[Sixstrings]

"Strongest job growth in a decade" the president and teevee news says. Sounds like good news, right? Well, the only problem is that 411,000 of these jobs are temporary census jobs, while the private sector only added 41,000 jobs. Another 322,000 unemployed Americans officially became "discouraged" and so we don't have to count them anymore. I always wonder how these "discouraged" folks get by -- supported by spouse? family? how do you just not work but have no other income?

So according to bloomberg news total net news jobs is 431,000 when you add in the 411k census and the 41k private sector. And then there's the "birth death model" which fudges all these numbers up by about 231,000.

Hm, "strongest job growth in a decade," eh? So what's that mean, counting each other is the road to economic prosperity? The market tanked on this news today, and for good reason. Obama was touting a "strong jobs" number last week, and so the market was expecting just that -- like at least 181k private sector. Nobody knew he was talking about just census jobs.

Remember, we need something like 220k added per month just to keep up with population increase, and that wouldn't even make a dent in the millions currently unemployed. To get the unemployed back to work, we'd have see around 450k sustained private sector jobs added, month after month for years.

And about those census jobs.. there's something REALLY FISHY about it. First of all, we have about 307 million people in the country. So if you hire half a million to go around counting, that means you have one census worker counting 614 people. That seems like way too many counting to me, especially if you take into account that the vast majority of people send their forms in anyway, and when you get right down to it the census is really all about counting anyone who doesn't have a social security number -- illegals, the Amish, and anyone else who somehow manages to get by in life without a social security number.

I think what's more likely is that no, we didn't really hire 411,000 new census workers in May. From what I've read, it looks like the census has been hiring and firing the same people multiple times just to inflate the numbers:

"What they do is hire you, they train you like a few weeks -- 35, 40 hours of training and give you six hours of productive work and lay you off." a former Census named "Maria" tells FOX News. "Maria" further explains they rehire you so it counts as a new job.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ar_thYFiXUk4

Now, I'm not against government jobs programs -- but it would be nice if they were real jobs, doing real things, and last at least until our economy is out of depression. But these census jobs are nothing.. all they get is 35 or 40 hours training and then very little work after that, and the job is temporary.

[copious.abundance]

I didn't hear any TV news call this the "strongest job growth in a decade." Nor could I find any quotes by Obama saying that either. Please provide a link. Otherwise you are just making up quotes. Just about everyone was disappointed in the number, so I do think you just made up that quote.

There were actually 114K fewer "discouraged workers" this month. Read the last line of the release. There were also fewer people working part-time for economic reasons, and even fewer working part-time for non-economic reasons.

As for the census, getting people to fill out their forms is harder than you think. I have actually been working on some census stuff at my job, and just yesterday we had one of the top people from the Census Bureau tell us that nationally the response rate is in the low 70%'s so far. So yes, they do need a lot of people to go out and do legwork to get people to sign the forms. This year's census is unprecedented in its effort, which is why they're hiring so many more people than in past censuses. I also guarantee you "Maria" is not typical. The census field workers are allowed to set their own hours. I'm not exactly sure how it works, but I think they're given a specific geographic area to cover, and once they've gotten all the people in that area to fill out their forms, they are done. It could be that some get their area done quickly and then have a furlough until they are assigned a new area.

But regardless, that's not how the BLS would have counted the census hires. The way it happens is, they do their establishment survey during a certain week each month (usually in the middle of the month). When they asked the Census Bureau how many people they had during the week in April, the Census Bureau told them it was X. In May when they did the same thing, it was X + 411,000. It could be that some people were hired, laid off, and then re-hired in the intervening weeks, but that doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the head count during each of the BLS survey weeks. Same goes with all other businesses and government entities they survey for their establishment survey.

[Outcast_Searcher]

As for the census, getting people to fill out their forms is harder than you think. I have actually been working on some census stuff at my job, and just yesterday we had one of the top people from the Census Bureau tell us that nationally the response rate is in the low 70%'s so far.

This doesn't surprise me, but the fact that they basically still use the same technology they used in the 50's (surveys by mail and follow-up by hordes on foot) is pretty outrageous.

And I DID see Obama talk about this (replay on CNBC) today. He admitted the nature of many of the jobs was temporary, citing the Census jobs. However, he did a bunch of crowing about how rosy, strong, and positive the report was, which clearly was intended to spin things his way.

.....

I watched the "official" congressional review of the progress of the Census Prep/plan last year on CSPAN, where this was discussed. With the internet, which could make this simpler, more efficient (email and a web based form, which most folks under 50 are familiar with) -- we should be able to save BILLIONS and make it more accurate.

But no, that might reduce some budget or government gimmick jobs, and heaven forbid anyone in government even consider THAT.

[Keith_McClary]

it would be nice if they were real jobs, doing real things, and last at least until our economy is out of depression. But these census jobs are nothing.. all they get is 35 or 40 hours training and then very little work after that, and the job is temporary.

Looks like a cool place to work, tho.

[Sixstrings]

I didn't hear any TV news call this the "strongest job growth in a decade." Nor could I find any quotes by Obama saying that either. Please provide a link. Otherwise you are just making up quotes. Just about everyone was disappointed in the number, so I do think you just made up that quote.

Good lord.. Oilfinder, I heard it on CNN today. The anchor said it, with a pretty smile, "strongest job growth in a decade." Trust me, I heard it. I wanted to throw a shoe at the TV.

I can't link something I heard on CNN.. it's a 24 hours news channel, they don't put everything online. But the "strongest job growth in a decade" meme appears to have originated with the Labor Department:

431,000 nonfarm jobs were added nationwide in May, the biggest increase in a month in a decade, said the labour department, on Friday. However, major jobs were government jobs, driven by hiring for 2010 census. The private sector job growth was weak.

(snip)

President Obama however, tried to put a positive spin on the jobs report by telling the workers that the addition of 431,000 new jobs in May demonstrated that the economy was “getting stronger by the day.”
http://www.lanewsmonitor.com/news/431-000-Jobs-added-In-May--But-Poor-Hiring-Disappoints-1275676517/

Really, the president shouldn't even point to the census as a sign of economic recovery -- these ARE NOT real jobs! It's just part time work, a once every ten year thing that is absolutely no sign the economy is "getting stronger by the day." We have a census every ten years no matter what, it's not like we only have a census when the economy "gets stronger" and creates all these census jobs.

EDIT: I read over my original post, and I was technically incorrect in saying "the president and teevee says." I heard an anchor repeat this line, but to clarify I didn't hear Obama say it -- I can't stand to listen to his speeches.

But it looks like "biggest increase in a month in a decade" originates with the Dept. of Labor, which is part of the Obama Administration and ultimately Obama is responsible for the spin they're trying to put on this. And the president himself included the census hirings in his speech today -- IMHO census numbers are irrelevant, it's impossible for part time temp work to stimulate long term growth for the simple fact that all these workers will soon be laid off (and because they play this game of hiring, firing, and rehiring them there won't be many who can collect unemployment).

But anyhow.. I don't "make things up" Oilfinder, this was just slightly sloppy posting on my part and wasn't intentional.

[copious.abundance]

Doing it by email would be an absolute no-go. If you think getting people to fill out a form mailed to them is hard, do you have any idea how difficult it would be to get a lot of people to give the government their email so they could send them a form? Not to mention people filling out multiple forms, and all kinds of other nasty stuff that can happen with email.

I spent much of 2 months late last year pouring over and correcting the Census Bureau's list of addresses in the jurisdiction I work for, and here's a bit of insight . . .

1. The people who fill out forms at an address must have that address as their main residence. This makes things complicated in many areas due to vacation homes. This is the case where I work. It can be VERY hard to tell if some houses are someone's permanent residence, or just a vacation house. The census field workers are required to visit a non-responding house 6 times before they are allowed to give up. Sometimes after a couple tries it becomes obvious the place is just a vacation house, but they are still required to try another 4 times afterwards.

2. Similary, in rural areas there are A LOT of trailer parks which are VERY hard to tell if someone lives there permanently, or if it is just a trailer park in someone's backyard that they let guests stay in occasionally. To make things more complicated, there are some large trailer parks which are intended to be vacation places, but which some people live in permanently.

3. There are A LOT of people both in urban and rural areas who don't trust the government to do anything, so the last thing they would want to do is fill out a form with their name, their wife and kids' names, their address, their race, etc., and hand it over to the government. Illegal immigrants, of course, would be one such group in this category.

4. A lot of people still do not have a computer and email. Needless to say, if they did an email census, reaching those people would be problematic.

As an aside, given #1-3, I suspect the response rates are a bit higher than the census states they are, but they don't know the nature of all the addresses they have, so they just go by the % of addresses that have filled out forms. For example, this is how they calculate that:

Let's say City Z keeps reasonably accurate records of all the residential addresses in their city limits (most cities do). They go through a process with the Census Bureau to verify all these addresses (this is what I did last year, and an employee before me did a first round of it with the Census Bureau in 2007-8, and the Census Bureau themself sends out field workers to check addresses). As noted in #1 and #2, there is a lot of uncertainty with some addresses. This is probably more of a problem in rural areas and decaying central cities than it is in suburban areas, whose residences tend to be easier to identify. Anyway, at some point at the end of this process they'll decide on a number - let's say they've come up with 7,822 residential addresses in City Z. It could be that 154 of those addresses actually were recently abandoned houses and vacation houses, but the workers at the city and the census couldn't be certain, so they decided to include them, just in case. Anyway, the Census Bureau will send out forms to each of those 7,822 residential addresses in March, and then wait a month or so.

By the April 15 "deadline," let's say the Census Bureau has received 6,581 forms back from City Z. That would be an 84% response rate - which is where the initial "response rate" figure comes from. But in reality, City Z only had 7,678 qualifying addresses, so the "real" response rate was 86%. However, both the Census Bureau and City Z don't really know that because they assumed the 154 borderline addresses were legitimate (though undoubtedly some employees have a hunch about the number since they were the ones who reviewed the addresses, but they aren't really sure).

At this point is where the Census Bureau starts sending out field workers to get people to fill out their forms. Sometimes they get people to fill out the forms, sometimes they find out the houses are vacation houses or otherwise not occupied, and sometimes the yards of the houses are guarded by pit bulls with "No Tresspassing" signs all over the place and the field worker just does not have good odds of getting ahold of those people. And sometimes the occupants of the house are alcoholics or drug addicts with whom you cannot have a coherent conversation with . . . and all kinds of other "interesting" stuff.

Anyway, given all the problems and issues which arise trying to count people in real life, I don't even want to imagine all the problems and mayhem which would almost certainly occur if they tried to do this via email.

And as another aside, I am sometimes accused of blindly believing government statistics. In my own job I help to *generate* some government statistics, so I have a good idea how bad or good they might be. They are certainly not perfect, but it is impossible to get perfect statistics on anything like this, so if anyone thinks they have better data, they are naiive.

[copious.abundance]

I didn't hear any TV news call this the "strongest job growth in a decade." Nor could I find any quotes by Obama saying that either. Please provide a link. Otherwise you are just making up quotes. Just about everyone was disappointed in the number, so I do think you just made up that quote.

Good lord.. Oilfinder, I heard it on CNN today. The anchor said it, with a pretty smile, "strongest job growth in a decade." Trust me, I heard it. I wanted to throw a shoe at the TV.

I can't link something I heard on CNN.. it's a 24 hours news channel, they don't put everything online.

Well, if they did indeed phrase it that way ("strongest") then yes you would be justified in throwing a shoe at them. If they said "largest" they would have been technically correct, but a bunch of temporary census jobs I would not call "strong" although it might be "large."

But the "strongest job growth in a decade" meme appears to have originated with the Labor Department:

431,000 nonfarm jobs were added nationwide in May, the biggest increase in a month in a decade, said the labour department, on Friday. However, major jobs were government jobs, driven by hiring for 2010 census. The private sector job growth was weak.

That said "biggest" not "strongest" - and technically speaking, if you look at the historical data for the past decade, it was indeed the "biggest."

Furthermore, that wording appears to be the article-writer's work, not the Labor Department words. If you read through the Labor Department's press release they do not use either the word "biggest" or "strongest."

President Obama however, tried to put a positive spin on the jobs report by telling the workers that the addition of 431,000 new jobs in May demonstrated that the economy was “getting stronger by the day.”
http://www.lanewsmonitor.com/news/431-000-Jobs-added-In-May--But-Poor-Hiring-Disappoints-1275676517/

Really, the president shouldn't even point to the census as a sign of economic recovery -- these ARE NOT real jobs! It's just part time work, a once every ten year thing that is absolutely no sign the economy is "getting stronger by the day." We have a census every ten years no matter what, it's not like we only have a census when the economy "gets stronger" and creates all these census jobs.

I hope you don't realistically expect the president to emphasize the report's weaknesses.

[careinke]

I've been working for the census for a couple of weeks now. Not as an enumerator, but a clerk. It's pretty interesting to see how the whole thing works, (and in some cases doesn't).

To get hired on, you have to take a timed test. In our area (Tacoma), you had to get at least a 97 percent or you didn't stand a chance of getting hired. I am naturally very good at taking tests, and this one pushed me, I finished with just three minutes to spare. Most in the room did not finish in time.

The workers are an eclectic mix but overall pretty competent group of people. There are retired types like me who are working to get a few toys (plus, I wanted to see how the census worked), young college students, military wives, retired military guys, people who are desperate for any thing while looking for a permanent job.

My job (and about 40 others is to QC the forms as they come in and check them into the computer.

When you get hired you take the same oath I took when I became a Military Officer. Except, they added a strong protection of privacy clause. I can honestly tell you the US Census takes your privacy VERY seriously. One of the posters in the office has in bold letters NO INS, NO IRS, NO FBI, NO CIA, then it goes on about how we can not talk to those folks about any thing we have seen as census workers. Penalties for breaking the privacy rules 5 years and $250,000.

One last thing, the least important piece of information on you, your name. The census does not even use your name for any statistical analysis. The only reason they collect it, is to release it for genealogy purposes AFTER 72 years have past. So if you don't give your name, the only affect it would have, is your great grand kids would not be able to track you down.

[Sixstrings]

Furthermore, that wording appears to be the article-writer's work, not the Labor Department words. If you read through the Labor Department's press release they do not use either the word "biggest" or "strongest."

Darn it, you're right. But you know, you don't have to be rude -- you can tell someone they're incorrect and then tell them why, you don't have to say "you're making stuff up."

I hope you don't realistically expect the president to emphasize the report's weaknesses.

I dunno.. how could he spin these numbers with a straight face? What I expected him to do was come out with a real stimulus bill, not what we got which was really just a bailout to the states. "Saving jobs" is not "creating jobs." IMO, the only kind of job creation that has any chance of stimulating the economy are infrastructure and R&D jobs. Saving a teacher's job (via bailout to the state) is not creating a new job. You can make an argument that in a deflationary spiral it makes sense to not fire government workers, but you still need to do something very big to actually stimulate growth.

There are so many things we could have done.. a nationwide high speed rail network, for one. That may have had a real impact, changing the cost, volume, and speed at which goods can be shipped, making it more viable for commuters to work farther from home, etc. That's what you have to do to stimulate an economy, something radically different that lays a groundwork for private business to build upon. Of course, maybe no amount of real stimulus would have worked, but at least we'd have something more tangible than just half a million folks running around counting people.

[careinke]

The census is not a stimulus package. It is required by Article one, section two of the Constitution. Silly Wabbit.

[Sixstrings]

I've been working for the census for a couple of weeks now. Not as an enumerator, but a clerk. It's pretty interesting to see how the whole thing works, (and in some cases doesn't).

I've read in the NY Post and a few other places about census workers being hired, then fired, and rehired over and over. Working there, have you encountered any of this?

One of the posters in the office has in bold letters NO INS, NO IRS, NO FBI, NO CIA, then it goes on about how we can not talk to those folks about any thing we have seen as census workers. Penalties for breaking the privacy rules 5 years and $250,000.

Wow, they tell you to not talk to the CIA, that's pretty intense.

One last thing, the least important piece of information on you, your name. The census does not even use your name for any statistical analysis. The only reason they collect it, is to release it for genealogy purposes AFTER 72 years have past. So if you don't give your name, the only affect it would have, is your great grand kids would not be able to track you down.

I don't know, it's just never made sense to me since the government already knows everything about us -- national id compliant DL's and state ID's, state birth certificate records, social security records, school registrations. With all those databases, they could get a close enough number of how many people we have and who lives where.

And so, the whole reason for having half a million people work on the census must be to count the homeless and the undocumented. Constitutionally, congress allots electoral votes and districts based on total people not whether they're here legally or not.

By the way, when I complain about the census I'm just irritated that they're touting census hirings as evidence the economy is adding jobs. As far as the census itself I don't have a problem with it -- sounds like you guys take it seriously and do a good job.

[Sixstrings]

The census is not a stimulus package. It is required by Article one, section two of the Constitution. Silly Wabbit.

It's also not a sign the economy is improving. My point was that instead of talking about census hirings, Obama should have passed a genuine stimulus package to deal with the depression.

And while constitutionally required, some people think the census is being used to inflate the jobs numbers -- hiring too many people, firing and hiring them over and over, etc. If that's true, it's like a pseudo-stimulus.

[careinke]

I see your point. I think the census at this time is a lucky coincidence. It's helping out some that need it while at the same time knocking out a constitutional requirement. I have not noticed nor heard about firing/rehiring in our area. But I've only been there a couple of weeks.

Mostly when you finish your tasks you get reassigned immediately to help out somewhere else. The less than stellar performers just don't get reassigned.

The big question is how the Obama administration is going to cover up the mass layoffs from the census starting Aug/Sep?

[Buggy]

Let's do some simple math. Subtract the temporary census worker job numbers from the private sector job numbers and what do you get? That's right, the market tanked because the jobs report should have been negative in the hundreds of thousands. But I'm not sure how all that works. Can't wait until the census is over to see how the numbers get spun. I imagine unemployment will mystically drop to 9% or some crap.

[Keith_McClary]

I am sometimes accused of blindly believing government statistics.

How about blindly regurgitating press releases (either the stock-price-promoting corporate ones or the OPEC-reserve-boosting variety) ?

[Plantagenet]

The census is not a stimulus package. It is required by Article one, section two of the Constitution.

While the census is required by the constitution, the 2010 census was funded as part of the 2009 stimulus bill and was designed to constitute yet another a stimulus package. Consider the fact that the 2010 census hiring numbers are THREE TIMES larger then that in 2000. The vast majority of the census workers are doing make-work. Here in my little town in Alaska we've got multiple people sitting at tables in restaurants with a little sign saying "ask about the census". Nobody ever interrupts their lunch or dinner to go over and "ask about the census" and the census "workers" never do anything but drink coffee and play solitaire on their computers...hour after hour...day after day. When the restaurant was closed for a week, the census workers just sat in the grass outside for the day.

The same thing is being duplicated all over the country because the census is deisgned to be a stimulus package---as MISH discusses in the link below, the census is hiring almost a million more workers then it actually needs.

MISH article about massive census hiring being just more stimulus

[Sixstrings]

Here in my little town in Alaska we've got multiple people sitting at tables in restaurants with a little sign saying "ask about the census". Nobody ever interrupts their lunch or dinner to go over and "ask about the census" and the census "workers" never do anything but drink coffee and play solitaire on their computers...hour after hour...day after day. When the restaurant was closed for a week, the census workers just sat in the grass outside for the day.

Plant, you should really make their day and walk over and "ask about the census." You could say you just want to make sure you were counted, and they can all take turns double and triple checking that yup, you've been counted.

[careinke]

Where I'm working I certainly have not seen any one just sitting around. The computer system up until a few days ago has been very touchy and crash prone. As a result we are working of a large back log of NRFU (Non Response Follow UP) forms prepared by the counters.

My rough guesstimate is it costs about $50 to $70 extra to go out and get the info from every Household that did not bother to send in their original mailings. With a 70 percent response rate that adds up to well over a billion wasted tax dollars just become some idiot was to lazy to fill out his census form. Sometimes the counters end up going out six times just to get one count.

Bottom line, you are paying more taxes because others are lazy.

[Plantagenet]

Where I'm working I certainly have not seen any one just sitting around.

Prior to April 29, the census staffed what they called "Be Counted" info sites and "Questionnaire Assistance Centers" in neighborhoods all across the country-----in my little town these were set up in restaurants and in our little library. I'm just back from a trip to Denver and Aspen, and I saw the same thing. Bored people sat for weeks at tables covered with little pamphlets about the census and festooned with colorful "ask me about the census" banners . I never saw anyone ask them about the census. It was a complete waste of money.

This kind of useless "make-work" government job is typical of the kind of "stimulus" jobs created by the 2009 stimulus bill that set up the census, and is one of the reasons the budget deficit under Obama has exploded to 1.6 TRILLION dollars this year at the same time that the rolls of the unemployed have grown to over 17% of the population (including the "discouraged", of course).

[Questionmark]

I too am a temporary census worker and I would like to say that those QAC positions were very short lived and easily the smallest operation put into motion. At least that's how it was in Brooklyn, NY. Most of those clerks worked about 15 hours a week and were let go after a month. The vast majority of census employees are enumerators, which are also month long positions. There definitely are a lot of unnecessary employees but I would say that's more to do with the government trying extra hard to reach as accurate a count as possible this time around as opposed to a scheme used to inflate job numbers.