You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
ES Journal Archive (2006 - 2008)
- Thread starter Buy1Sell2
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
This is going around the currency market this morning.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01312008/business/fridays_jobs_report_may_shock_markets_810457.htm
FRIDAY'S JOBS REPORT MAY SHOCK MARKETS
January 31, 2008 -- CLASS is in session! Put out your smokes and get your feet off the desk.
I've already predicted that this Friday's employment number could be shockingly bad. And yesterday the Federal Reserve cited "some softening in the labor markets" as one of two key reasons it took the bold move of cutting interest rates for the second time in two weeks.
While I hope my prediction for Friday is wrong (really, I do), I'd like to give you a step-by-step guide to understanding why the job expansion - or even a contraction - in January may not be as ugly as it could appear.
Yes, I'm showing the glass half-full in this column.
Follow closely because this guide will make you smarter than almost everyone on Wall Street (which really isn't saying much.) You will need a computer, so kick your kid off MySpace for a few minutes.
Step 1: Turn the machine on. (OK, that's obvious but you never know.)
Step 2: Go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Web site - www.bls.gov
Step 3: Go to "Advanced Search" at the top of the page and type in birth/death model.
Step 4: That'll take you to a page that says CES Birth/Death Model Frequently Asked Questions. Skip over the Q&A and click on Return to CES Net Birth/Death Model, which is all the way down at the bottom.
Step 5: You've found the treasure - a chart that is the main reason why the monthly employment figures have been distorting the employment picture for years.
Step 6: Look at the 2007 chart and you'll see that last January the Labor Department subtracted 175,000 jobs from its physical count because it believed its surveyors failed to pick up companies that it thinks - but can't prove - went out of business after the holidays.
If you look to the right of that negative 175,000 number, you'll notice that in every other month the BLS adds tons of jobs because it believes its survey is missing a whole lot of new companies that are being born.
January is the "death" part of the Model; the other 11 months are the "birth." Are that many jobs really quietly lost in January? And are hundreds of thousands of jobs created in the other 11 months by companies quietly popping up here and there? The answer is "no" to both questions.
But that's not the point of this column.
We're not trying to figure out the real job growth in the country. We are just determining how Friday's report will be funky because of statistical distortions.
January is always a month in which the BLS subtracts jobs from its count - 193,000 in 2006; 280,000 in '05; 321,000 in '04 and 211,000 in 2003.
VIEW FULL ARTICLE >PAGE 1 2 CONTINUE READING >
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01312008/business/fridays_jobs_report_may_shock_markets_810457.htm
FRIDAY'S JOBS REPORT MAY SHOCK MARKETS
January 31, 2008 -- CLASS is in session! Put out your smokes and get your feet off the desk.
I've already predicted that this Friday's employment number could be shockingly bad. And yesterday the Federal Reserve cited "some softening in the labor markets" as one of two key reasons it took the bold move of cutting interest rates for the second time in two weeks.
While I hope my prediction for Friday is wrong (really, I do), I'd like to give you a step-by-step guide to understanding why the job expansion - or even a contraction - in January may not be as ugly as it could appear.
Yes, I'm showing the glass half-full in this column.
Follow closely because this guide will make you smarter than almost everyone on Wall Street (which really isn't saying much.) You will need a computer, so kick your kid off MySpace for a few minutes.
Step 1: Turn the machine on. (OK, that's obvious but you never know.)
Step 2: Go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Web site - www.bls.gov
Step 3: Go to "Advanced Search" at the top of the page and type in birth/death model.
Step 4: That'll take you to a page that says CES Birth/Death Model Frequently Asked Questions. Skip over the Q&A and click on Return to CES Net Birth/Death Model, which is all the way down at the bottom.
Step 5: You've found the treasure - a chart that is the main reason why the monthly employment figures have been distorting the employment picture for years.
Step 6: Look at the 2007 chart and you'll see that last January the Labor Department subtracted 175,000 jobs from its physical count because it believed its surveyors failed to pick up companies that it thinks - but can't prove - went out of business after the holidays.
If you look to the right of that negative 175,000 number, you'll notice that in every other month the BLS adds tons of jobs because it believes its survey is missing a whole lot of new companies that are being born.
January is the "death" part of the Model; the other 11 months are the "birth." Are that many jobs really quietly lost in January? And are hundreds of thousands of jobs created in the other 11 months by companies quietly popping up here and there? The answer is "no" to both questions.
But that's not the point of this column.
We're not trying to figure out the real job growth in the country. We are just determining how Friday's report will be funky because of statistical distortions.
January is always a month in which the BLS subtracts jobs from its count - 193,000 in 2006; 280,000 in '05; 321,000 in '04 and 211,000 in 2003.
VIEW FULL ARTICLE >PAGE 1 2 CONTINUE READING >
Quote from avarus:
01-30-08 04:24 PM
above 1370's short, below 1340's long.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
moving stops up on longs from under 1340, looking to hold to 1370s to short again.
good luck, always use risk control.
avarus -- what are your thoughts behind the short @ 1370?
Are you just looking at the pivot?
Im thinking it will fill the gap to 1394 --- after that, who knows?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.