Payroll Data

Parasites must balance their drive to maximize what they extract from their host with the risk of losing everything by killing their host. This is the dilemma of the parasitic partnership of the central state and financial Elites everywhere: to extract the maximum possible in debt payments and taxes without sparking rebellion and revolution. The 30 million whose labor funds the parasitic status quo don't have to rebel; they simply have to stop going to work, stop starting enterprises, stop being productive. They just have to tire of being the host, tire of being debt-serfs, tire of being tax donkeys. The trick to suppressing revolution is to keep debt-tax serfdom bearable. The parasitic Elites are keeping the host going, but at a high cost in resiliency. Let's see how long the host lasts once a crisis hits.

The biggest surprise from the JOLTS report is not in any of the standalone series, but in the time progression of the Net Turnovers number, which is simply the total new hires less total separations. Historically, the Net Turnover number tracks the total monthly nonfarm payroll change (establishment survey) on a almost tick for tick basis. Not this time. In fact as the chart below showed, the upward revised March NFP number to 138K, which preceded the even more optimistic, and much cheered April print of 165K, which sent the S&P and the DJIA soaring to new all time highs on Friday, not only did not get a confirmation, but in fact the JOLTS survey for Net Turnovers  - which came at only 46K in March compared to a revised 138K jobs added per the establishment survey - implied that the real NFP number in March should have tumbled to a level last seen in September of 2010!

The CEO of Unicredit Federico Ghizzoni said yesterday that uninsured deposits could be used In future bank failures. He said that the savings which are not guaranteed by any protection or insurance could be used in the future to contribute to the rescue of banks who fail and that uninsured deposits could be used in future bank failures provided global policy makers agree on a common approach.

While hardly presented by the mainstream media with the same panache dedicated to the monthly ARIMA-X-12 seasonally-adjusted, climate-affected, goal-seek devised non-farm payroll data, the three month delayed Foodstamp number is according to many a far greater attestation to the "effectiveness" of the Obama administration to turn the economy around. And far greater it is: since his inauguration, the US has generated just 841,000 jobs through November 2012, a number is more than dwarfed by the 17.3 million new foodstamps and disability recipients added to the rolls in the past 4 years. And since the start of the depression in December 2007, America has seen those on foodstamps and disability increase by 21.8 million, while losing 3.6 million jobs. End result: total number of foodstamp recipients as of November: 47.7 million, an increase of 141,000 from the prior month, and reversing the brief downturn in October, while total US households on foodstamps just hit an all time record of 23,017,768, an increase of 73,952 from the prior month. The cost to the government to keep these 23 million households content and not rising up? $281.21 per month per household.

Employment is dead in the water because opportunities for organic expansion are few and the cost basis of doing business in the U.S. keep rising. That vise forces businesses large and small to reduce labor costs while boosting productivity. There is no other way to stay solvent in a post-bubble, over-capacity, over-indebted consumerist economy awash in too much of everything but energy, common sense and fiscal prudence.

There are 1.1 government dependents for every full-time worker in the U.S. In our analysis, there has been a Grand Bargain reached by the 3.5 classes in the U.S.  The Grand Bargain was this: we at the top will pay significant taxes as long as we get to control the levers of financial and political power. We in the top 19% will pay much of the taxes as long as we and our children can continue to live well and accumulate wealth. We in the "middle class" will continue to work hard as long as we have hope of bettering our lifestyle and the lives of our children. We in the bottom 50% and retirees agree not to threaten the top .5%'s power and the wealth of the top 19% as long as we can get by on our government transfers. This Grand Bargain is now fraying as the promises made to everyone cannot possibly be met. That which is unsustainable will be replaced by another more sustainable arrangement. It's a partnership of "Tyranny of the Majority" and "entrenched incumbents Elites."

It was a week ago when we first observed that the defense of 1400 in the ES at all costs must go on, or else the only thing that is keeping the market propped up - psychology (now with the AAPL euphoria long gone), would be gone as would all support. But once again, the overnight session has proven that, with a little help from its central banking friends, 1400 (and 1.2900 in the EURUSD) can be defended. This was in danger of being breached until China reported two PMI numbers: an official one which printed at 50.2, or modest expansion, and up from 49.8, magically right on top of expectations of 50.2, and the HSBC PMI, which also rose to 49.5, from 47.9: the 12th straight contraction print, but the highest number in 8 months. The market spin is naturally that this is an indication of a rebounding China. Sadly, just like in the US, this is merely pre-party congress data manipulation. The only thing that does matter out of China: whether or not the country will actually ease as opposed to doing day to day reverse repo injections. Without the former, the Chinese economy will not rebound, and will not lead to an improvement in corporate outlook for US tech stocks, period, the end.

Frequent readers know that in addition of any "data" and "numbers" out of Larry Yun's National Association of Realtors, which we openly boycott as these are consistently manipulated (recall the massive historical December 2011 revision), slanted and conflicted, the second dataset which we have mocked with a passion is anything coming out of the ADP, which every month releases its "Private Jobs" number a day before the official BLS Non-farm Payroll data. Today, our mockeries have been proven 100% spot on. The reason? A week ago, ADP announced that going forward it would coordinate with Moody's (yes, that Moody's), and especially its chief economist, SecTres hopeful (InTrade odds of actually attain that post: 0.00) Mark Zandi, to fudge adjust its data going forward. The data revision was supposed to be publicly disclosed tomorrow when the official October ADP number was released. Well, just like today's Chicago PMI, and so many other data points recently, this too was released early. What the early release allowed us to promptly calculate is that using the historically revised numbers, and comparing those based on the original methodology, in 2012 alone, the US would have lost a whopping... 365,000 private jobs! Putting thus number in context, according to the revised methodology, the US has generated only 1.172MM jobs in 2012 through September, or in other words, a statistical "fix" magically eliminated over 30% of what the market had previously expected were job gains, a number which the incumbent president has certain taken advantage of on more than one occasions while campaigning.

Following this morning's dismal employment sub-index from Chicago Fed PMI and the recent Philly Fed employment sub-index, the 'data' suggests that this week's (now confirmed by the BLS that NFP will be released on Friday as scheduled) payroll data could be the first negative print since September 2010. Of course, we are sure that pre-emptive Sandy 'action' and seasonal adjustments will explain away any miss from the current +125k estimate. Is this why the market is not levitating on moar broken windows?

Some prefer to see the 'employment' glass half-full, some half-empty, and others see the glass smashed into a million shards on the keynesian kitchen floor. The zealousness with which the 'number' has been dismissed and praised has generated more questions than answers. Goldman's Jan Hatzius addresses the question of the pace of progress in the labor market, the reasons for the contrast between GDP and employment, the amount of slack left, and the implications for Fed policy.

For some reason, despite the ADP number coming month after month within a 3 std deviation of the actual NFP, and thus confirming it has absolutely no predictive power, vacuum tube headline scanning algos continue to trade off the number which explains why futures had a brief spike moments ago after the latest September ADP Private Payrolls number came out at 162K, on expectations of 140K. Of course, last month's print which initially came at 201K only to see the August NFP come in at less than half this print, was revised materially lower to 189K, as was the July ADP which was cut by 17K to 156K. But who cares - the algos already had done their ramp job a month ago. Remember: in an election year, all Initial Claims will be revised upward, while all ADP. NFP prints must be revised downward - it's not called the economy for nothing. In other news, when adding the +/-150,000 margin of error on both side of the equation, we can boldly say that according to the ADP, Friday's NFP will come in a range of -1,000,000 to +1,000,000. Perhaps the only relevant datapoint in the entire ADP report is that manufacturing jobs added were 4,000 in September. Only 996,000 more to go until we hit the president's solemn promise of revitalizing US manufacturing. There was however, a last hurrah for Wall Street: "The financial services sector added 7,000 jobs in September, marking the fourteenth consecutive monthly gain." Correct: the Wall Street layoffs usually begin just before bonus season.

What the Fed did was actually much more than QE3. Call it QE3-plus... a gift that will now keep on giving. The new normal of bad news being good news is now going to be more fully entrenched for the market and 'housing data' (the most trustworthy of data) - clearly the Fed's preferred transmission mechanism - is now front-and-center in driving volatility. I don't think this latest Fed action does anything more for the economy than the previous rounds did. It's just an added reminder of how screwed up the economy really is and that the U.S. is much closer to resembling Japan of the past two decades than is generally recognized. It would seem as though the Fed's macro models have a massive coefficient for the 'wealth effect' factor. The wealth effect may well stimulate economic activity at the bottom of an inventory or a normal business cycle. But this factor is really irrelevant at the trough of a balance sheet/delivering recession. The economy is suffering from a shortage of aggregate demand. Full stop. It just perpetuates the inequality that is building up in the country, and while this is not a headline maker, it is a real long term risk for the health of the country, from a social stability perspective as well.

You could be forgiven for believing that the ECB's talk/plans have indeed solved the European problems. The market's reaction appears to confirm all anchoring bias and thanks to overly bearish positioning (and thin summer markets) has sent all but the long-term-est bears scurrying for their rabbit-holes - as once again 'tail-risk has been removed' - just like LTRO, the SGP, and The Grand Plan before it. However, as BofAML notes in this must read note, we do not believe the ECB move will necessarily lead to a permanent stable equilibrium for the euro area for two reasons: 1) a stable equilibrium would require certainty about the ability of countries to restore debt sustainability, i.e. that they will respect an agenda of economic policy reforms and/or; 2) certainty about the ECB course of action, i.e. that the ECB will purchase bonds in such a way that we will not observe renewed financial market stress as we did this summer. Such certainty would require both Spain and Italy to put their faith in the Troika’s hands and the ECB to pre-commit in return, which seems to us very unlikey at this time. The ECB’s conditional backstop is some way from the “bazooka” that many were expecting

Gluskin Sheff's David Rosenberg details the four major downside risks for US growth over the next four quarters:

1. More Adverse News Out Of Europe
2. The Sharp Run-Up In Food Prices
3. Negative Export Shock
4. The Proverbial Fiscal Cliff

Two months ago, as we were carefully reading the latest Goldman explanation of how the firm had completely missed something Zero Hedge predicted back in January, namely the record warm winter's impact on skewing seasonal adjustments for payroll data (which has since validated our day 1 of 2012 predication that 2012 will be a carbon-copy replica of 2011, and which has made the comedy value of another Goldman masterpiece, that of Jim O'Neill's idiotic "2012: Not a Repeat of 2010 or 2011" soar through the roof) we stumbled upon something we knew was about to get much, much more airplay: Goldman's quiet and out of place admission that what matters for a country's central bank is the flow of its purchases, not the stock (another massive economic misconception we have been trying to debunk since the beginning). Recall these words: "...we have found some evidence that at the very long end of the yield curve, where Operation Twist is concentrated, it may be not just the stock of securities held by the Fed but also the ongoing flow of purchases that matters for yields..." This is how we summarized this observation two months ago (pardon the all caps): "UNLESS THE FED IS ACTIVELY ENGAGING IN MONETIZATION AT EVERY GIVEN MOMENT, THE IMPACT FROM EASING DIMINISHES PROGRESSIVELY, ULTIMATELY APPROACHING ZERO AND SUBSEQUENTLY BECOMING NEGATIVE!"