Unemployment falls to lowest level since May 2001

[randym431]

Pish tosh!

Bush has only generated some 3 mill jobs since he has been in up to now. Clinton? 25 mill new jobs. What a joke... :disgust:

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: ebaycj
The economy is doing well. Corporations are doing well. The problem is that all of this well-being is not "trickling down" to the everyday workers. That is why the negative view of the economy is prevalent, because so many educated workers feel as if they have been "standing still" financially for the past 6 years, while their companies are moving forward quickly. People don't like to be taken advantage of.

I've seen more people than not on these boards talk about how well they are doing in their companies.

You know why? Because everyone who has an average job just does it, they don't go posting, "OMG, I'm making an amazing average salary!"
People only will post to brag when they're doing well with a job, same as when people only call 1-800 Comment lines when there's a problem, not when they've had a normal shopping experience.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: ebaycj
The economy is doing well. Corporations are doing well. The problem is that all of this well-being is not "trickling down" to the everyday workers. That is why the negative view of the economy is prevalent, because so many educated workers feel as if they have been "standing still" financially for the past 6 years, while their companies are moving forward quickly. People don't like to be taken advantage of.

I've seen more people than not on these boards talk about how well they are doing in their companies.

You know why? Because everyone who has an average job just does it, they don't go posting, "OMG, I'm making an amazing average salary!"
People only will post to brag when they're doing well with a job, same as when people only call 1-800 Comment lines when there's a problem, not when they've had a normal shopping experience.

When people are asked if they feel they are doing well economicly something around 66% say 'yes' they are.
People are being told over and over again how bad the economy is by people like Pelosi and others who are out for political gains and they start to believe the hype.
It becomes a case of "I am doing good, but I worry about the guy across the street."

 

[pkme2]

Hawaii's Unemployment Rate in Hawaii is 2.5% and we have a Republican Governor. Go figure.......

http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/blsla/lasst15000003

 

[miketheidiot]

what i find interesting is that many people still don't perceive these gains.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: pkme2
Hawaii's Unemployment Rate in Hawaii is 2.5% and we have a Republican Governor. Go figure.......

http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/blsla/lasst15000003

I'm not trying to dog ya (I'm moving to Maui in February) but the unemployment rate there has a lot to do with people having two and three jobs just to make ends meet. Hawaii is actually the perfect example of ultra low unemployment coinciding with an out of control cost of living.

There is such a thing as the UE rate being too low. Hawaii is the perfect example. 5% is just about right. At 2% the employers are begging for workers...

<--- Republican (Well... votes republican... registered independent)

 

[Painman]

On the flipside of that report, the economy added a "whopping" 92K new jobs during the same reporting period...

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
what i find interesting is that many people still don't perceive these gains.

It's not to their advantage. Truth is in the eye of the beholder, facts are merely written in to make up whatever one believes in.

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Employment at that low of a level actually is bad for several reasons. Foremost among them is inflation. If you knew more about economics and less about trolling you might know why.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Our country hasn't had an inflation problem in 20 years, and yet our unemployment has hovered around there for awhile. Our unemployment doesn't affect inflation like it used to in the global economy, where most of our goods are produced outside our country and independent of our employment.

I'll take 4.4% unemployment and tame inflation over 6% unemployment and almost no inflation.

4.4% inflation is still higher than what is targeted. Utilizing past inflation to justify future or present is stupid, entirely different environment. If it's higher than targeted and outstrips what can be considered "acceptable", it is a problem. Unemployment beyond the frictional unemployment boundary is actually bad for the economy, as it leads to rampant inflation.

Of course, you could care less, as long as your ignorant outlook gets propagated by the president. Of course, I am sure you will ignore my post and everybody else's, because nobody knows anything but you. Perhaps you should learn a bit more before you post so stupidly.

4.4% inflation? The CPI says that in the last 12 months, prices are up 2%. Low unemployment and low inflation, together. Economists' heads around the world are exploding!

Because economists would never think there could ever be low inflation AND low unemployment. :roll:

Take a look at Japan. They have deflation and their unemployment has been lower than ours for years (higher than their average though, I think). That's not to say their economy is the best. I would actually argue that ours is much healthier.

The problem is if we go over full employment which I think we are getting fairly close to if we haven't surpassed it already. That would increase inflation past levels that we would want. If we don't control inflation we could have a scenario like we had in the late 1970s with high inflation and high unemployment. The only solution to that is a severe contractionary policy like we had in the early 1980s. I don't think that'll happen any time soon because it looks like the Fed has finally learned how to run the money supply.

The inflation numbers may be low currently (if you could link me to the CPI only changing 2%, that'd be good) but if unemployment numbers continue to go down, I would expect the inflation numbers to jump up.

 

[techs]

btw unemployment rate under Clinton was:
7.3 percent when he took office
3.9 percent when he left office

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Simple economics can explain to you why a low unemployment is not always a good thing.

And this unemployment rate is total BS.

Here's the proof

No way unemployment can keep going down if the # of jobs created each month is at or below the equilibrium level. 3 of the 10 months of this year have been above it, the rest have been well below, on average.

You're kidding, right? The running average is above the required line for 75% of the graph, thus reducing the unemployment rate.

See my post above where I mention "Ain't nuthin' getting through"

You keep proving that point with each and every post.


But, fwiw, I will try again:
http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/data


And note the LFPR has maintained the same level since June.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm

Note how the LFPR rate is, essentially, the same each month since the start of the "recovery" in Q4 2003.
http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab1.htm (turn on the 1st 8 Seasonally Adjusted checkboxes)
In pretty picture form(looks like the post-Katrina dip has corrected itself and we're back to flat-line)

LFPR from 1996-Present

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Ferocious
umm unemployment was also very low during the age of feudalism.

Which is apparantly what the GOP wants for America. No middle class.

The funny thing is their biggest cheerleaders here think they are somehow going to escape their fate and eat at the table with the rich boys. I guess it just takes some people longer to figure out they are getting screwed by the same prick as everyone else.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: fitzov

We've added something in the range of 3 million jobs since 2003 I believe.

And how many jobs were lost? You have to use basic arithmetic here.

Fox said that we now have "record" number of people employed. Which I would understand to mean that more people are working than ever before. And therefore Bush has added more jobs than he as lost.

In terms of pure numbers, yes. Because the population keeps growing.

The LFPR is below Clinton-era, pre-Dot-com boom levels.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: fitzov

We've added something in the range of 3 million jobs since 2003 I believe.

And how many jobs were lost? You have to use basic arithmetic here.

Fox said that we now have "record" number of people employed. Which I would understand to mean that more people are working than ever before. And therefore Bush has added more jobs than he as lost.

Another great stat. The average unemployment under Bush is now 5.3, and under Clinton it was 5.2 so Bush is closing in on Clinton's record for unemployment, and baring a drastic increase in unemployment should pass him in another month or two.

Meanwhile, Nanci Pelosi had this to say ""The President has the worst jobs record since the Great Depression..."

My guess is that Fox are cooking the books, by failing to compensate for the growth in population. If the average unemployment is still higher under Bush than Clinton, then he has seen a net loss in employment while President as a whole. Whether that is a good or a bad thing, as a matter of economics, is another question.

 

[conjur]

10-Year Labor Force Participation Rate

Note that the "recovery" began in Q4 2003. Wow...look at those jobs grow!!! :roll:

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Ferocious
umm unemployment was also very low during the age of feudalism.

Which is apparantly what the GOP wants for America. No middle class.

The funny thing is their biggest cheerleaders here think they are somehow going to escape their fate and eat at the table with the rich boys. I guess it just takes some people longer to figure out they are getting screwed by the same prick as everyone else.

You've seen me post here many times, these people will continue to spout this nonsense until they are directly affected. Then watch them change their tune.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: jrenz
Despite all the good news month after month, some people still seem to think that the economy is doing terrible.

The addition of this good news will likely avert any suspected weakening of the market and keep us going strong.

Define "us".

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
How come no one has questioned the timing of this release like they have everything else good for the Republicans for the past week?

It is amazing that every economic indicator is at or higher than it was during the Clinton years and yet this crowd still complains.

What made the economy so much better when Clinton was in charge? Give me one stat to indicate that we were so much better off back then.

And don?t throw out the surplus we had, there is little correlation between deficit and surplus and the economy. We have seen good economies in the last 30+ years during times of high defects.

Wrong. When Clinton became president unemployment was OVER 7 percent and when he left office it was lower than it is TODAY.
http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/feddal/ru
You really are brainwashed, aren't you? You didn't even think to look at the numbers.
You don't take into account that Clinton had a surplus and a lower unemployment rate than Bush has with huge deficits.
Not to mention the fact that real wages rose greatly during Clintons presidency while they have been stagnant the ENTIRE 6 years of Bushes Presidency.
Just more neo-con wishful thinking.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jrenz
Despite all the good news month after month, some people still seem to think that the economy is doing terrible.

The addition of this good news will likely avert any suspected weakening of the market and keep us going strong.

No one ever said there wasn't a dearth of Wally World stocking shelf jobs available.

Just some of us don't happen to think that is "good news" or a sign of a"strong" Country.

Actually wages went up an annual rate of 4% last month as well, while inflation went DOWN 1%. So they aren't Walmart jobs being created.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jrenz
Despite all the good news month after month, some people still seem to think that the economy is doing terrible.

The addition of this good news will likely avert any suspected weakening of the market and keep us going strong.

No one ever said there wasn't a dearth of Wally World stocking shelf jobs available.

Just some of us don't happen to think that is "good news" or a sign of a"strong" Country.

Actually wages went up an annual rate of 4% last month as well, while inflation went DOWN 1%. So they aren't Walmart jobs being created.

Wage increase has nothing to do with the monthly created jobs. The fact that retail fell by 3,500 jobs indicate that they were not WalMart jobs though. And it's nice to see wages actually beat inflation (if they truely have) considering that the 5 year average wage is about -5% or so behind after inflation adjustment.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Simple economics can explain to you why a low unemployment is not always a good thing.

And this unemployment rate is total BS.

Here's the proof

No way unemployment can keep going down if the # of jobs created each month is at or below the equilibrium level. 3 of the 10 months of this year have been above it, the rest have been well below, on average.

You're kidding, right? The running average is above the required line for 75% of the graph, thus reducing the unemployment rate.

See my post above where I mention "Ain't nuthin' getting through"

You keep proving that point with each and every post.


But, fwiw, I will try again:
http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/data


And note the LFPR has maintained the same level since June.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm

Note how the LFPR rate is, essentially, the same each month since the start of the "recovery" in Q4 2003.
http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab1.htm (turn on the 1st 8 Seasonally Adjusted checkboxes)
In pretty picture form(looks like the post-Katrina dip has corrected itself and we're back to flat-line)

LFPR from 1996-Present

LFPR is down about 1% from its high when Bush took office. First of all, nobody is saying that the economy is as strong as it was in the mid to late 90's, the economy has never been that strong. Second of all, the lower LFPR could be due to all kinds of reasons, including baby boomers retiring, etc... (it could also be that the job market isn't as strong as it was at the turn of the century, or a combination of both). My whole point is that the economy really isn't as weak as you or others like to portray it. Thank you for at least backing up your opinions with the numbers that led you to your conclusion.

http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2004/01/follow-up-to-unemployment-rate-puzzle.html

If you look at the graph, the LFPR has been on a downward trend for 30 years, so to blame Bush or a "weak" economy for the LFPR going down is pretty ridiculous when it took a huge hit during the boom of the 90's. If you look at the graph, during the boom times the LFPR goes DOWN, and during the recessions it trends UP.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jrenz
Despite all the good news month after month, some people still seem to think that the economy is doing terrible.

The addition of this good news will likely avert any suspected weakening of the market and keep us going strong.

No one ever said there wasn't a dearth of Wally World stocking shelf jobs available.

Just some of us don't happen to think that is "good news" or a sign of a"strong" Country.

Actually wages went up an annual rate of 4% last month as well, while inflation went DOWN 1%. So they aren't Walmart jobs being created.

Wage increase has nothing to do with the monthly created jobs. The fact that retail fell by 3,500 jobs indicate that they were not WalMart jobs though. And it's nice to see wages actually beat inflation (if they truely have) considering that the 5 year average wage is about -5% or so behind after inflation adjustment.

If Walmart jobs were being created in any number, then I highly doubt that wages would increase by 4%...

 

[ProfJohn]

Wage increases are a lagging indicator. They always follow othe economic data.

Also, I believe that the wage increases we are seeing now are better than the ones at this point in the Clinton recovery.

They showed the data on TV, would have to dig to find it, and I have other things I'd rather do

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: jrenz
Despite all the good news month after month, some people still seem to think that the economy is doing terrible. The addition of this good news will likely avert any suspected weakening of the market and keep us going strong.

Good news:
[*]There are plenty of jobs available.
[*]GDP is staying in the positive territory.
[*]Stocks have gone up the last couple of years.

Bad news:
[*]With all that good news, the US government can't even come close to a balanced budget.
[*]The jobs and good GDP were created by a massive 44% non-military federal budget increase over the last few years. Plus, you have the massive military federal budget increase.
[*]Inflation has increased every year for several years and shows no signs of stopping this growth.
[*]GDP growth is still positive, but it is getting smaller and smaller.
[*]Housing was one big drivers of the economy the last few years and the housing market is on the edge of a cliff. And it isn't the typical yearly cyclical variation this time.
[*]Stocks still haven't recovered from the crash and may just be in a multi-year overall-stagnant trading region.

You are a moron if you look only at the bad news and say the economy is horrible. You are equally a moron if you look only at the good news and say the economy is great. I see both types of morons in Anandtech and possibly several in this thread.

My opinion: The economy is good on many measures, but its foundation is very rocky. Rocky enough, that I think it is beginning to crumble in several areas. Will it bring everything down? Probably not. But the next year will not look nearly as rosy as it has been.

Very well put and I agree entirely.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Wage increases are a lagging indicator. They always follow othe economic data.

Also, I believe that the wage increases we are seeing now are better than the ones at this point in the Clinton recovery.

They showed the data on TV, would have to dig to find it, and I have other things I'd rather do

Actual income picture adjusted for inflation during the recovery.

Note: From April. Slight uptick from then but not enough to erase 5 years worth of inflation erroded wages.