Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Alcoa Inc. Message Board

  • fidelissemper fidelissemper Jan 7, 2011 9:12 AM Flag

    Unemployment Numbers

    Anybody find it curious that the "guesstimates" from "analcysts" was super high? Seems like they were once again trying to paint a bad picture when it is indeed getting better and has been for many months now. any way they can spin the doom and gloom these days. Predict 300,000 plus new jobs? why so high? hmmm I think 100,000 plus added and unemployment dropping is great news but not the way you see the "stories" written up. I really hate the media manipulators most of the time but I am on to there game...they duped us into a war with Iraq and never to be trusted again without massive grains of salt sprinkled throughout the BS that passes for main stream media.

    That said, GL all, AA will rock this year. Long, strong and loving it.

    Peace

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Give it up. You're just digging a deeper hole to fall in with every attempt to prove a falsehood.

    • Regardless of whom you supposedly slap, you're still stupid.

    • The reason I argue U4 is a better measure is simple - just because people have become discouraged and stopped looking does not therefore mean they are out of the labor force.



      http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c27463a0-1a64-11e0-b003-00144feab49a.html#axzz1AS4p7bAO

      This could explain it so even trolito can understand.

      "
      The problem is that the monthly payrolls report contains two different measures – a survey of households and a survey of employers – and in December they pointed in different directions.

      The employment survey, the normal focus of attention, showed overall growth in payrolls of only 103,000. That was well below expectations, especially after a disappointing November report and a remarkably high estimate from private- sector payroll processor ADP earlier this week.

      Yet the household survey, from which the unemployment rate is calculated, sent a completely different message. It showed an extra 297,000 people in jobs and 260,000 fewer people in the labour force. The combination of the two was enough to cause a drop in the unemployment rate from 9.8 to 9.4 per cent.

      The reality – taking the trend in both measures and other recent data together – is likely to be somewhere in between. Jobs growth is picking up a bit to more than 100,000 a month but still shows no sign of a dramatic acceleration......There are a few theories to explain all the moves in the data. One is seasonal adjustments, which tend to be tricky at the end of the year and may have distorted the ADP numbers.

      The difference between the household and business survey data is most likely just a one-off, although there are some suggestions that the business survey may have a slight bias towards larger companies, and their hiring behaviour could be different.

      *************Most analysts attribute the fall in labour force participation and therefore the fall in the unemployment rate, to the expiry of long-term unemployment benefits in December***********

      If you no longer receive unemployment benefits, the theory goes, then you no longer have any reason to tell a survey you are ac-tively looking for work. The number of “discouraged workers”, who say that they are no longer looking for a job because they do not think they can find one, was 1.3m in December.

    • The reason I argue U4 is a better measure is simple - just because people have become discouraged and stopped looking does not therefore mean they are out of the labor force.

      They want a job and ultimately find one.

      In either case, even if I grant that discouraged workers are out of the work force, is a smaller work force good for the economy?

      We're not debating definitions on this board - we're talking about Alcoa's future in a broad contextual sense.

      Regardless of your read, does this report bode well for Alcoa?

      My sense is the unemployment report does not bode well for the overall economy, and is generally neutral with regard to companies with significant international exposure.

      Regards,

      Warlord

    • "Swing and a miss, speedbag"

      "LOL. Please point out one error of fact I've, or admit you can't, whichever is easier"
      .
      .
      .
      I think by now everyone is underwhelmed by the depth of your refudiation of what I posted - no - wait - just reread what you posted above - - - no refudiation there - just some name calling - "why ma not surprised"?



      http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_A/threadview?m=tm&bn=2&tid=228025&mid=228103&tof=2&rt=1&frt=2&off=1

    • Swing and a miss, speedbag.

    • LOL. Please point out one error of fact I've, or admit you can't, whichever is easier.
      .
      .
      .

      http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_A/threadview?m=tm&bn=2&tid=228025&mid=228103&tof=2&rt=1&frt=2&off=1

    • LOL. Please point out one error of fact I've, or admit you can't, whichever is easier.

    • "In fact, you won't challenge a thing I said now, because you can't. So feel free to point out I slap around a lot of ignorant folks like yourself on this topic"
      .
      .
      .
      .
      I notice you didn't refudiate anything I posted - instead - a feeble attempt at intimidation - funny thing - just saying something doesn't make it so - if you want me to feel "slapped around like ignorant folk" you're going to have post facts and "refudiate" my figures. Can't do it - - - - - "why ma not surprised"?

    • Doom & Gloom?? What planet are you from?? We need 125,000 new jobs just to keep up with new people entering the work force. 100K per month doesn't even keep up with that much less lower the millions looking. You sound like one of the hope & hype crowd.lol Normal recoveries would have seen 300K-400K jobs created per month ONE YEAR AGO already. Where's the beef??

      The other reality is many of these jobs are made up by a computer model known as the birth/death model. It assumes but can't prove so many new jobs created each month. I'll post next month on the 2010 revisions. Last year they yanked 1.3 MILLION jobs away that were reported monthly but never existed in 09.

      The reality is most of these jobs gains are bogus. The drop in the unemployment rate is simply people losing their unemployment insurance so they are no longer counted. Unemployment is NOT DROPPING! Just statistical garbage. 100K jobs isn't enough to drop anything in a country with 325 million people. People need to use their heads.

 
AA
9.76-0.02(-0.20%)Sep 23 4:00 PMEDT