A reader asserts that Senator Johnson, in mentioning “Its not like we dont have sufficient jobs here in Wisconsin.” means that I need to be reporting variety of jobs, not variety of people employed. In the previous post, I was precisely showing production and nonfarm payroll work tasks (drawn from the Current Establishment Survey), which refer to the number of jobs, to wit:
Figure 4: Wisconsin personal nonfarm payroll work plus job openings from JOLTS (blue), s.a, and pattern estimated on 2009M06-2020M01 (red), both on a log scale. NBER defined peak to trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: BLS via FRED, NBER, bls, and authors computations
.
Figure 3: Wisconsin personal nonfarm payroll work plus task openings from JOLTS (blue), s.a, on a log scale NBER specified peak to trough economic crisis dates shaded gray. Source: BLS through FRED, BLS, author, and nbers computations.
The overall of CES openings and jobs was 130 thousands listed below the 2009M06-2020M01 trend in February 2022, when Senator Johnson made his remark (trend estimated utilizing regression on time pattern).
Addendum:.
Reader Econned claims I ought to repent for utilizing tasks instead of unfilled tasks. Well, here is the total variety of jobs and unfilled jobs, and an image of how that was listed below pre-recession levels in 2022M02, and far below pattern, when Senator Johnson made his recommendation to * jobs *.
Source: Bowler, Morisi, “Understanding the work procedures from the CPS and CES survey,” Monthly Labor Review, February 2006..
Now, the reader may believe the BLS is ill-placed to describe its own information series, but I have a little more faith. So in point of fact, in terms of tasks, it is proper to outline the series from the CES. (If you want the existing description, see the BLS page on the differences in between the study, here).
Reader Econned then asserts without any supporting proof that I can discover:.
You are showing jobs that are filled while Johnson is likewise referencing tasks that are not filled.
Even taking this assertion at face value, the overall number of jobs plus openings had not regained the pre-recession peak of 3157 thousand total when Senator Johnson made his remark. Rather it was far listed below the level consistent with the pre-recession trend.
In the previous post, I was exactly showing production and nonfarm payroll employment tasks (drawn from the Current Establishment Survey), which refer to the number of jobs, to wit:
In point of truth, in terms of jobs, it is proper to plot the series from the CES. Even taking this assertion at face worth, the total number of openings plus jobs had actually not regained the pre-recession peak of 3157 thousand total when Senator Johnson made his remark. Figure 4: Wisconsin personal nonfarm payroll work plus job openings from JOLTS (blue), s.a, and trend approximated on 2009M06-2020M01 (red), both on a log scale.
