Measurement of unemployment data is no-standardized around the globe.
Straight comparison of net numbers equates to a disparate way of impossible parity. It's as opposite as comparing random surveys versus mandatory agency fillings in most cases.
Now, it is not possible to compare data from one country to another. Adjustments of data requires substantial amount of labor, and in most cases, anyone in such work has it well keep under lock.
A macro-economist formulating global economic changes will adjust the official reported job numbers differently. No a very helpful way to give some light to the issue and create opinion. A good potion to be biased.
A realist will adjust unemployment numbers with a plus 4.0 from the official US job report, with seasonal adjustments, for the EU employment numbers with add a plus 0.7 with no seasonal adjustments. The subject is difficult and it will not be resolved. But the reality is, the EU uses very tight measurements for employment stats and the labor department in the US plays it by ear when it pleases an it is convenient.
Work in the subject of labor statistics around the globe is available at Harvard U, and the Chicago U Economics web sites for anyone to read it.
A “cute” example, Mexico claims 3% unemployment rate. Using the same suggested measures by their USDL. One wonders, how Mexico gets to that number? Magic, anyone working 5 hours a month is considered employ for that month.
Go figure, low unemployment in Mexico!!!!
If that's not an incentive to cross the Rio Grande in search of more than 5 hours a month. I wonder what it is. Mexico continues ot report 3.5% unemployment rate and no one steps up and says: 19%.
I Play By Ear This One.
The US the employment data is a survey done by phone to a group of interested parties, HR departments, corporate executive opinions, household opinions, and the DOL databank from the employment offices.
The job creation data is a measure of phone calls made to a sample of variables. After all that, it becomes an opinion weighted as opinion and reported as secure and empirical. Well, who knew, we make the employment number as we please fit!!!
Basically, and mildly put, a questionable way to account for those individuals out of a job, or a perfect tool to deceive, and a faulty way to compare data.
A pseudo-fact straight out of official bean counter’ mills.
Some assert, good enough to be measured against self deception.
Really worthless, if the raw data is compared against other empirical data from places as France using unrelated sources and totally well register and tabulated system. The results for USDL might as well be used for manure talk.
It is far to raise questions about the validity of the survey method. As a measure of empirical validity, further more, to compare local data with a global economy, is more or less dangeorus sausage making.
The global employment information affects economies more than ever. Accuracy of data cost big tax payers money and it is big business and should be reliable.
If the survey is done in a politically sensitive area, the data can have a margin or error, some say, the margin is too great to be fully reliable (of up to 5 points), as we are experiencing in latest reports.
Overall, the survey tries to do a good sampling with poor input.
It does not imply a thing. As the data is presently gathered; equals as, a person telling someone something. Some economists in “sotto voce” call this type of accounting method: story telling.
After all, estimates are easy to manipulate using different geographical areas or targeted groups. Again, this process is not under scrutiny economists, conveniently only a few are taking stand and question the politburo, but they are not given national forum to be heard.
It is disturbing, the constant finding of large gaps in variances in the data as they release teh numbers month after month.
The latest accuracy "tasty" results; are not encouraging, where are actuarial experts? Bean counters should be for accuracy and no some bogus abstraction. The latest findings indicate this released of data opinions are biased.
Most peeple feel, this is based in political interests. It will be fair to tell those actuarial experts releasingthe numnbers, welcome to Arnold's word.....BABY.
If politics continues to distort reliable numbers, continues to affect policy decisions. It is becoming a little too late to correct anything created by spinners. Hubris is not a good recipe for penitence.
The next comment represents a fair example how reality works.
In the US, if a person is out of a job for 26 weeks; normal time to be unemployed in many high tech jobs. Specially, while these knowledge intensive jobs are getting one way trip to Bangalore and Shangai. The DOL unemployment roll does not account anyone after those 26 weeks. Adjustments are made internally but not reported as a continued unemployed individual. Another one no in teh count, a person receiving income assistance, no under disability but because of family or poverty situation, does not account as unemployed.
Let's take the state of Kansas, the state claims 8.2% of the population are under different income assistance programs. More than half of those individuals do not have a job. Those individuals are not accounted as unemployed.
If you take the US unemployment numbers and techniques of gathering this data, and compare it to EC labor numbers, it will put Kansas with an unemployment rate of 14.8%, no adjusted for seasonality.
The discrepancies are clear comparing one system to account employment versus other.
Until civilized governments agree in one standard, for accuracy and good global government shake. Each country accounting method can be compared only to itself. Unless, you are in Italy, then might as well drink a good amount of grappa, and come up with a number.
If we take Germany, this is an example of well organized system.
The comparison of Germany's unemployment rate with the US, as is constantly reported in the news and by spin-masters is a totally an erroneous linear approach.
Germany mandates filling with the employement agency to all individuals and companies to apply for assitance. The incentive is to receive health care, and a decent and good salary while in transition; to receive a basic 18 months of salary and health care benefit coverage while unemployed, the individual must be enrolled at the LB office.
After the max 2 years period the individual still needs to present himself to the employment agency and be coutned. Unless, the individual becomes incapacitated to labor -the law makes small exceptions but in general it's how it works-.
It is in the German worker interest to follow the procedure, and all is done with a classic German seriousness of sophisticated control. Small offices in most townships are mandated to keep extreme accurate numbers and ntional statistics continue to be serious bussines in Germany.
A German worker losing a job, until it reaches the age of 65 will be accounted as unemployed, or until it fins a job. I know some changes are taking place, with a rigorous accounting method and admirable efficiency. If changes are substantial, we will hear it from German citizens.
Imagine, a German worker gets up to 65% of its salary for the first year, if it becomes unemployed, as it happens to many Germans. Yeahaa!!! 65% of their employment earnings! With this kind of benefits, you can bet workers will file for unemployment benefits for the full period.
Next, time you hear a pundit comparing economies, see it yourself or live with their fallacies. The reality is much different than what most people think. Western Europe (except England) and the US have one thing that is different, it is the risk implied in the future of individuals, you can create a stable future in Europe, US citizens cannot say the same anymore, in the US the industrialist elite has waged a class war and won. The rest is as similar as Main Streets USA.
Those generous benefits cost the paper to print. This money appeats in the system very fast.
No comments:
Post a Comment