Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (694216)	7/27/2005 5:46:53 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Respond to of 769670

--Stone & McCarthy (Princeton)--The early consensus on July payrolls per both the Market News international and Bloomberg surveys of economists is for a rise of about 175,000 to 180,000. This is very much in line with the year to-date average payroll increase of 181,000. June payrolls rose 146,000. smra.com In recent years July payrolls have fallen short of market expectations, including a 201,000 shortfall in July 2004. In fact, in 4 of the past 5 years the initial print on July payrolls was below the median estimate (MNI survey). Over the past 20 years the performance of economists in predicting July payrolls has been more mixed, with about half the time overshooting and half the time undershooting. Our forecast for July payrolls is somewhat softer at +155,000, or about 25,000 below the median estimate. Initially, we had pencilled in a 180,000 number, but have since fudged this lower after considering 2 factors. First, the Births/Deaths model should reduce the not seasonally adjusted level of July payrolls by about 80,000 following making an addition to June payrolls of 184,000. Only in January and July does this model reduce payrolls, in the other 10 months it positively impacts on the BLS's monthly payroll estimate. While this is a recurring pattern from year to year, it doesn't appear to be fully smoothed away by the seasonal adjustment factors. Over the past couple of years, January and July payroll changes have been relatively weak, while April (the month in which the contribution is the largest) has exhibit relatively strong payroll gains. Secondly, there is some indication that July and August payroll changes may suffer some recurring downward bias. Looking solely at private sector payrolls, to remove distortions caused by Census workers, the average changes in July payrolls over the past 17 years has been only 84,000 in July and 94,000 in August, compared to 116,000 for the other 11 months. Is this pattern of relative weakness in July and August simply a random event, a statistical coincidence, or is there some underlying explanation of this pattern? We think that there may be some statistical rationale for this pattern of the data. Specifically, we think the problem may be in the seasonal adjustment methodology. The BLS seasonally adjusts the payroll data on a disaggregated basis. In other words, the subcomponents are independently seasonally adjusted and summed to the super-sector and aggregate level. The beauty of this approach is that it provides for an intuitively pleasing outcome in which the sum of the seasonally adjusted components is equal to the seasonally adjusted headline payroll count. The disadvantage to this approach is that it doesn't guarantee that the headline payroll number, or even the super-sector totals, won't exhibit residual seasonality. Residual seasonality is when a seasonally adjusted series still exhibits a recurring seasonal pattern, in other words, when the seasonality isn't fully removed. For example, if payrolls are softer in July and August, as they seem to be, this would likely be the result of residual seasonality.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (694216)	7/27/2005 6:50:35 PM
From: tonto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

That is great news!

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (694216)	7/27/2005 7:21:28 PM
From: Wayners	Respond to of 769670

In case you didn't pass civics class, the President runs the Exective Branch of the Federal Govt. Even the actions of the Federal Reserve are outside his control. President Bush does not run any corporations, does not decide who commercial banks lend to, and he does not control the investing activities of venture capitalists. Bush does not have control over corporate revenue or earnings. Bush does have control over the the SEC and the enforcement of laws and regulations under their cognizanze. But if you are asking the SEC to manipulate stocks in the stock market to satisfy your greed lust, and blaming Bush for them not doing it, then you're quite frankly an idiot.