@TBPInvictus right here (hyperlink is now to Bluesky)
Let’s minimize to the chase: A Hoover Establishment evaluation of California personal job creation is off by an element of 100. Between January 2022 and June 2024, the state created 523,700 personal sector jobs — not 5,400 as claimed. MSM uncritically repeated the false quantity.
I spend far an excessive amount of time debunking financial bullshit. *Sigh.*
Our story to this point: Hoover Establishment’s Lee Ohanian wrote a chunk final April falsely claiming that California’s new minimal wage regulation had value the state nearly 10,000 quick meals jobs. The story was false. Some sleuthing uncovered the actual fact Ohanian had inappropriately relied on knowledge that was not seasonally adjusted. To his credit score, he finally walked his error again, however solely when confronted by Michael Hiltzik on the LA Occasions.
As soon as once more, Ohanian is again with one other egregious knowledge evaluation error.
In an August piece — which laid dormant till not too long ago — Ohanian wrote the next:
Between January 2022 and June 2024, employment in US personal companies elevated by about 7.32 million jobs.
Of those 7.32 million jobs, about 5,400 had been jobs created in California companies—representing about .07 % of the US determine. Put in another way, if California private-sector jobs grew on the identical fee as in the remainder of the nation, they’d have elevated by over 970,000 throughout that interval, about 180 occasions better than the precise enhance.
It’s well-known that California has been among the many worst-performing states within the nation when it comes to job development. However the newest statistics present that just about all jobs which can be being created in California are authorities jobs. Between January 2022 and June 2024, complete California jobs grew by about 156,000, with authorities jobs accounting for 96.5 % of that development.(De-empahsis added; the statements which can be unfaithful or questionable are struck via)
The primary sentence is appropriate. Over the interval cited, US personal sector jobs grew from 127,958,000 to 135,274,000, a acquire of seven,316,000. Every little thing else he wrote is both 1) utterly flawed, 2) deceptive, or 3) fabricated.
Professor Ohanian, who teaches at UCLA, decided that California added solely 5,400 private-sector jobs over that interval. He says, “The calculation for California private-sector jobs is derived from complete jobs minus California authorities jobs.”
That’s an error: The “complete jobs” hyperlink takes us to a BLS sequence (LASST060000000000005) derived from their Family Survey. From that, the nice professor is subtracting “authorities jobs,” however that hyperlink takes us to a sequence that’s derived from the Institution Survey (SMS06000009000000001). Inappropriately mixing knowledge from one BLS Payroll survey with knowledge from one other BLS Empoloyment survey is a cardinal sin of BLS knowledge evaluation.
In case you mistakenly consider that the 2 surveys are in some way “the identical factor” or knowledge derived from one is interchangeable with knowledge derived from the opposite, look beneath on the distinction between the 2 with respect to general payroll employment:
How does BLS clarify the distinction?
“The payroll survey (CES) is designed to measure employment, hours, and earnings within the nonfarm sector, with business and geographic element. The survey is finest recognized for offering a extremely dependable gauge of month-to-month change in nonfarm payroll employment. A consultant pattern of companies within the U.S. gives the info for the payroll survey.
The family survey (CPS) is designed to measure the labor drive standing of the civilian noninstitutional inhabitants with demographic element. The nationwide unemployment fee is the best-known statistic produced from the family survey. The survey additionally gives a measure of employed individuals, one that features agricultural employees and the self-employed. A consultant pattern of U.S. households gives the data for the family survey.”
So then how (and why) did Ohanian derive the “solely 5,400 personal sector jobs over 2.5 years” in California?
To make sure we’re wanting on the correct classic knowledge, we’ll use FRED’s sibling, ALFRED, which permits us to select a time limit and examine the then-real-time numbers. What we see beneath is Employed Individuals in California Classic: 2024-07-30-(All Workers: Authorities in California Classic: 2024-07-19*1000) . Employed Individuals in California is from the Family Survey, whereas All Workers: Authorities in California is from the Institution Survey.
Right here’s the info simply above in desk type, and there’s your 5,400 down on the backside:
What are the true numbers? Utilizing the Institution Survey solely (as we should always), we get a desk that appears like this:
California added 523,700 personal sector jobs over the interval that Professor Ohanian claims they added solely 5,400. He was solely off by an element ~100x.
I’ve coated above solely the primary two paragraphs of Professor Ohanian’s column. When an ECON 101 error is discovered that early, then the remainder of the paper/column/put up is to be disregarded as junk economics. Given Professor Ohanian’s earlier sloppiness, I don’t have the bandwidth to plow via the remaining.
Okay. possibly only one extra graf.
California’s job creation file has been much more dismal during the last 18 months. Since January 2023, private-sector employment within the state declined by over 46,000 employees. California’s private-sector job collapse is unprecedented, and with the state representing practically 12 % of the nation’s inhabitants, it’s a drag on the nation’s economic system.
I don’t know the place the 46k loss comes from. Don’t care. Not going to research.
Okay. I lied once more. He captured Employed Individuals in California from Jan 2023-Jun 2024 from the Family Survey as a substitute of, as beneath, from the Institution Survey.
Personal sector employment in California, January 2023-June 2024, Classic 2024-07-19:
Ohanian is both a reliable dangerous actor or an especially incompetent economist. I’m unsure which.
Both method, there may be an echo chamber within the social media world ready with bated breath for information it will probably use, reality be damned. That “a lie can journey midway all over the world whereas the reality is placing on its footwear” has by no means been extra true than it’s at this time. And it’s an enormous, huge drawback. We see this with low-information voters, individuals who consider the inventory market will not be at all-time highs, that the unemployment fee is larger than it’s, or that inflation remains to be excessive (costs are excessive, inflation is low). Misinformation is an issue so giant it results nationwide elections.
I count on higher from locations just like the Hoover Institute, and tutorial facilities like Stanford and UCLA. Similar in regards to the Rip & Learn media that blindly parrots defective and dumb evaluation.
Joan Robinson understood this practically a century in the past: “The aim of learning economics is to not purchase a set of ready-made solutions to financial questions, however to discover ways to keep away from being deceived by economists.”
[Amplifying this crap on social media are folks like CA Congressman Kevin Kiley, the California Globe (of course), futurist Steve Jurvetson, and many other right wing cranks. Shame on all.]
Beforehand:
Misunderstanding Seasonal Changes
See additionally:
The fast-food business claims the California minimal wage regulation is costing jobs. Its numbers are pretend (June 12, 2024)
Can Stanford inform the distinction between scientific truth and fiction? Its pandemic convention raises doubts (Oct. 15, 2024 )
Sources:
Evaluating employment from the BLS family and payroll surveys
California’s Companies Cease Hiring, Lee Ohanian, Hoover, August 7, 2024
