasonal factors.

The official unemployment rate fell to 8.2% from 8.3%. The obvious question is how can this happen if less than 150,000 jobs were created and that's the amount needed for things to remain in equilibrium? It can only occur if more people than expected leave the labor market. This happened again last month  as has been the case during the entire economic "recovery"(millions of people have left the U.S labor market since the Great Recession began). The mass exodus from the labor market creates a huge reservoir of unemployed waiting to reenter the market if conditions actually improve. This reentry could keep the unemployment rate from falling well into the decade.

People of course do not leave the labor market in droves when the economy is on an upswing. The continued shrinkage of the labor market indicates an economic downturn. Don't expect to hear that from either the U.S. government or the cheerleading mainstream media. Politicians don't get reelected by telling the public bad news.

A key question that usually goes unexamined in reporting about the jobs numbers is the high price the U.S. taxpayer and consumer will be paying in the future for the jobs being created today. The U.S. has run deficits of $1.3 trillion or more since 2009. Pumping all of that money into the economy will of course create jobs, but at what cost?  Unless there is a free lunch, that money will have to be paid back either through higher taxes or higher inflation. Both will lead to lower job creation in the coming years.

Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Retail Sales and Employment Not as Good as First Reported

 

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

There has much cheerleading in the mainstream press lately about the improving employment situation and strong 2011 holiday retail sales. Just released figures indicate it may have been much ado about nothing.

Retailers depend on the holiday season for their yearly profits. Major efforts were made in November to get people to start buying early. This worked and retail sales were up 0.4% during the month. Strong early numbers don't necessarily mean overall numbers will be greater however. It can simply mean that buying activity was frontloaded and the later numbers will then be weak. This is exactly what happened. Retail sales were up a whopping 0.1% in December (retail sales are not adjusted for inflation, the number would be negative if it had been).

Looking inside the report shows how incredibly weak the consumer is. Excluding autos, which are highly volatile, retail sales were 0.2% lower -- the first drop since May 2010. Core retail sales, which exclude autos, gasoline and building materials were down 0.1%. Even though it was the height of the holiday buying season, spending at electronic and appliance stores was down 3.9% and spending at department stores was down 0.2%. Once again, if the numbers had been adjusted for inflation they would have been even worse.

So how come U.S. consumers aren't spending more now that the employment situation is supposedly getting better?  Well, maybe it's because it isn't. The big news lately has been the declining weekly claims which have fallen below the traditional 400,000 per week that indicates recession. However, for the first week of 2012 they came in at 399,000 -- back at recession levels. This was up from the 372,000 reported the previous week (three states including mega-sized California didn't send in their claims numbers for this report).  Of course, the mainstream press blew the trumpets about the "good", but highly questionable, 372,000 number, just as it did for the 200,000 jobs that were allegedly created in December 2011.

Among these jobs were 42,000 new messenger positions. While it's more likely that 42,000 messengers were hired in December than 42,000 nuclear physicists, that doesn't mean it is believable. Messengers work in a field with declining employment. The December jobs report has been criticized as having "statistical adjustment" problems. Non-statisticians generally refer to this as lying about the numbers. Of course, the appearance of suddenly improving economic news (not to be confused with an economy that is actually improving) at the beginning of a presidential election year should not be surprising.

As the election season heats up, there will be a desire for the government to report that economic conditions are better than they actually are.  This does not mean the news will necessarily be good, it will just be better than it actually is. Expect the bad news to come out after the November election.  Until then, invest with caution. 

Disclosure: None


Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

A Technical Look at Gold and Silver at the End of 2011

 

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

While gold and silver are in long-term secular bull markets, they have experienced price weakness in the last few months of 2011. The technical picture indicates that they are likely to remain pressured for a while longer before recovering in 2012.

GLD (the major ETF for gold)  fell below its 200-day simple moving average earlier in December and at the time, I pointed out in a previous article that this indicated lower prices in the future and it would next fall to the 325-day. After bouncing back up to the 200-day, gold did indeed fall to 148 on December 29th, which was the 325-day moving average. At the time that gold was breaking its 200-day, the DMI (directional moving indicator) also gave a sell signal on the daily charts. The RSI (relative strength index) fell below 50 and MACD (moving average convergence divergence) below the zero line -- both bearish. The sell signal on the DMI does not seem to be exhausted just yet.

The moving average picture overall still indicates that gold is in a short-term bull market. For this to turn negative, the 50-day would have to fall below the 200-day moving average and even then it shouldn't be considered as serious unless it was confirmed by a cross below the 325-day. The gives gold a lot of room to fall, even if the chart remains bullish. Even though a short rally in the beginning of 2012 is indeed possible, lower prices are likely to follow. A break of the 325-day moving average should be considered significant and would next bring GLD down to the 140 level. The 40-month simple moving average however is the most solid support below the 325-day. 

Silver shows greater weakness than gold on its charts with the selling much more advanced. Unlike gold, silver has hit new yearly lows and when this happens the first time, it is likely that a series of  new lows will then be made, although short rallies frequently take place first.  For SLV, the major silver ETF, the 50-day moving average already fell below the 200-day in October and the bearish pattern was confirmed when the 50-day then fell below the 325-day at the end of November.  On the daily charts, the DMI is on a sell signal and this seems to be only halfway done at this point. The other technical indicators are also bearish. SLV is currently being held up by support around 26. Much stronger support exists around 21 (really a band of support between 18 and 21).

The recent drops in gold and silver should be considered to be buying opportunities, although investors with a longer-term horizon should not be pushing the buy button just yet. The charts do not indicate a definitive bottom has been put in, nor that this is likely to happen in the next few weeks. Secular bull markets tend to last for around 20 years and this indicates the ultimate high for gold and silver will be around 2020. While there is always a higher high in the future during secular bulls that doesn't mean that there aren't major reversals along the way. The stock market secular bull between 1982 and 2000 had the 1987 crash, the 1989 and 1997 flash crashes, the 1990/91 bear market and the 1998 bear market. Smart investors used these declines as buying opportunities and made lots of money when they did. The same will be true for gold and silver for the rest of this decade. 

Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.