What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Unemployment lowest since 2008 (2 Viewers)

This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :lmao:The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :lmao:
So unemployment remaining relatively steady at 9.6% and the number of displaced workers in part time positions they don't want rising almost five times the amount of private sector jobs increase is a strong job report? Maybe CNBC would report a dog taking a dump was good news for the economy as long as the current administration is in power...
 
Big revisions for June and July, including private payrolls moving up 100k in July. Private still increasing in August, overall number would be around +70k without the census workers rolling off. The market looks set for a move higher after these numbers.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
:lmao: You're really stretching now. "It wasn't a complete disaster and last month's horrific numbers were slightly less horrific." Still well below the normal post-recessionary trajectory.

 
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :)The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :shrug:
Because we're certain the market understands it better than you. The rally is only because the market's expectations were desperately low, not because the report was stellar.
 
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :)The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :shrug:
So unemployment remaining relatively steady at 9.6% and the number of displaced workers in part time positions they don't want rising almost five times the amount of private sector jobs increase is a strong job report? Maybe CNBC would report a dog taking a dump was good news for the economy as long as the current administration is in power...
And the headline on FoxNews is "Jobless Rate Climbs to 9.6 Percent as More Americans Seek Work." I think the report is mixed with both good and bad news. Interesting how the issue is reported by various news sources.
 
This from MSN:

link

Stocks soar as job cuts abate

American employers shed 54,000 jobs in August, fewer than expected. The unemployment rate rises to 9.6%. Goldcorp will buy Andean Resources for $3.4 billion.

Posted by TheStreet Staff on Friday, September 3, 2010 8:07 AM

By Sung Moss, TheStreet

Updated at 9:36 a.m. ET

Stocks were surging as the market opened after the government said U.S. employers cut fewer jobs than expected in August.

At 9:36 a.m. ET, the Dow Jones Industrial Average ($INDU) was up by 108 points, or 1.1%, at 10,428. The S&P 500 ($INX) was up by 13 points, or 1.2%, at 1,103. The Nasdaq ($COMPX) was rising by 30 points, or 1.4%, to 2,230.

The Labor Department reported that American employers shed 54,000 jobs in August, fewer than the 105,000 economists had expected. The Dow gained 51 points Thursday, extending its 255-point surge on Wednesday.

************************************

You just can't get enough good news on the employment market, I say.

 
This is a "we're glad the world's not ending" rally in the market. The report overall is a mixed bag and does little to change the base outlook of a slow, plodding recovery that can not produce enough jobs to bring the unemployment rate down. I a still holding onto some hope that a more optimistic outcome will occur based on the continued increase in hourly earnings and it's positive impact on a consumer spending.

 
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :)The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :shrug:
So unemployment remaining relatively steady at 9.6% and the number of displaced workers in part time positions they don't want rising almost five times the amount of private sector jobs increase is a strong job report? Maybe CNBC would report a dog taking a dump was good news for the economy as long as the current administration is in power...
So now CNBC is the lamestream media? Maybe the Dow Jones, Nasdaq, and S&P 500 are all part of this liberal conspiracy, since they are all up betwen 1% and 1.5% so far today. :lmao:
 
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :)The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :shrug:
So unemployment remaining relatively steady at 9.6% and the number of displaced workers in part time positions they don't want rising almost five times the amount of private sector jobs increase is a strong job report? Maybe CNBC would report a dog taking a dump was good news for the economy as long as the current administration is in power...
So now CNBC is the lamestream media? Maybe the Dow Jones, Nasdaq, and S&P 500 are all part of this liberal conspiracy, since they are all up betwen 1% and 1.5% so far today. :lmao:
Seriously. Do you even understand that another overall loss of jobs is not a good thing, or do you need someone to help you with that pesky negative numbers stuff again? This is yet another false rally on Wall Street, where the market is being manipulated on "better than expected" bad news for the benefit of a few.
 
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :)The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :shrug:
Because we're certain the market understands it better than you. The rally is only because the market's expectations were desperately low, not because the report was stellar.
Private job growth continues and June and July recieved big boosts above their previous estimates, indicating that the summer slump was smaller than we thought. These are all positive things. The only real source of job loss is coming from the public sector. But whatever, keep denying the positive signs because they don't fit your politics.
 
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :)The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :shrug:
So unemployment remaining relatively steady at 9.6% and the number of displaced workers in part time positions they don't want rising almost five times the amount of private sector jobs increase is a strong job report? Maybe CNBC would report a dog taking a dump was good news for the economy as long as the current administration is in power...
So now CNBC is the lamestream media? Maybe the Dow Jones, Nasdaq, and S&P 500 are all part of this liberal conspiracy, since they are all up betwen 1% and 1.5% so far today. :lmao:
Seriously. Do you even understand that another overall loss of jobs is not a good thing, or do you need someone to help you with that pesky negative numbers stuff again? This is yet another false rally on Wall Street, where the market is being manipulated on "better than expected" bad news for the benefit of a few.
Looks like they have the critical thinking ability to see that the 114,000 weighing the number down come from the roll-off of temporary census workers. I'm sure you were screaming that the positive numbers in March and April were false due to that boost too, but you cannot have it both ways.I get how it works with you guys though, you think that the market is always right until it moves against what you want it to then it doesn't know what it is doing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :lmao:

The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :yes:
Because we're certain the market understands it better than you. The rally is only because the market's expectations were desperately low, not because the report was stellar.
Private job growth continues and June and July recieved big boosts above their previous estimates, indicating that the summer slump was smaller than we thought. These are all positive less disastrous than we thought things. The only real source of job loss is coming from the public sector. But whatever, keep denying the positive signs because they don't fit your politics.
Fixed.From JPM this morning: "current consensus calling for 100K total decline in NFPs w41K private adds". The market is up because the report wasn't as bad as expected. When you're a year past the trough of a recession and you're still losing jobs it's not a good thing--especially when the best number you can herald is a sub-population growth private employment number that has your $862 B stimulus behind it. Keep applying lipstick to the pig. :excited:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Private job growth continues and June and July recieved big boosts above their previous estimates, indicating that the summer slump was smaller than we thought. These are all positive things. The only real source of job loss is coming from the public sector. But whatever, keep denying the positive signs because they don't fit your politics.
Jesus Christ. Seriously. For your own sake, stop already. This is simple. Do the freakin' math:
Government employment fell, as 114,000 temporaryworkers hired for the decennial census completed their work. Private-sectorpayroll employment continued to trend up modestly (+67,000).
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes re-ferred to as involuntary part-time workers) increased by 331,000 over themonth
That's a substantial overall loss of full time jobs. How hard can this possibly be? If the GOP controlled Washington it would still be an overall loss of a significant number of full time jobs. The report is politically unbiased.
 
Private job growth continues and June and July recieved big boosts above their previous estimates, indicating that the summer slump was smaller than we thought. These are all positive things. The only real source of job loss is coming from the public sector. But whatever, keep denying the positive signs because they don't fit your politics.
Jesus Christ. Seriously. For your own sake, stop already. This is simple. Do the freakin' math:
Government employment fell, as 114,000 temporaryworkers hired for the decennial census completed their work. Private-sectorpayroll employment continued to trend up modestly (+67,000).
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes re-ferred to as involuntary part-time workers) increased by 331,000 over themonth
That's a substantial overall loss of full time jobs. How hard can this possibly be? If the GOP controlled Washington it would still be an overall loss of a significant number of full time jobs. The report is politically unbiased.
I didn't say there were not negative aspects, but that there are substantial positive components of this report that are very promising. I also said the market looked to move higher on the news which at first you disagreed with, then decided to imply the market is just wrong. But, I'm done trying to point out the positives of a report to you when you refuse to see them.
 
Maybe this will help you, since math on the sign and magnitude of numers seems to confuse you:

link to bls table one

Look under the "unemployed" line near the top. See, the seasonally adjusted number goes up. Then look at the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate. Tht number goes up too - from 9.5% to 9.6%.

Now these numbers are called "negative" numbers. They are on the left side of the number line. When they get larger, that means they are further to the left on the number line, which means that they are getting worse.

:shakinghead:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :popcorn:

The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :mellow:
Because we're certain the market understands it better than you. The rally is only because the market's expectations were desperately low, not because the report was stellar.
Private job growth continues and June and July recieved big boosts above their previous estimates, indicating that the summer slump was smaller than we thought. These are all positive less disastrous than we thought things. The only real source of job loss is coming from the public sector. But whatever, keep denying the positive signs because they don't fit your politics.
Fixed.From JPM this morning: "current consensus calling for 100K total decline in NFPs w41K private adds". The market is up because the report wasn't as bad as expected. When you're a year past the trough of a recession and you're still losing jobs it's not a good thing--especially when the best number you can herald is a sub-population growth private employment number that has your $862 B stimulus behind it. Keep applying lipstick to the pig. :blackdot:
Sorry, but the last two months with an average 80k private job growth is very much a good thing. I know job growth isn't responding as sharply from this recession as usual, but this recession was much much much deeper than normal. If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth. The report is certainly painting a picture that the recovery is a slow recovery, and not a recovery about to slide to a double dip. I think these are good signs, and I don't really care if you want to be too bull-headed to acknowledge that there are positives despite the slower than normal pace.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe this will help you, since math on the sign and magnitude of numers seems to confuse you:

link to bls table one

Look under the "unemployed" line near the top. See, the seasonally adjusted number goes up. Then look at the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate. Tht number goes up too - from 9.5% to 9.6%.

Now these numbers are called "negative" numbers. They are on the left side of the number line. When they get larger, that means they are further to the left on the number line, which means that they are getting worse.

:shakinghead:
You are arguing against something that I am not saying. I'd have patience with you and explain my position more if you weren't doing it in such an ####### manner. I know better than to think you are doing anything but trolling. Back to the ignore function with you.
 
If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth.
:whoosh:
I look at the labor market independent of things like the census to see trends. It is ok if you don't, but I'd wager all of you who don't now were screaming the numbers in the spring were incorrectly inflated by those.
What?
I'm still trying to figure out if bostonfred went full schtick or just fell of the deep end. I don't need another quandary to sort out.
 
If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth.
:whoosh:
I look at the labor market independent of things like the census to see trends. It is ok if you don't, but I'd wager all of you who don't now were screaming that the numbers in the spring were incorrectly inflated by the census hirings.
What?
Bolded with some clarification, if that doesn't help I'd be happy to explain further.

Basically the most important factor in the jobs market is the private employment figures which will drive the recovery or a recession. The second chart here is what is most encouraging to me. This is not going to be an easy bounce-back for the labor market, and that the private sector is continuing to gain is encouraging. There is still a long way for it to go, but ISM numbers on Wed and the stronger business spending on GDP are certainly showing that we are going in the right direction.

 
If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth.
:brush:
I look at the labor market independent of things like the census to see trends. It is ok if you don't, but I'd wager all of you who don't now were screaming that the numbers in the spring were incorrectly inflated by the census hirings.
What?
Bolded with some clarification, if that doesn't help I'd be happy to explain further.

Basically the most important factor in the jobs market is the private employment figures which will drive the recovery or a recession. The second chart here is what is most encouraging to me. This is not going to be an easy bounce-back for the labor market, and that the private sector is continuing to gain is encouraging. There is still a long way for it to go, but ISM numbers on Wed and the stronger business spending on GDP are certainly showing that we are going in the right direction.
But what does that have to do with your saying we'd have more employment growth if only we hadn't cut jobs? That's a bit like saying if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their hind ends so hard when they jumped. The simple fact is, they don't have wings.

 
If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth.
:brush:
I look at the labor market independent of things like the census to see trends. It is ok if you don't, but I'd wager all of you who don't now were screaming that the numbers in the spring were incorrectly inflated by the census hirings.
What?
Bolded with some clarification, if that doesn't help I'd be happy to explain further.

Basically the most important factor in the jobs market is the private employment figures which will drive the recovery or a recession. The second chart here is what is most encouraging to me. This is not going to be an easy bounce-back for the labor market, and that the private sector is continuing to gain is encouraging. There is still a long way for it to go, but ISM numbers on Wed and the stronger business spending on GDP are certainly showing that we are going in the right direction.
You are encouraged by a graph in an article in which the author describes what the graph represents in the following manner:hiring by the private sector has slowed noticeably in recent months:

The slog presents us with two main problems. First, the odds of a double-dip recession are higher than they were a few months ago. It won’t take as much to push the economy into a self-reinforcing cycle of job cuts and spending cuts. Second, the labor market is a long, long way from healthy, and it isn’t on pace to get there anytime soon.

Come on Desert. You are stretching yourself into pretzels here trying to see something that just isn't there.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, but the last two months with an average 80k private job growth is very much a good thing. I know job growth isn't responding as sharply from this recession as usual, but this recession was much much much deeper than normal. If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth. The report is certainly painting a picture that the recovery is a slow recovery, and not a recovery about to slide to a double dip. I think these are good signs, and I don't really care if you want to be too bull-headed to acknowledge that there are positives despite the slower than normal pace.
A deeper recession would argue that job growth (and economic growth) should be much stronger than it is. Given the depth of the recession, GDP should be growing north of 5%-6%. Job growth is anemic due to the type of recession we had, not the severity. [edit for grammar]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, but the last two months with an average 80k private job growth is very much a good thing. I know job growth isn't responding as sharply from this recession as usual, but this recession was much much much deeper than normal. If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth. The report is certainly painting a picture that the recovery is a slow recovery, and not a recovery about to slide to a double dip. I think these are good signs, and I don't really care if you want to be too bull-headed to acknowledge that there are positives despite the slower than normal pace.
A deeper recession would argue that job growth (and economic growth) should be much stronger than it is. Given the depth of the recession, GDP should be growing north of 5%-6%. Job growth is anemic due to the type of recession we had, not the severity. [edit for grammar]
:brush: The guy doesn't understand the concept of negative numbers. You think he can grasp this? He's working off talking points, nothing more.

 
But what does that have to do with your saying we'd have more employment growth if only we hadn't cut jobs? That's a bit like saying if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their hind ends so hard when they jumped. The simple fact is, they don't have wings.
Yes it is, however my point is that the census jobs are not part of the business cycle and considering them muddies the picture on it. That is all.
 
But what does that have to do with your saying we'd have more employment growth if only we hadn't cut jobs? That's a bit like saying if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their hind ends so hard when they jumped. The simple fact is, they don't have wings.
I guess the point is that the hiring, and subsequent layoff, of census workers isn't particularly meaningful when discussing job growth or losses because they are not based upon the recovery or further decline of the economy, business sector, etc.
 
But what does that have to do with your saying we'd have more employment growth if only we hadn't cut jobs? That's a bit like saying if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their hind ends so hard when they jumped. The simple fact is, they don't have wings.
Yes it is, however my point is that the census jobs are not part of the business cycle and considering them muddies the picture on it. That is all.
Oh I see. I skipped over the part where you qualified it with "public sector" jobs. My bad. Sorry.
 
I just saw two economist on CNBC this AM talking about this weeks numbers for jobs, retail and housing looked at as a whole indicate that there isn't a double dip coming. Just steady low-level growth.

What is interesting in this epic Bull/Bear debate(I don't recall a match this hard fought in my lifetime) - is that there has been all this hand wringing over companies not knowing what is going to happen in the future(taxes/inflation/deficits - all the bear arguments) that has caused them to hold back on employing and investing in the economy - yet if you look back over nearly the last 2 years since this administration came into power it has been marked as pretty calm, less volatile time for business - companies are making money, inflation hasn't spiked, oil prices are flat and steady, some growth has occurred, companies have record cash, banks are back to lending(not giving cash away) - without all the political rhetoric it would look like the Eisenhower years.

 
You are encouraged by a graph in an article in which the author describes what the graph represents in the following manner:

hiring by the private sector has slowed noticeably in recent months:

The slog presents us with two main problems. First, the odds of a double-dip recession are higher than they were a few months ago. It won’t take as much to push the economy into a self-reinforcing cycle of job cuts and spending cuts. Second, the labor market is a long, long way from healthy, and it isn’t on pace to get there anytime soon.

Come on Desert. You are stretching yourself into pretzels here trying to see something that just isn't there.
I disagree with his conclusions, I think the chart is encouraging for the reasons I mentioned above. Though, I do also follow many other more leading indicators that seem to be telling the same story, so my picture is a bit different than looking at just the lagging ones. :thumbup:
 
Sorry, but the last two months with an average 80k private job growth is very much a good thing. I know job growth isn't responding as sharply from this recession as usual, but this recession was much much much deeper than normal. If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth. The report is certainly painting a picture that the recovery is a slow recovery, and not a recovery about to slide to a double dip. I think these are good signs, and I don't really care if you want to be too bull-headed to acknowledge that there are positives despite the slower than normal pace.
A deeper recession would argue that job growth (and economic growth) should be much stronger than it is. Given the depth of the recession, GDP should be growing north of 5%-6%. Job growth is anemic due to the type of recession we had, not the severity. [edit for grammar]
Agreed. Recession with a financial crisis is tough to come back from. Credit standards still aren't where they need to be for the economy to go full-speed ahead, banks still need to deleverage their balance sheets as do consumers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
But what does that have to do with your saying we'd have more employment growth if only we hadn't cut jobs? That's a bit like saying if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their hind ends so hard when they jumped. The simple fact is, they don't have wings.
Yes it is, however my point is that the census jobs are not part of the business cycle and considering them muddies the picture on it. That is all.
Oh I see. I skipped over the part where you qualified it with "public sector" jobs. My bad. Sorry.
No worries GB :unsure:
 
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchang.../labour_markets

GIVEN the consistently disappointing data we've seen out of the American economy in recent weeks, the outlook for this morning's August payroll employment report was uncomfortably uncertain. Initial jobless claims have risen ominously of late, and a number of indicators of economic activity have edged downward, leading some to believe that the Labour Department would provide evidence of a sharp retrenchment in labour markets for the month.

In fact, the figures aren't that bad. The headline number is negative—off 54,000 for the month—but that's overwhelmingly due to the continued drawdown in temporary census employment, which subtracted 114,000 jobs from the August report. Ex-census, the economy added 60,000 jobs in August. Private employment rose by 67,000 for the month. Since December of 2009, private employment has grown by a total of 763,000.

Meanwhile, revisions to previous months' data indicated a better labour market performance than was previously believed. The June employment change was revised from a drop of 221,000 to a decline of 175,000, and the change in July was revised from a decline of 131,000 jobs to a dip of just 54,000. (In both cases, the headline negative figures were also attributable to the unwinding of temporary census hiring). July private employment growth was revised up to 107,000 jobs.

Of course, these positive moves still don't amount to an economy producing enough jobs to rapidly bring down the unemployment rate. The jobless rate ticked up in August, from 9.5% to 9.6%. The upward shift doesn't necessarily signal a deterioration. Household employment (figured as part of a different survey from the payroll number) rose by 290,000 for the month, but that was not enough to compensate for the 550,000 worker increase in the size of the labour force. But at this point in the business cycle, labour force growth is a positive sign. Still, all involved would prefer to see the economy adding far more jobs; at this pace, full employment might not return until mid-decade.

Some potentially good news is the drop in long-term unemployment in this report. Both the number and percentage of unemployed workers off the job for more than 26 weeks declined in August. A key question is whether the drop is due to reemployment or departures from the labour force. The average and median durations of unemployment also fell.

Temporary help services continued to be a strong source of employment growth, as did the health and education sector. Manufacturing employment offset some of this rise, due largely to normal cycles in the production schedule in the automobile industry. Hours and earnings both showed slow but steady growth, yet again.

The overall picture is of a labour market that continues to chug along in the right direction, albeit far too slowly. The pace of employment recovery implies several long, hard years ahead for American workers. But given the mood on markets and around dinner tables lately, one has to appreciate the continuation of the upward trend
I think the bolded is good to point out. This and this are probably two of the most frightening charts of the recession. It is good to see them coming down, but why they are coming down is important.
 
Desert_Power said:
Sorry, but the last two months with an average 80k private job growth is very much a good thing. I know job growth isn't responding as sharply from this recession as usual, but this recession was much much much deeper than normal. If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth. The report is certainly painting a picture that the recovery is a slow recovery, and not a recovery about to slide to a double dip. I think these are good signs, and I don't really care if you want to be too bull-headed to acknowledge that there are positives despite the slower than normal pace.
1. Deeper recession typically lead to a steeper bounce back.2. Just a few months ago we had more job growth, so no matter how you want to parse the numbers, the job market has deteriorated. 3. Even your private sector job growth stats are below population growth.All of this was accomplished with a zero interest rate policy from the Fed, significant quantitative easing from the Fed and an $862 billion stimulus.
 
Desert_Power said:
Sorry, but the last two months with an average 80k private job growth is very much a good thing. I know job growth isn't responding as sharply from this recession as usual, but this recession was much much much deeper than normal. If the public sector hadn't been sharply cutting jobs the last two months we would have had two months of employment growth. The report is certainly painting a picture that the recovery is a slow recovery, and not a recovery about to slide to a double dip. I think these are good signs, and I don't really care if you want to be too bull-headed to acknowledge that there are positives despite the slower than normal pace.
1. Deeper recession typically lead to a steeper bounce back.2. Just a few months ago we had more job growth, so no matter how you want to parse the numbers, the job market has deteriorated. 3. Even your private sector job growth stats are below population growth.All of this was accomplished with a zero interest rate policy from the Fed, significant quantitative easing from the Fed and an $862 billion stimulus.
Don't forget TARP, which was as important as any of them.
 
I had my first interview in over a year on Monday :excited: I'm a perfect fit for the position and I thought the interview went well :excited: 5 days later still no call :lmao:

 
guderian said:
Desert_Power said:
Bronco Billy said:
This ought to make the market skyrocket when you combine it with a couple of Obama speeches!
The market is up about a percent so far today. :yes:The headline on CNBC reads: Stocks Rally on Strong Jobs Report. Maybe the market understands the report a bit better than you :shrug:
Because we're certain the market understands it better than you. The rally is only because the market's expectations were desperately low, not because the report was stellar.
Bottom line is that the BLS report beat market expectations, and the market is reacting to the positive economic news. Had the numbers been worse than expectations, the market would have retreated and you'd be in this thread celebrating the bad news.
 
Needed a place for this:

• "What most people would call unemployment, [Michael] Van Gorkom embraced as 'funemployment.' While millions of Americans struggle to find work as they face foreclosures and bankruptcy, others have found a silver lining in the economic meltdown. These happily jobless tend to be single and in their 20s and 30s. Some were laid off. Some quit voluntarily, lured by generous buyouts. Buoyed by severance, savings, unemployment checks or their parents, the funemployed do not spend their days poring over job listings. They travel on the cheap for weeks. They head back to school or volunteer at the neighborhood soup kitchen. And at least till the bank account dries up, they're content living for today."--Los Angeles Times, June 4, 2009
• "It's an old theory that's gaining new political currency: By cushioning the blow of unemployment for nearly two years, jobless benefits discourage recipients from looking for work. The claim, most frequently advanced by conservative pundits and politicians aligned with the conservative "tea party" movement, is seen as a fresh insult by the nation's suffering unemployed workers."--Los Angeles Times, Sept. 21, 2010
 
Employment Situation SummaryTransmission of material in this release is embargoed USDL-10-1393until 8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, October 8, 2010Technical information: Household data: (202) 691-6378 * cpsinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/cps Establishment data: (202) 691-6555 * cesinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/cesMedia contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- SEPTEMBER 2010Nonfarm payroll employment edged down (-95,000) in September, and the unem-ployment rate was unchanged at 9.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Sta-tistics reported today. Government employment declined (-159,000), reflec-ting both a drop in the number of temporary jobs for Census 2010 and job losses in local government. Private-sector payroll employment continued to trend up modestly (+64,000).Household Survey DataThe number of unemployed persons, at 14.8 million, was essentially un-changed in September, and the unemployment rate held at 9.6 percent. (See table A-1.)Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for adult men (9.8 percent), adult women (8.0 percent), teenagers (26.0 percent), whites (8.7 percent), blacks (16.1 percent), and Hispanics (12.4 percent) showed little or no change in September. The jobless rate for Asians was 6.4 percent, not seasonally adjusted. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over), at 6.1 million, was little changed over the month but was down by 640,000 since a series high of 6.8 million in May. In September, 41.7 percent of unemployed persons had been jobless for 27 weeks or more. (See table A-12.)In September, both the civilian labor force participation rate, at 64.7 percent, and the employment-population ratio, at 58.5 percent, were un-changed. (See table A-1.)The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) rose by 612,000 over the month to 9.5 million. Over the past 2 months, the number of such workers has increased by 943,000. These individuals were working part time be-cause their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)About 2.5 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force in September, up from 2.2 million a year earlier. (The data are not sea-sonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)Among the marginally attached, there were 1.2 million discouraged work-ers in September, an increase of 503,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not cur-rently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.3 million persons marginally attached to the labor force had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)Establishment Survey DataTotal nonfarm payroll employment edged down by 95,000 in September.Government employment fell by 159,000, reflecting both the departureof 77,000 temporary Census 2010 workers from federal government pay-rolls and a decline of 76,000 in local government employment. Private-sector payroll employment continued to trend up (+64,000) over the month. (See table B-1.)Health care employment rose by 24,000 in September. The increase wasconcentrated in ambulatory health care services (+17,000). Health careemployment has risen by an average of 21,000 per month this year.Within professional and business services, employment services added28,000 jobs in September. Temporary help services accounted for mostof the gain.Within leisure and hospitality, employment in food services and drink-ing places increased by 34,000 over the month and has risen by 104,000 thus far in 2010.Mining employment continued to trend up (+6,000) over the month. Mining has added 77,000 jobs since a recent low in October 2009.Employment in manufacturing changed little in September and, on net, has been essentially flat since May. The industry added 134,000 jobs during the first 5 months of the year.Employment in wholesale trade, retail trade, transportation and ware-housing, information, and financial activities showed little change in September.Employment in construction edged down (-21,000) over the month, partlyoffsetting an employment gain in August. Both the August and Septemberchanges were concentrated among nonresidential specialty trade contrac-tors. Construction employment has shown little net change since February.Government employment fell by 159,000 in September. A decline in federal government employment was due to the loss of 77,000 temporary Census 2010 jobs. As of September, about 6,000 temporary decennial census workers re-mained on the federal government payroll, down from a peak of 564,000 in May. Employment in local government decreased by 76,000 in September with job losses in both education and noneducation.In September, the average workweek for all employees was unchanged at 34.2 hours. The manufacturing workweek for all employees decreased by 0.1 hour to 40.1 hours, and factory overtime was unchanged at 3.0 hours. The aver-age workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private non-farm payrolls was unchanged at 33.5 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)Average hourly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls in-creased by 1 cent to $22.67 in September. Over the past 12 months, aver-age hourly earnings have increased by 1.7 percent. In September, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employ-ees increased by 1 cent to $19.10. (See tables B-3 and B-8.) The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for July was revised from -54,000 to -66,000, and the change for August was revised from -54,000 to -57,000.
Private job growth continues to improve and census employees roll off. Continued private sector expansion is a good sign, I can't see a double dip in store. The big loss in local government is troubling but expected with their budgets and the inability of meaningful state aid to get through Congress. I'll let you guys figure out how to blame Obama for this one. :sarcasm:
 
Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed USDL-10-1393

until 8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, October 8, 2010

Technical information:

Household data: (202) 691-6378 * cpsinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/cps

Establishment data: (202) 691-6555 * cesinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- SEPTEMBER 2010

Nonfarm payroll employment edged down (-95,000) in September, and the unem-

ployment rate was unchanged at 9.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Sta-

tistics reported today. Government employment declined (-159,000), reflec-

ting both a drop in the number of temporary jobs for Census 2010 and job

losses in local government. Private-sector payroll employment continued

to trend up modestly (+64,000).

Household Survey Data

The number of unemployed persons, at 14.8 million, was essentially un-

changed in September, and the unemployment rate held at 9.6 percent. (See

table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for adult men (9.8

percent), adult women (8.0 percent), teenagers (26.0 percent), whites

(8.7 percent), blacks (16.1 percent), and Hispanics (12.4 percent) showed

little or no change in September. The jobless rate for Asians was 6.4

percent, not seasonally adjusted. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over),

at 6.1 million, was little changed over the month but was down by 640,000

since a series high of 6.8 million in May. In September, 41.7 percent

of unemployed persons had been jobless for 27 weeks or more. (See table

A-12.)

In September, both the civilian labor force participation rate, at 64.7

percent, and the employment-population ratio, at 58.5 percent, were un-

changed. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes

referred to as involuntary part-time workers) rose by 612,000 over the

month to 9.5 million. Over the past 2 months, the number of such workers

has increased by 943,000. These individuals were working part time be-

cause their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find

a full-time job. (See table A-8.)

About 2.5 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force

in September, up from 2.2 million a year earlier. (The data are not sea-

sonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted

and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the

prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had

not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table

A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 1.2 million discouraged work-

ers in September, an increase of 503,000 from a year earlier. (The data

are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not cur-

rently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for

them. The remaining 1.3 million persons marginally attached to the labor

force had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey

for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See

table A-16.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment edged down by 95,000 in September.

Government employment fell by 159,000, reflecting both the departure

of 77,000 temporary Census 2010 workers from federal government pay-

rolls and a decline of 76,000 in local government employment. Private-

sector payroll employment continued to trend up (+64,000) over the

month. (See table B-1.)

Health care employment rose by 24,000 in September. The increase was

concentrated in ambulatory health care services (+17,000). Health care

employment has risen by an average of 21,000 per month this year.

Within professional and business services, employment services added

28,000 jobs in September. Temporary help services accounted for most

of the gain.

Within leisure and hospitality, employment in food services and drink-

ing places increased by 34,000 over the month and has risen by 104,000

thus far in 2010.

Mining employment continued to trend up (+6,000) over the month. Mining

has added 77,000 jobs since a recent low in October 2009.

Employment in manufacturing changed little in September and, on net, has

been essentially flat since May. The industry added 134,000 jobs during

the first 5 months of the year.

Employment in wholesale trade, retail trade, transportation and ware-

housing, information, and financial activities showed little change in

September.

Employment in construction edged down (-21,000) over the month, partly

offsetting an employment gain in August. Both the August and September

changes were concentrated among nonresidential specialty trade contrac-

tors. Construction employment has shown little net change since February.

Government employment fell by 159,000 in September. A decline in federal

government employment was due to the loss of 77,000 temporary Census 2010

jobs. As of September, about 6,000 temporary decennial census workers re-

mained on the federal government payroll, down from a peak of 564,000 in

May. Employment in local government decreased by 76,000 in September with

job losses in both education and noneducation.

In September, the average workweek for all employees was unchanged at 34.2

hours. The manufacturing workweek for all employees decreased by 0.1 hour

to 40.1 hours, and factory overtime was unchanged at 3.0 hours. The aver-

age workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private non-

farm payrolls was unchanged at 33.5 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)

Average hourly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls in-

creased by 1 cent to $22.67 in September. Over the past 12 months, aver-

age hourly earnings have increased by 1.7 percent. In September, average

hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employ-

ees increased by 1 cent to $19.10. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for July was revised from

-54,000 to -66,000, and the change for August was revised from -54,000 to

-57,000.
Private job growth continues to improve and census employees roll off. Continued private sector expansion is a good sign, I can't see a double dip in store. The big loss in local government is troubling but expected with their budgets and the inability of meaningful state aid to get through Congress. I'll let you guys figure out how to blame Obama for this one. :goodposting:
I will give Obama 100% credit for these pathetic numbers. We've been lagging for 14 months now when will it end? At this rate it will take decades to recover all the jobs we have lost since jan. 2008.

So you are pleased with September's numbers? Remember we have gone almost $3 trillion in debt getting here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My company hasn't had an official hiring freeze but it hasbeen almost impossible to get approvals for new hirings. Now all of a sudden my company has just posted about 50 openings locally and close to 100 worldwide, all in the last month. Something is going on...

 
My company hasn't had an official hiring freeze but it hasbeen almost impossible to get approvals for new hirings. Now all of a sudden my company has just posted about 50 openings locally and close to 100 worldwide, all in the last month. Something is going on...
I think the private sector has been (understandably) spooked since May when we had both the Flash Crash and fears about the European debt crisis were at a high. As a result, they were tentative to hire or expand and wary that we were about to plunge back into a double dip situation. You could see both the equity and labor markets moving sideways throughout the summer while bond prices rallied on the uncertainty. Now that the fears seem to have been oversold, the private sector appears to be loosening. I think those macro factors could help explain why you would see a sudden uptick in your company.
 
I will give Obama 100% credit for these pathetic numbers. We've been lagging for 14 months now when will it end? At this rate it will take decades to recover all the jobs we have lost since jan. 2008.So you are pleased with September's numbers? Remember we have gone almost $3 trillion in debt getting here.
We'll have recovered all of the jobs lost sometime around 2020.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top