Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Jobs Dropped By 33,000 In September, Likely Due To Storms (npr.org)

Posted by msmash on from the where-we-are dept.

An anonymous reader shares an NPR report: The U.S. economy shed 33,000 jobs in September, according to the latest report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while unemployment fell to 4.2 percent. The September payrolls drop broke a nearly 7-year streak of continuous job gains. But economists caution that the drop is likely representing the short-term consequences of bad weather, not a long-term shift in the job market. Before this report, the economy had added an average of about 175,000 jobs per month; the unemployment rate has been at 4.3 or 4.4 percent since April. Job growth in September was expected to be lower than usual because of the effects of several devastating hurricanes. Economists did not generally predict an actual decline, but a not-so-stellar report was widely anticipated.

16 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. ...and in a month or two... by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Given that the hurricane-stricken areas are in semi-tropical places where construction can (and probably does) happen year-round, I'm betting that there will be a massive boom in construction jobs coming in the next month or two, and lasting maybe 6 months or more. Someone's gotta rebuild all that stuff, after all...

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:...and in a month or two... by wiggles · · Score: 3, Informative

      fallacy fallacy fallacy.

      Fatcats don't hoard money - they invest it, creating further economic activity. The money doesn't leave the economy unless somebody sinks it into gold, art, or real estate.

    2. Re:...and in a month or two... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Reading fallacy. This entire chain is pointless, because Solandri started it all by not reading. OP didn't say there was going to be a big economic boom because of this. He said there was going to be "a massive boom in construction jobs". He labelled a specific area that was going to have a boom.

      Solandri's post was the equivalent of saying it's a fallacy that there was a dotcom boom or a housing boom or any other boom, because if those hadn't happened the money would have just been used somewhere else.

    3. Re:...and in a month or two... by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Informative

      I never stated that hurricanes were good for the economy, nor did I recommend destruction in order to stimulate said economy. I merely stated that a frigton of temporary jobs would come of it, and why.

      QED: I posted no fallacy here.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    4. Re:...and in a month or two... by Solandri · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The money doesn't leave the economy unless somebody sinks it into gold, art, or real estate.

      Money spent on gold, art, and real estate stays in the economy. The guy you paid for the gold, art, or real estate now has a bunch of money he can spend on things.

      What matters is the overall productivity gain from what the money was spent on. That's why Enron's scam of selling the same equipment back and forth multiple times between two of its divisions didn't actually generate money. It inflated the accounting books, but because there was no productivity gain per transaction, it did nothing to help the company. For an economic transaction to be beneficial to the individual/company and the overall economy, it has to have a net productivity gain. The store which sells a hammer has to sell it for more than they paid for it (and to stock it). The carpenter who buys the hammer has to be able to use it to increase his carpentry business sales by more than he paid for the hammer.

      Gold is pretty bad in that respect because it doesn't do anything (unless you're using it to plate electronics for corrosion resistance). And in fact buying it for decoration can be a net negative on the economy since it drives up the price for gold used for productive purposes (like anti-corrosion plating). Art can be good if exhibiting it generates additional economic activity (people wanting to make/buy more art, people traveling to view it). Real estate can be good if you build something on it that generates more economic activity, or preserve it to allow something to continue to exist which generates or protects economic activity (e.g. land for anti-flood dikes).

    5. Re:...and in a month or two... by ixidor · · Score: 2

      tell that to Apple's i dunno 200 Billion horde...

  2. I Blame by dcw3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Plug in your political affiliation and start pointing fingers now...

    Democrat
    Trump
    Climate Change
    Misogyny
    Russia

    Republican
    Obama/Clinton
    Abortion
    Snowflakes
    BLM

    Or maybe, instead of picking sides, and listening to the talking heads, we could just for a moment stop and realize that "the other side" isn't all evil/crazy, and that they just see things through a different lens that we should try to understand instead of listening to our individual echo chambers.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
    1. Re:I Blame by JoshuaZ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, the other side isn't evil or crazy, but that doesn't mean that climate change isn't real, that Donald Trump isn't a sexist asshole who literally bragged about sexually assaulting women, and that he very likely collaborated with Russia in if not illegal, certainly questionable ways. And of course, there are Republicans out there who are willing to stand up to him, but that doesn't make Trump less bad.

      Every Presidential election since I was old enough to care except this one, I've sent time arguing with people that it wouldn't be terrible if the candidate from the major other party they were opposed to won. I didn't do that where Trump was concerned, because he really is that bad. It is true that people are often much too willing to assume that the politicians they dislike are somehow absolutely awful, but it doesn't mean that that doesn't sometime genuinely occur.

    2. Re:I Blame by Solandri · · Score: 2

      If just 10% of the energy people spent on blaming others with different political affiliation was instead spent on work, growing a business, or starting a new business, most of the problems we complain about would disappear on their own.

      The entire reason we developed representative government with elected officials is so we would only need to take a few days out of our lives every couple years to worry about politics. Instead of having to learn the minutiae of every political issue every day so we can make an informed decision about all of them, we choose a few people to do it for us. That frees us up to do our regular productive jobs the rest of the time. But instead of using that free time to get more work done or for recreational activities, for some odd reason we use huge portions of it to follow what our elected officials do and argue with each other about the rightness or wrongness of it. That's not our job. That's the job of the politicians we elected. We made those elected offices so everyone wouldn't have to waste time dealing with all that stuff.

      Do your research before the elections and vote your conscience. Follow up on it just enough to make sure the people you voted for are doing what you expected them to do, and so you're prepared for the next election. Otherwise, get on with your life. That's how the system was designed to work. If you feel strongly enough about politics that you must follow it every day, then you should probably be running for office. And if the electorate decides you aren't suitable for office, go back to your regular job.

      Do you want to know the best way to heal the political divisiveness currently afflicting the country? Get to know some people with different political opinions. Go on vacation together, go hiking with them, play some sports with them, go to a concert together, take your kids to the park together, go fishing together. Discuss anything but politics. You'll find that you're both regular people, and you have a lot more in common with each other than differences. And when a divisive political issue comes up, your imagination won't be working with a vacuum so it can run wild and cast the other guy as evil incarnate so it's OK to punch him, throw things at him, shoot him, or even think it's OK that he's been shot.. He'll be the neighbor you hang out with - a real person with a life just like you who has his own personal reasons for disagreeing with you, just like you have your own personal reasons for disagreeing with him. And maybe, just maybe, we'll be able to sit down and have a civilized conversation about how best to resolve or live with our differences, instead of calling each other stupid/crazy/evil and doing everything we can to impede each other.

    3. Re:I Blame by tbannist · · Score: 2

      I've always thought Obama and Clinton were moderate conservatives.

      You only think that because they are moderate conservatives.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  3. Re:Storms? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

    The Unemployment Rate this year since January has been 4.8%, 4.7%, 4.5%, 4.4%, 4.3%, 4.4%, 4.3%, 4.4%, 4.2%. Jobs dropped by 33,000 but unemployment went down...? FAKE NEWS!!!

    Seriously though, what? Labor force participation rate went up from 62.9% in August to 63.1% in September. Labor force went from 160,571,000 to 161,146,000. Number of employed went from 153,439,000 to 154,345,000. Where do you see 33,000 jobs reduced?

    --
    Support my political activism on Patreon.
  4. Re:Storms? by will_die · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yet the actual scientists who study hurricanes and forecasted last year that this years hurricanes would be worse than recent norms say it the warming is caused by El Nino not global warming.
    The people who are saying it was caused by global warming are the people who are paid to raise the fear level about global warming.

  5. Re:Or.. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

    The Gulf cost is a major area for US Oil Refineries. Being hit by a Hurricane is not good for them.

    Also there isn't any noticeable trending decline in the US Oil and Gas industry. It may not be a big boom like it was a few years ago, but the US is a major Oil producer (and consumer)

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  6. Re:Storms? by nospam007 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Aren't we pretty sure it's Trump's fault?"

    That's just Twitter storms.

  7. Re: Don't worry ... by Layzej · · Score: 2

    Wait what? Hurricanes are caused by global warming now?

    Here's what has happened over the last few decades: "it is virtually certain that intense tropical cyclone activity has increased in the North Atlantic since 1970."

    Here's what we expect with global warming:

    Although projections under 21st century greenhouse warming indicate that it is likely that the global frequency of tropical cyclones will either decrease or remain essentially unchanged, concurrent with a likely increase in both global mean tropical cyclone maximum wind speed and rainfall rates, there is low confidence in region-specific projections of frequency and intensity. Still, based on high-resolution modelling studies, the frequency of the most intense storms, which are associated with particularly extensive physical effects, will more likely than not increase substantially in some basins under projected 21st century warming and there is medium confidence that tropical cyclone rainfall rates will increase in every affected region. - http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessm...

    Rainfall is what caused most of the damage this year AFAIKT, so that seems in line with our expectations for a warmed world, though these are early days and large impacts are not anticipated until later in the century. Possibly this was just bad luck. Possibly the impact was enhanced by global warming. Either way it's probably it is something we should learn to get used to.

  8. Re:Dow Jones up 27% in less than one year. by JoshuaZ · · Score: 2

    Not particularly; I also don't think that the short term growth of the stock market is the only metric of how things are going; I personally do quite well from the current stock market, that doesn't mean that there aren't serious problems with this administration.