More Jobs Lost.....

[umbrella39]

The OP is brain dead

You don't say! The name can change but the dumb remains the one constant.

 

[sandorski]

"Cook the books much" counts as Commentary?

 

[UberNeuman]

"Cook the books much" counts as Commentary?

could have been "derp, derp, derp."

/oh wait it was..
//derp, derp... derp....

 

[Throckmorton]

I'm continually amazed by the people boiling mad at Obama for not fixing in a year what it took Bush 8 years to fuck up.

Exactly... Oh and you can never blame Bush for what's Bush's fault either, because accountability is politically incorrect.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

If only a republican were in power...

Heh heh, Lol. I wonder what the numbers would look like if McCain had won and the Republicans had taken Congress. Probably about the same. Or perhaps worse. I can see the Republicans doing something like increasing the amount of H-1B and L-1 visas in the name of strengthening the economy.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

An upward labor trend would result in a net gain of jobs; this is merely a continuing decrease in the rate of the DOWNWARD labor trend.

Remember, the numbers are worse than they look because we need around 150,000 net new jobs each month merely to keep up with population growth. So in terms of percentage of working-aged people employed, the percentage has decreased more than a loss of 20,000 jobs would suggest.

 

[werepossum]

The rate of job losses is slowing down. That's a positive sign. Don't take my word for it; read the article.

Edit: Let me make this really clear for you by analogy:

There were 273 combat-related deaths of American soldiers in Afghanistan in 2009. If 100 were to die in all of 2010 despite the increase in operations, will you maintain that that's not a positive trend?

If the federal budget deficit goes down to $200 billion in 2015, $100 billion in 2018, and $50 billion in 2020, will you insist that that's not an positive trend?

A positive sign, yes; an upward trend, no. As an example of the difference, it is theoretically possible to continue this "trend" and end up with zero jobs, losing them at an ever-decreasing rate but an ever-accumulating total.

Remember, the numbers are worse than they look because we need around 150,000 net new jobs each month merely to keep up with population growth. So in terms of percentage of working-aged people employed, the percentage has decreased more than a loss of 20,000 jobs would suggest.

True, this actually makes things worse. If we need 150,000 new jobs monthly to maintain parity and we lose 22,000 then we're actually down 172,000 jobs. One of the scary things in the ADP report was that companies of all sizes cut jobs. We also have people dropping out from the official unemployed list, though, which helps keep the official unemployment rate down, and of course ADP does not include government (the Obama growth industry) or the very small companies people start when they lose their jobs.

One thing about March - companies can finally see the hit they will be taking on health care reform, so probably some of those jobs lost are probably from that. Other job losses for HCR reform will probably follow (for example, our local BC/BS just announced 93 jobs cut to cover its increased costs under HCR.) But other companies - those who primary competition is also American - can factor in those costs and may begin some hiring and/or expansion or other capital projects. Once companies also know what kind of hit they'll take on energy reform (Cap and Tax), then those companies whose business models allow survival under the new rules can resume hiring and building. Of course, those hit too hard by the new rules to grow or even survive will continue hemorrhaging jobs, either in outsourcing or in downsizing or in bankruptcy.

And of course Obama's proposed tax and regulatory reforms are the third sword hanging above American businesses' collective figurative head. When he said he would fundamentally transform American, he wasn't joking. And there's nothing worse for hiring than to have pending but unknown legislation with the ability to destroy your company. Once the legislation is known and its affects have been calculated, at least some businesses will survive and even prosper. It's the uncertainty that's killing growth in all of them, and thereby killing consumer spending in those non-government employees who don't know how much longer they will BE employees.

 

[Genx87]

It's ok. This is a jobless recovery, you don't really need a job so stop fretting, it will be all ok. The dow is up that should be good enough for you!

I miss the days of the Bush jobless recovery. You know the jobless recovery that had us at full employment.

 

[dullard]

The data is coming in:

1) Initial jobless claims at 439k is tied for the lowest in 19 months.
2) The manufacturing index is the highest since July 2004
3) Tomorrow, the labor department chimes in and is expected to annouce ~190k jobs gained in March.

 

[werepossum]

I miss the days of the Bush jobless recovery. You know the jobless recovery that had us at full employment.

LOL The days when the media ran pompous stories about how the "true" unemployment was ten percent rather than the actual U-3 unemployment rate being ten percent.

 

[Genx87]

LOL The days when the media ran pompous stories about how the "true" unemployment was ten percent rather than the actual U-3 unemployment rate being ten percent.

I personally cant wait to see the media run story after story about how great it is we have an 8-9% unemployment rate in 2012. The same media who was whining about 5% in 2004.

 

[sandorski]

I miss the days of the Bush jobless recovery. You know the jobless recovery that had us at full employment.

Ahh the sweetness of Rose Coloured glasses.

 

[Special K]

The data is coming in:

1) Initial jobless claims at 439k is tied for the lowest in 19 months.
2) The manufacturing index is the highest since July 2004
3) Tomorrow, the labor department chimes in and is expected to annouce ~190k jobs gained in March.

I'm pretty sure #3 is solely due to all the temporary workers the government hired to handle the census. The private sector will still report a net loss of jobs for March.

 

[werepossum]

I'm pretty sure #3 is solely due to all the temporary workers the government hired to handle the census. The private sector will still report a net loss of jobs for March.

The private sector is SO twentieth century. In Obama's "fundamentally transformed" America all workers will be employed by glorious new federal government where we'll produce nothing but somehow enjoy higher salaries and benefits.

 

[Hacp]

I have a question about the census. How much are we paying these guys? Can't we get all the people on food stamps and welfare, we do have 1/8 of our population on food stamps, and tell them to count their building then report to the federal government? Wouldn't that be a low cost solution? No counting, no food stamps, no welfare. Sounds fair to me.

 

[sandorski]

The private sector is SO twentieth century. In Obama's "fundamentally transformed" America all workers will be employed by glorious new federal government where we'll produce nothing but somehow enjoy higher salaries and benefits.

I'm guessing you missed this News

 

[werepossum]

I'm guessing you missed this News

"Treasury plans to sell 7.7 billion Citigroup shares in 2010?" No, I saw that and it's really good news. I've never been comfortable with government owning these companies instead of holding and/or guaranteeing loans. Doesn't seem to have much bearing on the current topic or my (admittedly tongue-in-cheek) comment though. . .

 

[shira]

A positive sign, yes; an upward trend, no. As an example of the difference, it is theoretically possible to continue this "trend" and end up with zero jobs, losing them at an ever-decreasing rate but an ever-accumulating total.

Your knowledge of math is obviously pretty poor.

According to you, if "jobs added" went from +500,000 in one month to +10,000 the next month, that would be an "upward trend." Do you really stand by that partisan hack-point?

Chart 2 on page one of the February Jobs report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics clearly shows what's happening in our economy:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Use any BS language you want, but it's abundantly clear that things are getting better.

 

[Hacp]

Your knowledge of math is obviously pretty poor.

According to you, if "jobs added" went from +500,000 in one month to +10,000 the next month, that would be an "upward trend." Do you really stand by that partisan hack-point?

Chart 2 on page one of the February Jobs report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics clearly shows what's happening in our economy:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Use any BS language you want, but it's abundantly clear that things are getting better.

If we continue the trend of losing jobs we will never recover.

 

[shira]

If we continue the trend of losing jobs we will never recover.

Gee, another fvcktard righty who escapes into oversimplification when defending a fraudulent position.

 

[werepossum]

Quote:
Originally Posted by shira View Post
Your knowledge of math is obviously pretty poor.

According to you, if "jobs added" went from +500,000 in one month to +10,000 the next month, that would be an "upward trend." Do you really stand by that partisan hack-point?

Chart 2 on page one of the February Jobs report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics clearly shows what's happening in our economy:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Use any BS language you want, but it's abundantly clear that things are getting better.
If we continue the trend of losing jobs we will never recover.

This. If we went from 500,000 new jobs to 10,000 new jobs we would still be adding jobs - the trend would still be to have more jobs - whereas going from 24,000 net lost jobs to 20,000 net lost jobs is just dying a bit more slowly - a positive sign and things are getting better in as much as they are getting worse more slowly, but hardly what I would call an upward trend. Interestingly, Shira's link shows a downward trend starting in February by his definition - but I guess the "nonpartisan" thing to do would be to concentrate only on those months where the job losses decrease.

 

[boomerang]

The private sector is SO twentieth century. In Obama's "fundamentally transformed" America all workers will be employed by glorious new federal government where we'll produce nothing but somehow enjoy higher salaries and benefits.

I hope the central planners don't mess up and put the nail plant too close to the steel foundry. We can create more jobs if we need to transport the finished product further distances.

The foundry makes the steel. The nail factory then makes nails. The nails then get transported back to the foundry to be melted for more steel. Lots of happy, productive workers.

In other news, beet production is up for the third straight quarter!

 

[HydroSqueegee]

LOL guys. (Can you even play Solitaire on a DEC?) But surely they must have SOME computers, if only to keep track of their shotguns and jackboots.

Oh wait, it's government - why track them when they can just buy new ones?

do you have any idea the hell we are put through when a piece of equipment comes up missing in the Air Force? we dont just buy a new one...

 

[Balt]

I hope the central planners don't mess up and put the nail plant too close to the steel foundry. We can create more jobs if we need to transport the finished product further distances.

The foundry makes the steel. The nail factory then makes nails. The nails then get transported back to the foundry to be melted for more steel. Lots of happy, productive workers.

In other news, beet production is up for the third straight quarter!

FACT: Bears eat beets.