Jobs report, and a thought experiment.

When I hear a new jobs report is out, the first thing I always do is go check the Birth/Death Model to see how many "modelled" jobs were added to the unadjusted numbers this month. This time, it's +185,000 jobs! Yay! Keep in mind that the Birth/Death Model has not gone consistently negative at any point in this recession, tho' it did go negative - like it always does, even in good economic times¹ - last January. But that was it.

The BLS talks about the birth/death model - which models jobs added or lost (in theory) due to new businesses starting up and old businesses failing or closing - and how tends to lag behind turning points in the economy - it'll keep adding jobs for a while as jobs are actually lost, then more accurately reflect reality as job losses accelerate in the depths of the recession, then lose jobs when jobs are starting to be added in real life, then add jobs as the recovery picks up steam and real job additions are increasing. But beyond that, they refuse to disclose how it works, in any way. It's a black box. At this point, of course, everyone who follows it just assumes it's a number-massaging tool to make things look better than they are. I certainly do.

But it occurred to me: what if it's not? Let's pretend, for a moment, that the BD model is honest, and just broken, and is lagging economic reality, as is stated. Just as a thought experiment.

That would imply that we're still in stage one - adding jobs as jobs are lost early in the recession. Before job losses get really bad and the recession really starts to grind home. In the last recession, you had a substantial streak of at least well-mixed negative/positive birth/dead adds and losses - say, from 2002, from July 2002 to February 2003, you had adds and losses that came to a total of -151,000. More importantly - because of January - you had birth/death model job losses four months out of eight, or, backing up out of 2003, three months out of six.

That's what the "bottoming out" period looks like in this model, when the worst of the recession is upon us. We don't have that yet. What does that, in turn, imply?

Taking data again from the previous recession - which is unfortunately the only one using this model - it implies substantial continuing job losses into 2010 and quite possibly 2011, and I suspect that's where the "green shoots"/"recovery" combined with "continuing rise in unemployment" mixed message comes from.² It implies a target U-3 (headline number) unemployment rate of somewhere between 11% and 13.5%, and a U-6 (under- and unemployment) in the 23%ish-range - something comparable to the Great Depression. (And if you didn't read footnote 1 when it was referenced above, please go do so.)

Of course, that assumes it's not just a numbers-manipulation tool. It's probably that. But if it's not - if we take them at their word - then you have this message from their model: unemployment is going to get substantially worse before anything gets better.

Good luck.

---

¹: From BDA historical model: Jan08: -378,000. Jan07: -175,000. Jan06: -193,000. Jan05: -280,000. Jan04: -321,000. Jan03: -391,000. In other words, the January 09 subtraction of -356,000 number is less than the numbers shown at the worst of the previous recession, in the tech crash, and not hugely out of line in comparison to non-recessionary periods such as January 04. It has functionally never turned negative in this recession.

²: And if the "green shoots" terminology doesn't remind you of Hoover administration propaganda from 1931, it should. It really, really, should.

too many tabs open

Too many tabs open, time to make some links!

If you favour an inclusive ENDA and have a US Congressional representative, please follow this link and see if your Representative in Congress is part of the problem, because there is one - reportedly, there still aren't enough Representatives signed on. Awesome, by which I mean fuck all of you, but, well, don't tell them that. Just say "stop being dicks and sign on." Oh wait, no, don't use the word "dicks."

The Volokh Conspiracy has commentary on Mr. Obama's speech regarding Don't Ask/Don't Tell.

The EFF reports on warrantless mass email snooping that's still, of course, ongoing. Isn't that nice. Remember, Mr. Obama is for this. Here's an action item on repealing the FISA extensions many of us were fighting last year. To the surprise of no one, even the minimal protections and restrictions of these act have done no good whatsoever and are being ignored.

The Obama administration has also invoked state secrets to block another EFF lawsuit, this one for a proposed treaty, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). What's in it? We don't know, but it reportedly looks a lot like DMCA II, as a treaty:

Very little is known about ACTA, currently under negotiation between the U.S. and more than a dozen other countries, other than that it is not limited to anti-counterfeiting measures. Leaked documents indicate that it could establish far-reaching customs regulations governing searches over personal computers and iPods. Multi-national IP corporations have publicly requested mandatory filtering of Internet communications for potentially copyright-infringing material, as well as the adoption of "Three Strikes" policies requiring the termination of Internet access after repeat allegations of copyright infringement, like the legislation recently invalidated in France. Last year, more than 100 public interest organizations around the world called on ACTA country negotiators to make the draft text available for public comment.

Isn't that lovely. Always remember that treaties have more power than laws, in the US system.

Oh, and the national ID card is being revived in the Senate, this time as "PASS ID" rather than "REAL ID."

Here, have more on NPR and the torture lies.

Eastside asshat Ken Hutcherson gets some time on the American Family Association's pet news service, One News Now, by attacking GBLT rights and Mr. Obama's commentary last Monday.

The Washington Post got caught red-handed selling access to its reporters and "those powerful few" who were not named but are described as "Obama administration officials, Congress members, business leaders, advocacy leaders and other select minds typically on the guest list of 20 or less." Also, members of the newspaper staff. After being busted, they're saying the flyer was "prepared by the Marketing department and was never vetted by... the newsroom." Sure, whatever. I'd comment on "must've been nice having credibility," but, well, that horse left the barn some time ago.

Take that, Mets!

"Furries Convention keeps Mets awake." Apparently the New York Mets were in Pittsburgh just in time for Anthrocon - and shared the hotel. Says WABC:

Playing an afternoon game, the Mets might be a little tired because of The Furries. The Mets, who played in Pittsburgh for a weather make-up game on Thursday, stayed at the same hotel as the Furries Convention.

Lots of Mets players were Tweeting that they could not get any sleep due to people dressed as furry animals running around the hotel.

In related news, here's a blog consisting entirely of pictures of foxes.