Why do they keep citing the less accurate Establishment Payroll Survey?!??!?!
The discrepancy between the job numbers produced by the Establishment Payroll Survey and those produced by the Household Survey has finally been getting attention in the last few months. I never payed attention to the Establishment survey because I never worked directly for an establishment. In fact there has never been a time when the money which supported me came from a countable job. Those whose premises are supported by the lower Establishment numbers tend to dismiss the new ways of earning a living as not being "real" jobs. I have no doubt that some of the tens of thousands of people who now support their families would really rather be back in that nice warm foundry, or working rotating shifts at the tire plant, but not many of them.
My main purpose, in the post you are quoting, was to build up to the link to the news about the manufacturing index. I could have gone further about the Establishment survey. For one thing, it tends to count any new union jobs, meaning more union dues, meaning more campaign donations. It is more difficult to tax the self-employed, even if they make no effort to avoid or cheat. Note for example the IRS action against Indianapolis Baptist, which was shut down for the crime of being a collective of ministers who each took up their own collection and each paid all of the taxes due on that income (confirmed by audit) instead of being an Establishment which paid a salary minus withholding. Worst of all, people who do not depend on a big company for employment and security will be less inclined to depend on the government for their well-being.
Posted by: triticale at October 6, 2004 05:50 PM
Prev | List | Random | Next Powered by RingSurf! |
Pagerank |
Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |