djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 11:33:28 GMT -5
can't believe nobody posted this. extraordinarily good news. except for the gloomy right. who can't seem to express any joy for economic silver linings, yet seem to rejoice in clouds. excerpt of article below.... www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-unemployment-january-report-20120203,0,6620355.story The U.S. job market strengthened at the start of the year as employers added an unexpectedly large number of new jobs and the unemployment rate in January dropped for the fifth straight month to 8.3%--the lowest in nearly three years. The Labor Department said Friday that employers nationwide added 243,000 net new jobs in January – about 100,000 more than what analysts were forecasting. Job gains were broad-based, powered by increases in manufacturing, professional and business services such as accounting and engineering, and in leisure and healthcare industries. Government, however, continued to trim its payrolls, and the information sector also reported job losses, notably at motion pictures and sound recording firms. With the step-up in private-sector jobs, the nation’s unemployment rate dropped to 8.3% last month from 8.5% in December. The last time it was that low was February 2009. The jobless rate has fallen every month since August, when the rate was 9.1%. Most economists were expecting the January unemployment rate to tick higher or at best stay the same. The Labor Department also said there was a little more hiring momentum at the end of last year than previously thought. Revised data Friday showed that employers added 157,000 jobs in November, compared to 100,000 initially estimated. Job growth in December was 203,000. For all the encouraging news, the report Friday said 12.8 million people remained unemployed – 43% of them for more than six months – and that another 8.2 million part-time workers couldn’t find full-time employment. ........................................
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 11:36:25 GMT -5
it looks to me that Obama may be able to campaign on greater gains in employment than Bush had in his first term, despite the overtly worse economic backdrop.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 11:39:35 GMT -5
it looks to me that Obama may be able to campaign on greater gains in employment than Bush had in his first term, despite the overtly worse economic backdrop. Following the 2003 tax cuts, there were roughly 54 months of job gains.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 11:42:30 GMT -5
mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/02/interesting-facts-from-todays.htmlLarge employment gains are in the temporary worker category and oil and gas extraction industry. Some highlights of today's employment report (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf): 1. Temporary employment reached a 3.5-year high in January of 2.4 million jobs, the highest level since May 2008 (see chart). 2. Manufacturing overtime hours, at 4.3 hours in January, were at the highest level since 2006 (see chart). 3. Manufacturing companies hired an additional 50,000 workers in January, bringing the 12-month total of new manufacturing jobs to 235,000, and the 24-month total of new manufacturing jobs to almost 400,000. 4. For the eighth consecutive month starting last June, the January manufacturing jobless rate was below the national average rate (not seasonally adjusted). 5. The construction industry has added more than 50,000 jobs in the last two months. 6. Oil and gas extraction employment has increased by 14.2% over the last 12 months to 186,100, the highest level in 20 years. Update: 7. The more comprehensive measure of employment from the BLS household survey (civilian employment) showed a 847,000 job increase in January, the greatest monthly increase since 2003, and brings the total job increase over the last 12 months to 2.3 million.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 11:44:32 GMT -5
www.zerohedge.com/news/record-12-million-people-fall-out-labor-force-one-month-labor-force-participation-rate-tumbles-Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, Labor Force Participation Rate Tumbles To Fresh 30 Year Low Submitted by Tyler Durden on 02/03/2012 08:51 -0500 BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics Unemployment Withholding taxes A month ago, we joked when we said that for Obama to get the unemployment rate to negative by election time, all he has to do is to crush the labor force participation rate to about 55%. Looks like the good folks at the BLS heard us: it appears that the people not in the labor force exploded by an unprecedented record 1.2 million. No, that's not a typo: 1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force in one month! So as the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning, those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation. As for the quality of jobs, as withholding taxes roll over Year over year, it can only mean that the US is replacing high paying FIRE jobs with low paying construction and manufacturing. So much for the improvement.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 11:47:16 GMT -5
www.cnbc.com/id/46186264US Small Business Hiring Flat in January: Poll U.S. small business hiring was flat in January, a poll released on Friday showed, slightly better than the previous month's reading but still far from levels consistent with strong employment growth. The National Federation of Independent Business survey of 2,155 firms also found an increase in the percentage of owners reporting hard-to-fill job openings. NFIB said this measure has been a good indicator of the U.S. unemployment rate, and suggests that there might have been a small decline in January. The U.S. Labor Department is scheduled to release its January employment report later on Friday. Economists polled by Reuters thought it would show a 150,000 increase in nonfarm payrolls, with the unemployment rate holding steady at 8.5 percent. In the NFIB survey, the net change in employment per firm was nil, on a seasonally adjusted basis. That was a slight improvement from December, when the number of workers fell by an average of 0.15 per firm. "The indicators are improving, but glacially," NFIB economist William Dunkelberg said in a statement. NFIB said 11 percent of small business owners added jobs, but an equal percentage reduced employment. The remaining 78 percent made no net change. The percentage of owners reporting hard-to-fill job openings rose to 18 percent, the highest in more than three years. The net percent of owners planning to create new jobs fell 1 percentage point to 5 percent, seasonally adjusted, the third consecutive monthly decline.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 11:48:51 GMT -5
it looks to me that Obama may be able to campaign on greater gains in employment than Bush had in his first term, despite the overtly worse economic backdrop. Following the 2003 tax cuts, there were roughly 54 months of job gains. despite that fact, Bush had the worst job growth record since Hoover, adding barely 1M jobs in EIGHT YEARS.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 11:50:00 GMT -5
I posted this to the Gallop Poll/ Obama thread- because I do believe this is indeed very good news for the President. If this trend continues, he will be a formidable contender for re-election. Of course with such an uninformed public this would be true. The informed know much better.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 11:50:54 GMT -5
despite that fact, Bush had the worst job growth record since Hoover, adding barely 1M jobs in EIGHT YEARS.
I I recall, the unemployment rate was roughly 4% during the Bush years. Bush's term really ended with the 2006 elections.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 11:51:44 GMT -5
SF- isn't the participation rate related to the so called "age wave"?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 11:52:41 GMT -5
I posted this to the Gallop Poll/ Obama thread- because I do believe this is indeed very good news for the President. If this trend continues, he will be a formidable contender for re-election. Of course with such an uninformed public this would be true. The informed know much better. you mean the informed public that didn't vote for Bush in 2004?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 11:57:08 GMT -5
despite that fact, Bush had the worst job growth record since Hoover, adding barely 1M jobs in EIGHT YEARS. I I recall, the unemployment rate was roughly 4% during the Bush years. Bush's term really ended with the 2006 elections. yes, it was 4% when Bush took office in 2001. it was 6% when he was re-elected in 2004 (2 years before your magic 2006 mark). it was 8% when he left office in 2009. that was quite an accomplishment. only Hoover has done "better" in the last century.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 17:33:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2012 11:57:10 GMT -5
If the current trend continues, by November unemployment should be in the 7.6 -7.8 range…Obama mops up the floor with Mitt, after having completely humiliated and eviscerated him in a couple of debates.
I see steam blowing out of the ears of some righties, and it makes me smile. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Mkitty is pro kitty on Feb 3, 2012 11:57:55 GMT -5
Could someone tell "the informed" that they need to know the difference between correlation and causation? Also when Bush hemorraged jobs, people moved to lower paying ones.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 11:58:31 GMT -5
it looks to me that Obama may be able to campaign on greater gains in employment than Bush had in his first term, despite the overtly worse economic backdrop. Okay, fill me in, DJ...how can any of this, if it is happening, be credited to the Obama administration? if i answer your question, will you answer one i have for you?
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 12:01:26 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 12:03:27 GMT -5
if i answer your question, will you answer one i have for you? If I can. You're much more informed than I. oh, i wouldn't say that. i don't think we can credit Obama for what has happened- and that it is part of normal economic cycles (that were greatly exacerbated by lack of oversight in the mortgage instruments markets in the last decade or two). but the fact of the matter remains that "it's the economy stupid". people, for whatever reason, will vote based on how their PERSONAL fortunes have faired during an administration. now, let me ask you: do you think it is fair that Obama has been blamed for the economic problems we have suffered in the last five years?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 12:04:43 GMT -5
It doesn't much matter whether the Obama admin deserves credit or not. A president's fortunes ebb and wane with the economy. If the economy stays on track for recovery through the election it is a huge ad for Team Obama. Of course Greece, Iran, or whatever else could bring that crashing down at any time. But this is the hazard all president's face. But it does matter to me whether or not anything he did or did not do effected the economy. this is a knife that cuts both ways. if he can't take credit for what has happened, then he can't be held to account for it, either. yet you hear Gingrich and Romney bag on Obama DAILY for just that.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 12:05:22 GMT -5
Of course the point that the labor participation rate is the lowest in decades, that would be the denominator in the equation(ie: the bottom number in the division). That is the only reason why the unemployment rate has fallen.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 12:06:24 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 12:07:38 GMT -5
Of course the point that the labor participation rate is the lowest in decades, that would be the denominator in the equation(ie: the bottom number in the division). That is the only reason why the unemployment rate has fallen. i am not claiming the unemployment rate has fallen. however, the labor participation rate started falling in 2000, SF. it seems to me that you are making an argument for Obama that you are not making for Bush. how odd.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 12:09:04 GMT -5
Could someone tell "the informed" that they need to know the difference between correlation and causation? Also when Bush hemorraged jobs, people moved to lower paying ones. that has been a very slowly evolving trend, but it is noticeable when you look at average compensation for the bottom quintile.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 12:17:43 GMT -5
No, I don't believe he should be totally blamed. I feel our ship had a hole in it and had been slowly sinking when he took office. He merely shoved his foot through the hole and made it bigger.
Let's not for get an extremely, far left, radical congress put in place in 2006 running off with half-cocked ideas, wrecking havoc on the economy.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 12:21:23 GMT -5
oh, i wouldn't say that. i don't think we can credit Obama for what has happened- and that it is part of normal economic cycles (that were greatly exacerbated by lack of oversight in the mortgage instruments markets in the last decade or two). but the fact of the matter remains that "it's the economy stupid". people, for whatever reason, will vote based on how their PERSONAL fortunes have faired during an administration. now, let me ask you: do you think it is fair that Obama has been blamed for the economic problems we have suffered in the last five years? No, I don't believe he should be totally blamed. I feel our ship had a hole in it and had been slowly sinking when he took office. He merely shoved his foot through the hole and made it bigger. Thanks for your answer. so, you could forgive the people that are going to say that he shoved his finger in the dike and kept it from leaking, right? or can you NOT see that some people will see it that way?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 12:25:36 GMT -5
No, I don't believe he should be totally blamed. I feel our ship had a hole in it and had been slowly sinking when he took office. He merely shoved his foot through the hole and made it bigger.Let's not for get an extremely, far left, radical congress put in place in 2006 running off with half-cocked ideas, wrecking havoc on the economy. the pages of history were already written before the Democrats came to town in 2006, SF. lots of people knew it. but my favourite one was Peter Schiff, who accurately predicted almost everything we are seeing BEFORE the 2006 elections: so, either Schiff was a Nostradamus of our times, predicting stuff that had not even happened yet, or he was merely reading the tea leaves from over a decade of government missteps, most of which happened during divided government (and is therefore EQUALLY ascribed to both parties) and forecasting on that basis. note to the board: you guys should really watch this. Schiff absolutely humiliates supply side God Laffer in this segment. Laffer, and his minions, were 100% wrong. Schiff was 95% right.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,164
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 12:26:19 GMT -5
No, I don't believe he should be totally blamed. I feel our ship had a hole in it and had been slowly sinking when he took office. He merely shoved his foot through the hole and made it bigger.Let's not for get an extremely, far left, radical congress put in place in 2006 running off with half-cocked ideas, wrecking havoc on the economy. Are we going to be able to fix the economy by dissecting what we did wrong? no. we will continue making the same mistakes. TPTB will see to that.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 3, 2012 12:55:02 GMT -5
The unemployment number is going to be whatever it needs to be in order to help pave the way for Obama's re-election. The number has no meaning whatsoever.
|
|
Driftr
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 10, 2011 13:08:15 GMT -5
Posts: 3,478
|
Post by Driftr on Feb 3, 2012 13:08:24 GMT -5
SF- isn't the participation rate related to the so called "age wave"? I've heard this mentioned before. It seems like a valid excuse to me. I still plan to try and see if there is any link between tax revenues and participation rate. Still haven't started the data gathering portion of that excercise yet. Always seems to be something going on here when I think of it and when I have time, I invariably forget. Regardless, I like that the number of total employed is increasing even if the participation % is looking crumby.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Feb 3, 2012 13:11:23 GMT -5
Regardless, I like that the number of total employed is increasing even if the participation % is looking crumby.
It is good for those finding jobs for sure.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Feb 3, 2012 13:46:49 GMT -5
If the current trend continues, by November unemployment should be in the 7.6 -7.8 range…Obama mops up the floor with Mitt, after having completely humiliated and eviscerated him in a couple of debates. I see steam blowing out of the ears of some righties, and it makes me smile. ;D Not this rightie. I'm not voting for obama or "republican" anyway.
|
|