I’m not sure this numbers are publicly available yet or not — I can’t find them with a google search. But my economics guru writes:
So, Dec jobs revised up to 659,000 (from 500) while January came in at 522,000. Why do they keep doing this revision stuff? How can one be off by 30%?
So, I guess Dec people really did fire everyone.
659 is a big number…..
I don’t know if the 522K is a projection or what they’ll actually announce tomorrow. (Of course, whatever it is, it’s likely to get revised upwards later.)
Probably not enough jobs lost to get Joe and Mika’s attention.
Update: ChrisB explains these numbers:
The jobs numbers come from the ADP Employment Report, which ADP derives from its payroll data. It’s not the official jobs report from the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, which comes out on Friday.
Fwiffo
Actually, I think the 522k number would be better than what some have been talking about. I’ve heard people worrying it would hit 7 digits in January.
DougJ
Yes, that’s right Fwiffo. I saw one projection of 1.2 million jobs lost.
Dave
@Fwiffo:
Well, once it’s revised upwards at the end of February I’m sure that’s where we’ll be at.
Zifnab
That’s a lot of severance and a massive hit to the work force. I mean, you’d literally be clearing out whole office buildings with those numbers. From Houston, I’m just not feeling that. It’s the sort of thing you’d think you would see on the evening news or feel in a pronounced decrease in traffic or something.
I hear a lot of these cuts were in preparation for belt tightening down the line. Sort of preemptive layoffs. I can’t imagine you’d cut a percentage point off the American workforce in a month just to prepare.
DougJ
Part of the reason for the high projection for January was the relatively low 500K for December. When it turned out that was really 660K, it meant essentially 160K jobs fewer to lose in January.
Still, even 700K for January might have looked optimistic a few weeks ago.
Common Sense
If you were looking for him, Victor David Hansen is cowering under the sheets.
Dave
@Common Sense:
That is the most insane post I have ever read in my life at a supposedly "mainstream" site. VDH went off his meds.
Michael D.
You have a direct line to Joe the Plumber??
DougJ
We g-chat about things from time to time.
Napoleon
I though the new numbers were to be released Friday.
cosanostradamus
.
I blame it all on Rush Limbaugh. He’s too fat. He needs a boycott. And a girlcott, too…
.
DougJ
There are pay services where you can get them early, I think.
former capitalist
So, how soon will the new unemployment rate reach 10%? Yesterday US automakers offered practically all hourly-paid workers buyouts and the January new vehicle sales numbers were horrible. Housing starts–in the tank. Commercial real estate is dying. I’ve quit reading the Cal. Risk commentors; if you believe all those guys, we’re heading for Armageddon. Soon .
Tax Cuts. Tax Cuts.
OriGuy
Why is the only industry that is not laying people off the pundit industry?
zzyzx
I was listening to NPR this morning and Juan Williams said that today’s press conference about Obama capping exec salaries for companies accepting bailout pay would end up being about Geithner’s tax issues. "It is unavoidable," that this would be brought up, said one of the people who would be bringing it up and could avoid it. Damn passive voice.
ChrisB
The jobs numbers come from the ADP Employment Report, which ADP derives from its payroll data. It’s not the official jobs report from the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, which comes out on Friday.
The ADP report has not been perfectly accurate in the past and I believe it changed its model a month or two ago. I’m no expert on it but I believe Wall Street focuses on it as a way to anticipate what the official numbers will be.
bago
Yeah. IE 8 has this feature called "InPrivate", where you can browse a website without keeping cookies and history and whatnot. Useful for browsing redtube and national review.
Punchy
Maybe I’m missing something, but it’s standard practice to grossly low-ball the number (to keep from spooking wall street), then, a month later, when nobody is paying attention to last month’s figures anymore, they "adjust" it 30% higher?
WTF?
magisterludi
Unemployment is higher than 10% now, I wager. There are lot of people who are self-employed not included. There was a time when the government cracked down on companies that contracted out labor to the same people on a regular basis (as a way to get out of offering benefits and FICA share), but no more. At least, not in TN. I know a lot of people out of work who were once employees, rehired as contract labor, and then phased out.
mikkel
Please don’t pay attention to the ADP report at all. Like ChrisB says, it has been woefully inaccurate the last year or so, so much so that they changed their model (last month was the first run). The ADP actually originally said 693k in December, so they actually revised down. Actually based on prior revisions their new one sounds pretty good for predicting the real employment number once it’s finalized.
Barry
OriGuy
"Why is the only industry that is not laying people off the pundit industry?"
The hard liquor industry is doing well, also.
The pundit industry produces delusion as their product; when times are hard, the Powers that Be need to spray doulbe doses of delusion on us.