Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
timschochet

Unemployment lowest since 2008

Recommended Posts

The REAL bad news comes when all these temp government workers are let go after the 2010 elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Edited by Phurfur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Yet I still can't get a ####ing job with them! :lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is beginning to look like what I feared... an American version of Japan's lost decade. Hopefully not. :lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is beginning to look like what I feared... an American version of Japan's lost decade. Hopefully not. :lmao:

we already had that from 2000-2009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Yet I still can't get a ####ing job with them! :lmao:

You have to know someone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is beginning to look like what I feared... an American version of Japan's lost decade. Hopefully not. :wub:

we already had that from 2000-2009
Yea... not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Yet I still can't get a ####ing job with them! :wub:

You have to know someone.

threaten to run for office.. you'll be offered a job
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is beginning to look like what I feared... an American version of Japan's lost decade. Hopefully not. :wub:

we already had that from 2000-2009
Yea... not so much.
Not so much? Seriously? By what measurement? GDP? DJIA? Real Estate? Purchasing power? What?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Yet I still can't get a ####ing job with them! :wub:

You have to know someone.

threaten to run for office.. you'll be offered a job
Very Nice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Yet I still can't get a ####ing job with them! :hot:

You have to know someone.

threaten to run for office.. you'll be offered a job
:lmao:

Not putting you on ignore finally pays off! Take a bow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Not sure what you're seeing because another 235,000 people reportedly quit looking for work this month, so they're not counted in the unemployment figures. Guess you live in a lucky area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Yet I still can't get a ####ing job with them! :shrug:

You have to know someone.

Actually it's the opposite...Federal gigs are are no easier to get with connections.

Assuming normal connections, not a Kennedy or Bush in-law type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Yet I still can't get a ####ing job with them! :goodposting:

You have to know someone.

Actually it's the opposite...Federal gigs are are no easier to get with connections.

Assuming normal connections, not a Kennedy or Bush in-law type.

Actually it is. All to often managers will tailor a job listing so that only one particular person can get it. See it happen all the time here. Anytime you see a gov't job listing where the job is only open for applications for a week, the manager knows who they're hiring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three straight months of employment increases if anyone cares.

Details?
February was revised up to +3,000March was revised up to +19,000.April is +32,000.This is non-farm, private employment IE temp census hiring is not being counted. It's small, but it's positive. At the peak, we were losing ~750K jobs in a month.Friday is the BLS report, which will include all the government jobs. Consensus estimate is +200K (with 100K census jobs).Also keep in mind that the majority of the stimulus spending was scheduled for Q2 2010, which is where we are now. And to revisit something I said earlier in the thread...

inventory changes will make GDP look worse on the way down and better on the way up. They will be meaningless if PCE doesn't pick up (which it did slightly). Krugman has said as much.

PCE has picked up. That's good. It's outpacing income growth, which means the increase in spending is coming from less saving. PCE won't be able to sustain this rate without more job growth (which is coming).
Income growth outpaced PCE and income is now growing ex-transfer payments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are due out later this week (Wednesday and Friday). Hopefully no surprises this time.

This one should be fine. But next month should start to show the re-entry of the census workers to the unemployment line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are due out later this week (Wednesday and Friday). Hopefully no surprises this time.

This one should be fine. But next month should start to show the re-entry of the census workers to the unemployment line.
This month's headline number will be negative as ~250K census jobs are being lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is beginning to look like what I feared... an American version of Japan's lost decade. Hopefully not. :popcorn:

we already had that from 2000-2009
Yea... not so much.
Not so much? Seriously? By what measurement? GDP? DJIA? Real Estate? Purchasing power? What?
You won't get an answer. Probably just some rhetoric about "Oh yeah, blame Bush" as if the problem that occured during that time magically disappear and leave no lasting affect on America when someone else takes office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are due out later this week (Wednesday and Friday). Hopefully no surprises this time.

This one should be fine. But next month should start to show the re-entry of the census workers to the unemployment line.
This month's headline number will be negative as ~250K census jobs are being lost.
Did they start laying people off that long ago? The person I know that got hired by the Census Bureau had their first round of cuts just last week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are due out later this week (Wednesday and Friday). Hopefully no surprises this time.

AP surprised by slumping home sales

No other surprises

Overall, however, a recent batch of housing data released last week signaled a renewed housing slump that may threaten the broader economy. The Commerce Department reported on Wednesday that sales of new homes collapsed in May, sinking 33 percent to the lowest level on record as potential buyers stopped shopping for a home as government tax credits expired. That came a day after a report showed that sales of previously owned homes fell unexpectedly in May.

A key issue is jobs. The Labor Department is expected to report on Friday that employers eliminated 110,000 jobs in June, and the jobless rate is expected to tick up slightly to 9.8 percent, from 9.7 percent in May, according to economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters. That follows a bleak report in May, which showed employers added 431,000 jobs but the vast majority were temporary census positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is beginning to look like what I feared... an American version of Japan's lost decade. Hopefully not. :thumbup:

we already had that from 2000-2009
Yea... not so much.
Not so much? Seriously? By what measurement? GDP? DJIA? Real Estate? Purchasing power? What?
You won't get an answer. Probably just some rhetoric about "Oh yeah, blame Bush" as if the problem that occured during that time magically disappear and leave no lasting affect on America when someone else takes office.
Because measuring trough to trough is pretty silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are due out later this week (Wednesday and Friday). Hopefully no surprises this time.

This one should be fine. But next month should start to show the re-entry of the census workers to the unemployment line.
This month's headline number will be negative as ~250K census jobs are being lost.
Did they start laying people off that long ago? The person I know that got hired by the Census Bureau had their first round of cuts just last week.
Enough to affect the June numbers. The July census layoffs will be the biggest, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ADP National Employment Report:February was revised up to +3,000March was revised up to +19,000.April was revised to +65,000.May was revised to +57,000.

June was +13,000. :lmao:BLS report is Friday.April was +224KMay was +20K (consensus was 200K)June's consensus estimate is 150K ex-Census. Edited by KnowledgeReignsSupreme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are due out later this week (Wednesday and Friday). Hopefully no surprises this time.

No can dooos-ville. Reuters was surprised

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - New claims for state jobless benefits unexpectedly rose last week, while manufacturing activity and employment slowed in June, heightening fears the U.S. economic recovery is stalling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is beginning to look like what I feared... an American version of Japan's lost decade. Hopefully not. :(

we already had that from 2000-2009
Yea... not so much.
Not so much? Seriously? By what measurement? GDP? DJIA? Real Estate? Purchasing power? What?
You won't get an answer. Probably just some rhetoric about "Oh yeah, blame Bush" as if the problem that occured during that time magically disappear and leave no lasting affect on America when someone else takes office.
Wiping out gains is not what Japan's lost decade was all about. There is no comparison here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ADP National Employment Report:February was revised up to +3,000March was revised up to +19,000.April was revised to +65,000.May was revised to +57,000.

June was +13,000. :XBLS report is Friday.April was +224KMay was +20K (consensus was 200K)June's consensus estimate is 150K ex-Census.
Survey SAYS.... +100K ex-Census.Lower than forecast, and U3 unemployment drops as the participation rate declines again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't get an answer. Probably just some rhetoric about "Oh yeah, blame Bush" as if the problem that occured during that time magically disappear and leave no lasting affect on America when someone else takes office.

Wiping out gains is not what Japan's lost decade was all about. There is no comparison here.
Not surprising that he doesn't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :rolleyes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :confused:

When Joe Biden was in Wisconsin and said those jobs are gone and aren't coming back.Guess that's a backhanded way of admitting it. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :thumbup:

:thumbup:This will only be more evidence that they need to spend more money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wisconsin created 40,000 jobs in May.

Are Cheney and Boehner doing the counting these days? June's numbers aren't out yet but this seems insane-one state has as many jobs created as the whole country?

http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/milwaukee...14/daily42.html

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/newsreleases/...ate_default.pdf

This month they say 83,000 were created nationally. If my state created almost that many i'll be WTF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :shrug:

:unsure:This will only be more evidence that they need to spend more money.
The GOP is watering down and voting against every bill, banks are taking free tax payer money and refusing to lend. Time for the republicans and the banks to do what's best for the country. Lend money to business so they can hire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wisconsin created 40,000 jobs in May.

Are Cheney and Boehner doing the counting these days? June's numbers aren't out yet but this seems insane-one state has as many jobs created as the whole country?

http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/milwaukee...14/daily42.html

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/newsreleases/...ate_default.pdf

This month they say 83,000 were created nationally. If my state created almost that many i'll be WTF?

I hear the mall in North Pittsburgh is crowded..
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :lmao:

:lmao:This will only be more evidence that they need to spend more money.
The GOP is watering down and voting against every bill, banks are taking free tax payer money and refusing to lend. Time for the republicans and the banks to do what's best for the country. Lend money to business so they can hire.
Yes, yes, we know.... if not for the Republicans, we would live in an Utopian society of perfection crafted by Reid, Pelosi and Obama. As for 'lend money to business so they can hire', that kind of attitude is exactly how we got into this mess to begin with. Banks do not need to lend anything unless it makes sense to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a good report but then again Reagan reduced unemployment when he added the millions from the military to it in about 1982.

This isn't the first time the unemployment numbers went down under a bad report.

That report doesn't reflect what I see up here. Here many have gone back to work. Maybe next moth will relect that.

Don't worry, the feds are hiring at a rapid pace and I am not talking about the census. We are going through the largest expansion of the federal government in history.

Yet I still can't get a ####ing job with them! :popcorn:

You have to know someone.

Actually it's the opposite...Federal gigs are are no easier to get with connections.

Assuming normal connections, not a Kennedy or Bush in-law type.

That is a nice theory, but I can tell you it helps to know someone. Even though the hiring is done by HR, managers have input and can help you get your foot in the door for an interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wisconsin created 40,000 jobs in May.

Are Cheney and Boehner doing the counting these days? June's numbers aren't out yet but this seems insane-one state has as many jobs created as the whole country?

http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/milwaukee...14/daily42.html

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/newsreleases/...ate_default.pdf

This month they say 83,000 were created nationally. If my state created almost that many i'll be WTF?

There's 56 other states, boss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :shrug:

:bye:This will only be more evidence that they need to spend more money.
The GOP is watering down and voting against every bill, banks are taking free tax payer money and refusing to lend. Time for the republicans and the banks to do what's best for the country. Lend money to business so they can hire.
Yes, yes, we know.... if not for the Republicans, we would live in an Utopian society of perfection crafted by Reid, Pelosi and Obama. As for 'lend money to business so they can hire', that kind of attitude is exactly how we got into this mess to begin with. Banks do not need to lend anything unless it makes sense to do so.
The high unemployment sucks, but I get the feeling that many businesses are healthier now (or at least are better positioned for the long term) after streamlining their workforces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

banks are taking free tax payer money and refusing to lend.

I know you care about the talking points more than the facts, but:

http://macroblog.typepad.com/macroblog/201...ing-survey.html

Indeed, the results of our April 2010 survey suggest that demand-side factors may be the driving force behind lower levels of small business credit. To be sure, when asked about the recent obstacles to accessing credit, some firms (34 firms, or 11 percent of our sample) cited banks' unwillingness to lend, but many more firms cited factors that may reflect low credit quality on the part of prospective borrowers. For example, 32 percent of firms cited a decline in sales over the past two years as an obstacle, 19 percent cited a high level of outstanding business or personal debt, 10 percent cited a less than stellar credit score, and 112 firms (32 percent) report no recent obstacles to credit. Perhaps not surprisingly, outside of the troubled construction and real estate industries, close to half the firms polled (46 percent) do not believe there are any obstacles while only 9 percent report unwillingness on the part of banks.

This is from the Atlanta fed, which I'm sure has been infiltrated by Halliburton or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :lmao:

:lmao:This will only be more evidence that they need to spend more money.
The GOP is watering down and voting against every bill, banks are taking free tax payer money and refusing to lend. Time for the republicans and the banks to do what's best for the country. Lend money to business so they can hire.
Yes, yes, we know.... if not for the Republicans, we would live in an Utopian society of perfection crafted by Reid, Pelosi and Obama. As for 'lend money to business so they can hire', that kind of attitude is exactly how we got into this mess to begin with. Banks do not need to lend anything unless it makes sense to do so.
The high unemployment sucks, but I get the feeling that many businesses are healthier now (or at least are better positioned for the long term) after streamlining their workforces.
There is a lot of speculation that the reason they are not hiring is fear. Fear of what the government will or will not do- what new regulations, new taxes, new policies, etc. The government has not promoted stability which is a foundation for business to grow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speculation?

That is what it is. Companies have streamlined their operations. There is no reason to hire until there is a clear sign of a recovery. This is it folks. It'll take months of good news before any serious recovery even begins.

The 10's will be our lost decade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

President Obama told a Wisconsin town hall today that the unemployment rate is lower than it would be if the Recovery Act (the stimulus) had not passed.Obama told the audience "unemployment's at 9.6%.""Yes, but it's not 12 or 13 or 15," Obama said defending his policy.The economy "recovered more than people expected last year," he added."Things aren't as bad as they could have been, this could have been a catastrophe, in that sense it [the stimulus] worked," Obama claimed.

I thought if if the stimulus didn't pass the unemployment rate would pass 8%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

President Obama told a Wisconsin town hall today that the unemployment rate is lower than it would be if the Recovery Act (the stimulus) had not passed.Obama told the audience "unemployment's at 9.6%.""Yes, but it's not 12 or 13 or 15," Obama said defending his policy.The economy "recovered more than people expected last year," he added."Things aren't as bad as they could have been, this could have been a catastrophe, in that sense it [the stimulus] worked," Obama claimed.

I thought if if the stimulus didn't pass the unemployment rate would pass 8%?
That was the horrible thing about the stimulus. There was no way that it would be anything but 'good'. No matter how bad it got, it would always have been worse if not for the stimulus. You can see it here when Obama praises it for working when unemployment blew by their promises for where it would go if we just passed their bill. It is pathetic politicking and nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was pretty optimistic going into this report, but it just sucked the life out of me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :thumbdown:

Here, hand me your tooth and I'll put it under the pillow for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when will the administration admit that the 'stimulus' didn't work? Where are these jobs that were guaranteed if this bill was passed????? :own3d:

:lmao:This will only be more evidence that they need to spend more money.
Krugman is already leading the charge for ever more spending. Unreal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At first I thought this was a hurricane spaghetti model. Things are most certainly looking blah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.