New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Solid jobs report.

Arkady

Arkady

President
The US added 171,000 jobs in October. That's significantly more than needed to keep up with population growth. Unemployment ticked up a bit, to 7.9%, because of discouraged workers returning to the job hunt in light of the strengthening market.

This is not the report the Republicans were hoping for. They wanted weak job creation or, barring that, an unemployment rate that ticked up over the psychologically important 8% threshold. Instead, we got our 25th consecutive month of job creation, and our fourth straight month of strong job creation.
 
Lefty will spin it positively, righty will spin it negatively, and board contributors will dump on one another unapologetically. (Just thought I'd go all Nostradamus on PJ).

What's my prize? :)
 
And good old Chuck Todd was trying his best to spin it,reading off his smart phone what Romney tweeted and was cut short by the expert from Moody's who said it was a ,"Very Good Report!"!
 
BUT BUT BUT!, Donald Trump and Jack Welch have not weighed in yet!

;)

Regards
Pace
 
Unemployment is up, it's a GOOD THING! Wow, admitting that the discouraged coming back to finally look for jobs is a GOOD thing.

There isn't a Democrat in the White House is there?

"Desperado"


Desperado, why don't you come to your senses?
You been out ridin' fences for so long now
Oh, you're a hard one
I know that you got your reasons
These things that are pleasin' you
Can hurt you somehow
 
I thought you guys told us all those "discouraged workers" who had left the work force since Obama was elected were wealthy baby boomers who decided to retire early? WTF?
 
RickWA said:
Lefty will spin it positively, righty will spin it negatively, and board contributors will dump on one another unapologetically. (Just thought I'd go all Nostradamus on PJ).

What's my prize? :)
Click to expand...

Reasonable guess. But the NATURE of the spin does respond to the facts. If the job report had been disappointing, my spin would have focused on blaming the Republicans for blocking the jobs programs Obama tried to get passed, and I would have emphasized the risk that if we moved to outright embrace of austerity, like Europe, rather than mere flirtation with it, we could wind up with a rapid increase in unemployment, like Europe has seen since they embraced austerity. Instead, the job report was encouraging, so I went light on the spin and just presented what the report said, within the context of my sense that it was certainly not what the Republicans were hoping for.
 
Lukey said:
I thought you guys told us all those "discouraged workers" who had left the work force since Obama was elected were wealthy baby boomers who decided to retire early? WTF?
Click to expand...

No, we didn't say that, Lukey. We said that SOME of those 'discouraged workers' were baby boomers who decided to retire early.

Apparently, you were never taught the difference between 'SOME' and 'ALL'.

How in the world did you manage to get through college?!???
 
Arkady said:
The US added 171,000 jobs in October. That's significantly more than needed to keep up with population growth. Unemployment ticked up a bit, to 7.9%, because of discouraged workers returning to the job hunt in light of the strengthening market.

This is not the report the Republicans were hoping for. They wanted weak job creation or, barring that, an unemployment rate that ticked up over the psychologically important 8% threshold. Instead, we got our 25th consecutive month of job creation, and our fourth straight month of strong job creation.
Click to expand...

Funny how when these reports come out they are treated like they are written in stone. They are usually adjusted up later. August and September reports have been adjusted up about another 80,000. October will be adjusted up a couple of times. Another thing the private sector jobs was up 184,000 because 13,000 was lost in the public sector.
 
Arkady said:
The US added 171,000 jobs in October. That's significantly more than needed to keep up with population growth. Unemployment ticked up a bit, to 7.9%, because of discouraged workers returning to the job hunt in light of the strengthening market.

This is not the report the Republicans were hoping for. They wanted weak job creation or, barring that, an unemployment rate that ticked up over the psychologically important 8% threshold. Instead, we got our 25th consecutive month of job creation, and our fourth straight month of strong job creation.
Click to expand...

Saying Republicans want people out of work is very much a deceptive mischaracterization. When all they are looking for is a realistic jobs reports. In your own words

"Unemployment ticked up a bit, to 7.9%, because of discouraged workers returning to the job hunt"

you are telling us the jobs numbers are cooked up to benefit the incumbent
 
trapdoor said:
Yes, I suppose this is spin, but it still means unemployment is 2.9 points higher than Obama's team said it would be by this point, if we passed the stimulus plan.

According to the Brookings data here: http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/jobs/posts/2012/03/09-jobs-greenstone-looney the country needs to generate 208,000 jobs per month to keep up with new employees entering the workforce (data applicable as of March 2012).
Click to expand...

Brookings isn't talking about the number the country needs to generate to keep up with new employees entering the workforce. Read your link more carefully. They're talking about the number needed to return us to pre-recession employment levels by 2020. That means mopping up the net increase in workers, plus taking the excess existing workers off unemployment and putting them back to work, within the next eight years. I'd agree that 208,000 jobs per month is the right goal to be aiming for, which is why it's so shameless the Republicans have been blocking serious jobs creation efforts, and instead calling for a return to the very policies that got us this deeply into a hole in the first place. They're making it all but impossible that we'll be back to a pre-recession situation within the decade.

But it's still correct to say that the job creation we've had each month for the past four months is much more than is needed to mop up the net increase in workers. It used to take a lot more than it does now, but the Baby Boomers are moving into retirement, which makes lesser job creation enough. The new magic number is around 90,000:

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs...o-keep-pace-with-the-growth-of-the-population
 
Lukey said:
I thought you guys told us all those "discouraged workers" who had left the work force since Obama was elected were wealthy baby boomers who decided to retire early? WTF?
Click to expand...

Who told you that? Are you hearing voices again. They make medications for that.
 
LeRoy_Was_Here said:
No, we didn't say that, Lukey. We said that SOME of those 'discouraged workers' were baby boomers who decided to retire early.

Apparently, you were never taught the difference between 'SOME' and 'ALL'.

How in the world did you manage to get through college?!???
Click to expand...

This is typical of Republicans. They have this black and white world view, so that if you say "not white" they hear "black." "Not all the decrease in the employment-population ratio is due to discouraged workers" becomes "none of the decrease in employment-population ratio is due to discouraged workers."

I do wonder how the hell they got through high school, much less college. But it's probably a mindset they can turn off when they're not in a political or social context.
 
ITALIA said:
Funny how when these reports come out they are treated like they are written in stone. They are usually adjusted up later. August and September reports have been adjusted up about another 80,000. October will be adjusted up a couple of times. Another thing the private sector jobs was up 184,000 because 13,000 was lost in the public sector.
Click to expand...

The Obama economy is sort of the mirror image of the Bush economy, in that way. Under Bush, overall employment looked a lot better than private sector employment, because of the government hiring binge. Under Obama, governments are effectively pursuing austerity policies, with mass layoff in state and local governments, so that overall employment numbers look rough despite decent private sector job creation.
 
lupehernandezdepedajack said:
Saying Republicans want people out of work is very much a deceptive mischaracterization. When all they are looking for is a realistic jobs reports. In your own words

"Unemployment ticked up a bit, to 7.9%, because of discouraged workers returning to the job hunt"

you are telling us the jobs numbers are cooked up to benefit the incumbent
Click to expand...

I'm telling you nothing of the sort. How could you have read it that badly? If you want a primer on how jobs reports are done, I can give you an overview. Long story short, there's nobody involved in the chain of creating them who is a political appointee. These are career civil servants -- professional statisticians, accountants, economists, and pollsters, who collect the data according to an established methodology. There are very serious complaints one could offer about the methodology, but the idea that there's some bias for the incumbent isn't something I've heard any evidence for.
 
Arkady said:
Brookings isn't talking about the number the country needs to generate to keep up with new employees entering the workforce. Read your link more carefully. They're talking about the number needed to return us to pre-recession employment levels by 2020. That means mopping up the net increase in workers, plus taking the excess existing workers off unemployment and putting them back to work, within the next eight years. I'd agree that 208,000 jobs per month is the right goal to be aiming for, which is why it's so shameless the Republicans have been blocking serious jobs creation efforts, and instead calling for a return to the very policies that got us this deeply into a hole in the first place. They're making it all but impossible that we'll be back to a pre-recession situation within the decade.

But it's still correct to say that the job creation we've had each month for the past four months is much more than is needed to mop up the net increase in workers. It used to take a lot more than it does now, but the Baby Boomers are moving into retirement, which makes lesser job creation enough. The new magic number is around 90,000:

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs...o-keep-pace-with-the-growth-of-the-population
Click to expand...

Interesting data, but it still means waiting seven years for anything like a full recovery, even with jobs being created at nearly twice the rate they're actually being created.
 
That's cool. I'm sure another person will come along, highlight the .1% uptick and the 5 million out of work, etc.

This board gets tiresome irrespective of spin and spinner. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top