I wanted to share an interesting graph. This is sampled from a Hamilton Project paper.
As you can see the results of the household are diverging from those of the establishment survey, at this point by more than two percentage points of total employed. The household survey has some significant differences from the establishment survey including:
- Each individual is counted only once
- It is not limited to people over 16
- It includes some number of people who are working “off the books”
Not surprising and it’s good to know both numbers. Puts the LFP numbers in perspective.
Only slightly OT link goes to analysis of the effects of immigration on labor. ( Actually an analysis of an original paper but with extra references.)
https://reason.com/volokh/2024/03/10/mass-deportations-of-immigrants-destroy-more-native-born-american-jobs-than-they-create/
I thought this was the most underreported news last week.
From Bloomberg (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-14/california-added-far-fewer-high-pay-jobs-than-previously-thought)
“The state added only 50,000 jobs overall in the 12 months through September 2023, a stark contrast to the 300,000 jobs originally thought to have been created, the state’s Legislative Analyst’s Office…”
The original California State Legislative report is here (https://lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/801)
What raised my eyebrows was the 300,000 estimate came from the Federal Governments Labor Department’s establishment payroll survey; while 50,000 came from actual payroll records collected at the end of the year.
The state also noted the household survey was far more accurate than the payroll survey last year in estimating the actual number of jobs created.
Last thought: historically the payroll survey is generally more accurate than the household survey except during turns into recessions — the household survey catches the turn sooner than the payroll survey, although both are lagging indicators.
That’s interesting. Since the BLS relies on the state-level reporting, when a state as large as California makes such a large revision in its estimate that’s bound to have run-on effects.
Shorter: the actual unemployment rate is higher than what has been reported.
California’s population is increasing, too. Just not its high-paying jobs.
California’s population is increasing, too.
Actually that’s not true; (https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/12/19/californias-population-shrunk-in-2023-for-the-third-straight-year-but-exodus-slowed/)
I will say there’s a good chance that population estimates are underestimates because of the migrant surge.
That’s what I was referring to.