Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In this paper we will closely examine a well-publicised attempt to proclaim the recent recovery in employment as revealed by the Labour Force Survey 'an illusion' and to discard the Serbian LFS data as 'unreliable', and 'suspicious'. We will present and assess all the main arguments of the LFS's denialists: comparative evidence on employment elasticity with respect to growth, major shifts in employment since 2008, as well as the alleged inconsistencies between the employment trend and trends in social security contribution revenues and personal consumption. We will demonstrate that all the main claims of the denialists are methodologically irrelevant and based on incorrect calculations and distortion of facts and terminology. We will continue to explain the development of the LFS, its international and European standards, and emphasise the growing significance of the LFS that extends far beyond its contribution to macroeconomic statistics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arandarenko et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: