Money out of pocket creates jobs.  Money in pocket creates trust funds.

That's what I meant.

Depends on the reason money is leaving pockets.  Not all money out of pockets creates jobs.

 

Also, nothing creates jobs for people without marketable skills or work ethic.

Point being, the hoarding of money is not good for our economy, which is strengthened by the circulation of funds.  This is why I prefer tax credits over tax cuts.

Point being, the hoarding of money is not good for our economy, which is strengthened by the circulation of funds.  This is why I prefer tax credits over tax cuts.

 

"Hoarding" is a matter of perspective, though.  There are certainly companies (or ex-companies) that wish that they'd hoarded a little more when times were good as a hedge against downturns.  Depending on how aggressively you're using the term, hoarding can simply another word for saving.

 

Obviously, it's easy to point to extreme outliers like Apple, Google, Cisco, etc. with their enormous cash hoards, but they're just that--serious exceptions.

 

On the consumer end, consumers are not "hoarding" so much as paying off some of their debts as opposed to simply incurring new debt to replace existing debts.  That can be a painful adjustment for the economy, but like a detox program, it's a painful adjustment that leads to better health in the long term.

It seems like a lot of banks are hoarding money, and that is a huge detriment to employment.

Headline PPI Drops By 0.1%, Core PPI Rises By 0.3%, Highest Y/Y NSA Jump Since June 2009, BLS To Change PPI Weights

 

"Finally, and in pulling a page straight out of the BLS playbook, the BLS announced it would change the weighting in its PPI categories. "The new weights, which will be introduced in February 2012 with the release of January 2012 index data, will be based on shipment values from the year 2007. These value weights come from the Census of Manufactures, the Census of Mining, the Census of Services, and the Census of Agriculture. PPI weights have been based on 2002 census shipment values since January 2007. All PPIs will be affected by this weight update, including all the industry net output indexes, as well as indexes for traditional commodity groupings. In addition, weights will be updated from the 2002 to the 2007 census for all stage-of-processing indexes, durability of product indexes, and special commodity-grouping indexes. This weight revision will not change any arithmetic reference bases for indexes, the dates when PPIs were set to 100." This is a lot of words to say that going forward even more inflation will be crammed into smoothed core price indices, so as to completely ignore any swings in the margins. Because after all who cares about energy and food?"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/headline-ppi-drops-01-core-ppi-rises-03-highest-yy-nsa-jump-june-2009-bls-change-ppi-weights

It seems like a lot of banks are hoarding money, and that is a huge detriment to employment.

 

A lot of companies are as well.

It seems like a lot of banks are hoarding money, and that is a huge detriment to employment.

 

Now that may be a charge with a bit more bite, given the bailout that was ostensibly supposed to enable lending again.  (I think many in both the banking industry and Congress knew that it would never do any such thing and that it was really just a kickback for one of the most powerful industries and one of the most powerful establishment forces in Washington.)

 

Of course, I'm a little leery of criticizing banks for not lending at the same time that I'm criticizing consumers for borrowing too much.  I'm a little more sympathetic when it comes to business lending, but the debt overhang on the corporate side is pretty serious as well.  (My practice area involves dealing with a lot of distressed debt situations, so I may be particularly sensitive here, which may in turn be good or bad.)

Comparing the national debt to a single household's finance is really dumbing down the conversation IMHO.

 

Well, it would give people more money to spend on goods and services, thus increasing employment. It's not like our so-called job creators are bothering to do that.

 

Oh, you mean all these po' folk are going to go out and buy CAT scanners, heavey machinery, Jumbo Jets and other stuff that we make in the US, or are they gong to go out and buy shirts and shoes and handbags from Walmart?

 

Maybe they will buy more middle east gasoline for thier Hundai?

 

 

Have you looked at the balance of trade numbers lately?

 

Well you are correct, your so called "Robin Hood" tax  will be great for job creation........ in China!

 

Our economic prblems are structural and will not be fixed by goosing customer demand.

 

That is another big lie by the political establishment.

 

 

 

TEdolph

 

The EITC still goes into federal spending figures, at least to the extent that the government is actually writing checks to people.  To the extent that it simply reduces tax revenue, it goes into some spending figures because many budget analyses count tax cuts/credits/etc. as expenditures.

 

I was thinking of it more as an already-existing redistributive mechanism, and one that has an element of "reward for working" to it since one has to be working (earned income) to qualify. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How about just creating an economic climate where the 99% can be i) fully employed and ii) make decent money?

 

Would that be better than just shifting around pieces of the same old pie?

 

 

TEdolph

And how does the 1% getting richer possibly do that. You think CEOs making even more money is remotely conducive to increasing employment? Name me one company where that happens and I'll name you a hundred where the inverse is true.

 

Let me ask you this, should the rich even pay any taxes? Serious question. They'd have a lot more money to spend otherwise, which according to trickle down would result in a massive employment boom.

The top 1% has been getting richer and richer. Where are the jobs?

^Overseas, so they can get richer and richer.

^Overseas, so they can get richer and richer.

 

Bingo. The problem they have is this process means their main consumers are getting poor in the US and Europe. So they better make Indian and Chinese citizens richer really quick or this house of cards is going to be difficult to hold up.

U.S. jobless claims hit lowest weekly level since 2008

 

"The number of people seeking unemployment benefits plummeted last week to 352,000, the fewest since April 2008. The decline added to evidence that the job market is strengthening.

 

Applications fell 50,000, the biggest drop in the seasonally adjusted figure in more than six years, the Labor Department said Thursday. The four-week average, which smooths out fluctuations, dropped to 379,000. That's the second-lowest such figure in more than three years."

http://www.ibj.com/us-unemployment-claims-hit-lowest-weekly-level-since-2008/PARAMS/article/32041

 

Of course this tidbit was buried well below the headlines. These numbers are going to receive quiet the revision over the next month or so. The real number jumped significantly.

 

Jobless claims fall 50,000 to 352,000

Seasonal quirks likely contributed to steep plunge

 

"About 7.83 million people received some kind of state or federal benefit in the week ended Dec. 31, up 493,566 from the prior week. Total claims are reported with a two-week lag."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-jobless-claims-fall-50000-to-352000-2012-01-19-847180

 

 

Because this has come up here and it addresses thing like the household debt comparison.  I've always seen these arguments bandied about by laymen or very informally.  Nice to see it form someone that seems like they may know what they're talking about.

 

EconProph

March 2, 2011

The Misunderstood National Debt

Jim Luke @ 6:34 pm

 

...

 

The debt is not the end of times nor will it end American economic prosperity (other policies may do that!).  And he’s absolutely right that public debt is largely misunderstood.

 

But the arguments for why it’s not a crisis and how it’s misunderstood are even stronger than he argues.  Essentially, Manning argues that most all of the debt is owed to “ourselves”, meaning either American citizens, American corporations/banks, or other units of government (Social Security program, The Federal Reserve, etc). That’s all true, but there are bigger reasons why the national debt doesn’t really matter.

 

...

 

http://econproph.com/2011/03/02/the-misunderstood-national-debt/

The top 1% has been getting richer and richer. Where are the jobs?

 

 

In China. 

 

And as long as we allow the Chi-Coms to devalue their currancy by 25% in an economic war against the U.S., that is where all the job creation will be if you goose consumer demand.

 

TEdollph

If this is true, then Greece has officially defaulted no matter what the spin maybe.

 

Debt crisis: live

 

"Investors in Greek bonds are reportedly facing a haircut of up to 70pc as IIF talks continue over the weekend, while Germany would consider a bourse tax as a compromise if this could bring Britain in line with its EU partners."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/debt-crisis-live/9026792/Debt-crisis-live.html

 

And this is from one of the biggest 'cheerleaders'.

 

IMF slashes global forecast on eurozone crisis, with drastic falls in Italy and Spain

 

"The International Monetary Fund has slashed its global growth forecast for this year and exhorted the European Central Bank to boost liquidity to stave off a deeper eurozone crisis."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9026408/IMF-slashes-global-forecast-on-eurozone-crisis-with-drastic-falls-in-Italy-and-Spain.html

 

I believe this has become the plan of attack. Start with Greece, default without saying they have defaulted. Give the markets a little time to digest what happened, then do the same with Portugal, Spain, Italy, Hungary, etc. At the same time pump the system with as much money through ECB, IMF, Federal Reserve and other 'creative' financial instruments and hope they can keep the game afloat.

 

Portugal to need "debt haircut" as economy tips into Grecian downward spiral

 

"Portugal's borrowing costs have jumped to record highs and are tracking the moves seen in the culminating phase of Greece's debt crisis, dashing hopes that the country will be able to stave off contagion by embracing drastic austerity."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9026144/Portugal-to-need-debt-haircut-as-economy-tips-into-Grecian-downward-spiral.html

EconProph

March 2, 2011

The Misunderstood National Debt

Jim Luke @ 6:34 pm

 

...

 

The debt is not the end of times nor will it end American economic prosperity (other policies may do that!).  And hes absolutely right that public debt is largely misunderstood.

 

But the arguments for why its not a crisis and how its misunderstood are even stronger than he argues.  Essentially, Manning argues that most all of the debt is owed to ourselves, meaning either American citizens, American corporations/banks, or other units of government (Social Security program, The Federal Reserve, etc). Thats all true, but there are bigger reasons why the national debt doesnt really matter.

 

...

 

http://econproph.com/2011/03/02/the-misunderstood-national-debt/

 

Very informative.  Good to have an objective analysis on this issue without all the silly spin and agendas.

In other words, print, extend, manipulate, etc. in an organized worldwide fashion. These types of statements show that a large chunk of the modern world's economy is clearly on the edge. I am sure just 5 years ago very few people would have ever dreamed of such a comment being made by the IMF or even the need for such a comment. Things have changed a lot since then.

 

IMF chief urges action to avoid ‘1930s moment’

Lagarde calls for larger firewalls, deeper integration in Europe

 

“What we must all understand is that this is a defining moment,” Lagarde said at the German Council on Foreign Relations, according to the prepared text of her speech. “It is not about saving any one country or region. It is about saving the world from a downward economic spiral. It is about avoiding a 1930s moment, in which inaction, insularity and rigid ideology combine to cause a collapse in global demand.”

 

The “1930s moment” appears to be a reference to the Great Depression of the 1930s, when the crash on Wall Street in 1929 triggered an economic depression in the U.S. which later spread around the world."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/imf-chief-urges-action-to-avoid-1930s-moment-2012-01-23

 

Will Europe finally become the 'United States of Europe'.

Tedolph is a groupie of the 1%

Because this has come up here and it addresses thing like the household debt comparison.  I've always seen these arguments bandied about by laymen or very informally.  Nice to see it form someone that seems like they may know what they're talking about.

 

EconProph

March 2, 2011

The Misunderstood National Debt

Jim Luke @ 6:34 pm

 

...

 

The debt is not the end of times nor will it end American economic prosperity (other policies may do that!).  And he’s absolutely right that public debt is largely misunderstood.

 

But the arguments for why it’s not a crisis and how it’s misunderstood are even stronger than he argues.  Essentially, Manning argues that most all of the debt is owed to “ourselves”, meaning either American citizens, American corporations/banks, or other units of government (Social Security program, The Federal Reserve, etc). That’s all true, but there are bigger reasons why the national debt doesn’t really matter.

 

...

 

http://econproph.com/2011/03/02/the-misunderstood-national-debt/

 

I've heard this argument before, and it simply doesn't pass the smell test.  After all, the ultimate practical conclusion of his argument is that the federal government can (and, impliedly, should) spend without limit.  (Since it's almost always liberal economists making these arguments, I always ask whether or not there is any justification for critiquing the expense of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and whether this thesis holds up when the new spending programs under consideration are invasions of Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Cuba, and France.)

 

the government (federal) cannot go broke or ever not be able to pay back bonds and interest when they are due.  This is because the government creates and is the source of the underlying “base money”.  It can always create more money to pay the bonds when due.  Now I know many folks, including many economists who haven’t updated their understanding of the monetary system since the 1971, will say “but, but, but that’s printing money and that creates inflation.”.  No it isn’t. And no it doesn’t.  The government doesn’t pay it’s bills or payoff bonds with “money”.  They send checks drawn on The Federal Reserve Bank.  Those checks are accepted by your local bank when you deposit them. When your local bank gives the check to The Fed, The Fed provides the bank with bank reserves.  Bank reserves are not money.  Bank reserves do not circulate. And, since 1971 at least, bank reserves do not limit or really influence how much money is in circulation.  How much your local bank loans out creates money.  And The Fed creates reserves to match what’s needed.

 

One has to wonder what his definition of "money" is that he puts it in scare quotes and distinguishes it from reserves at the Federal Reserve.  It's pretty standard economics that the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply">money supply</a> includes "currency in circulation and demand deposits (depositors' easily accessed assets on the books of financial institutions)."

 

Finally, there’s another very important reason the Chinese or anybody else that holds U.S. debt in large amounts don’t have a problem with the size of our debt.  That’s because the “debt” itself, the bonds, really shouldn’t be thought of as “debt”.  Government debt is really more like “paper money that pays interest”.

 

Sovereign debt can function that way for many purposes, true, but this cuts against his argument that we're not printing money.  After all, if government debt is "paper money ...," we've certainly been printing a lot of it.  In addition, I don't see the necessary causal link that he seems to see here that implies "... therefore, don't worry about how much we're printing."

Jobless rate plunges to lowest in 3 years

says the Dayton Daily News headline, but the article tells you whats really happening....

 

Ohio’s unemployment rate nose-dived in December to its lowest level in three years, according to data released Friday by the Department of Job and Family Services.

 

But the drop ...was mainly the result of discouraged workers shelving their job searches.

 

So, it's fake.  The economy isn't creating the jobs and putting people to work.    People stop looking, and the "unemployment" % artificially goes down. 

 

 

The official <a href="http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000">labor force participation rate</a> stats support that explanation on the national level as well, and there's little reason to think that any special circumstances apply to Ohio that would make it an exception to the trend.  Of course, depending on how much respect you have for the official stats (there is at least one <a href="http://www.shadowstats.com/">Web site devoted to critiquing them</a>), that may or may not say much for you.

BLS stats say that employment is increasing but not at a fast enough rate to take us to pre-recession levels anytime soon.

 

The unemployment number could drop to 4% (or whatever) at this rate by people just running out of unemployment benefits and becoming discouraged and not look for work. Yet our employment situation will really not improve much. But the headline numbers will look great and that should make everyone feel better and buy another flat screen tv. :clap:

 

Here in Colorado the unemployment rate dropped one tenth of a percentage point yet "...Nonfarm payroll jobs — tracked in a separate survey of employers — actually declined by 4,400 during the month."

 

Read more: Colorado unemployment declines to 7.9 percent in December - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_19806958#ixzz1kPhSPyFD

Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse

 

 

So our headline number dropped but the number of people employed in the state dropped 4,400. But once again the headline looks great.

This is shocking? :-o

 

Citigroup sued for fraud over $1 billion of CDOs

 

"NEW YORK (Reuters) - Citigroup Inc (NYSE:C - News) was sued for fraud by Loreley Financing over nearly $1 billion worth of collateralized debt obligations purchased in 2006 and 2007.

 

Citigroup is accused of defrauding Loreley into purchasing "fraudulent investments that are now worthless," Loreley said in a complaint filed Tuesday in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan.

 

Citi used the CDOs to offload the risks of toxic mortgage-backed securities on its books and to help preferred clients "short" the housing market, the lawsuit claims."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/citigroup-sued-fraud-over-1-233654800.html?source=patrick.net

 

I guess people actually do need a job, and a steady income to afford a new home or feel secure enough to make such a purchase.

 

December new-home sales dip to end worst-ever year

Sales for 2011 slump to record low

 

"WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — U.S. sales of new homes retreated in December, perhaps a fitting end to a year that saw a record low level of sales."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/december-new-home-sales-dip-to-end-worst-ever-year-2012-01-26?dist=afterbell

This index is really starting to show some serious strain going on in the world economy.

 

Chart of the Day: The Baltic Dry Index

 

"The index – often used as a proxy for the health of the global economy as it reflects the prices charged for shipping commodities such as metals, coal or grain around the world – has fallen by 61% since October."

 

"The index was at 842 at yesterday’s close – down from its 12-month high of 2173 last October."

 

"He said: “This collapse looks similar to the falls we saw in the Baltic Dry ahead of the recessions of the late 1970s and early 1990s – but this drop is actually steeper.”

 

“What this is signalling is that the world economy is slowing down much more quickly than people have been thinking.”

http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2012-01-25/chart-of-day-baltic-dry-shipping-rates-fall?mod=mostread-PE

John Reed on Big Banks’ Power and Influence

January 27, 2012

Bill Moyers talks with former Citigroup Chairman John Reed to explore a momentous instance: how the mid-90’s merger of Citicorp and Travelers Group – and a friendly Presidential pen — brought down the Glass-Steagall Act, a crucial firewall between banks and investment firms which had protected consumers from financial calamity since the aftermath of the Great Depression. In effect, says Moyers, they put the watchdog to sleep.

 

There’s no clearer example of the collusion between government and corporate finance than the Citicorp-Travelers merger, which — thanks to the removal of Glass-Steagall — enabled the formation of the financial behemoth known as Citigroup. But even behemoths are vulnerable; when the meltdown hit, the bank cut more than 50,000 jobs, and the taxpayers shelled out more than $45 billion to save it.

 

Now, John Reed regrets his role in the affair, and says lifting the Glass Steagall protections was a mistake. Given the 2008 meltdown, he’s surprised Wall Street still has so much power over Washington lawmakers.

 

“I’m quite surprised the political establishment would listen to groups that have been so discredited,” Reed tells Moyers. “It wasn’t that there was one or two or institutions that, you know, got carried away and did stupid things. It was, we all did… And then the whole system came down.”

 

<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/35736113?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="400" height="225" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="http://vimeo.com/35736113">John Reed on Big Banks' Power and Influence</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/user9013478">BillMoyers.com</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>

Great video, thanks for posting it.

And still dropping. Three percent here and three precent there, really starts to add up over time.

 

U.S. house prices slide 1.3% in November

Case-Shiller index shows 32.9% drop from peak

 

"The S&P/Case-Shiller 20-city composite home price index dropped 1.3% to take the year-on-year drop to 3.7%."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-house-prices-slide-13-in-november-2012-01-31

Good news...

 

http://www.daytondailynews.com/dayton-ohio-jobs/jobs-news/midwest-leading-nation-in-economic-recovery-1320963.html

 

 

Excellent video with John Reed.

Take a look at the absolute meltdown going on in the comments section to this article.  Just goes to prove the point that there are a LOT of people out there that have no interest in seeing the economy improve over these next several months.....

 

http://news.yahoo.com/manufacturing-picks-private-job-gains-slow-004225175.html

Yes, Hts121 we all know you are an Obama apologist and establishment Dem type so you are going to spin this in a postiive way.  There is indeed a political angle in how one spins the numbers and I would appreciate it if you keep your partisan BS to the Politics subforum.

 

Anway, from the article:

 

The Fed last week acknowledged some improvement in the labor market but said the jobless rate remained too high and that it would likely keep overnight lending rates near zero until at least late-2014. Fed policymakers' central forecast expects unemployment will end this year between 8.2 and 8.5 percent.

 

Which is pretty much what has been the track record on jobs creation for Ohio, that I've been tracking from the BLS monthly employment estimates.  If the rate accelerates that would be good news.  The DDN artcile also indicates that we are into a recovery.  Its just a weak one in terms of jobs creation vis a vis the scale of the collapse.

 

 

 

Unemployment rate falls to 8.3%; fifth straight monthly decline

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-unemployment-january-report-20120203,0,6620355.story

Yes, Hts121 we all know you are an Obama apologist and establishment Dem type so you are going to spin this in a postiive way.  There is indeed a political angle in how one spins the numbers and I would appreciate it if you keep your partisan BS to the Politics subforum.

 

I'm a liberal leaning libertarian, not a democrat.  Currently not registered with either party.  On Obama and Kasich's email lists.  And, FYI, I spend a good amount of time fighting (in the real world, not just on UO) for people like you and your former partner, Jeffrey.  Real fights.... involving real issues and rights.  In that forum, I have a feeling you would appreciate me perhaps being a bit more opinionated that your average guy.  If you paid attention to my posts, you would realize I have several issues with Obama...... even if I do defend him against the vitriolic and irrational attacks from his opponents.  Your views are your views and I don't mean to offend simply by challenging them, although it seems like that is your reaction whenever that happens....

 

Again, if you actually read my posts, I have long espoused that consumer confidence has a significant impact on the economy.  To the extent that there are groups out there that are INTENTIONALLY trying to keep that confidence level in the toilet, that is IMO a very relevant point to raise in the "US Recession: News & Discussion" thread.  If you want to challenge that point, go right ahead.  I don't see why you have to throw a hissy fit about it and reduce your response to ad hominen attacks.  Get over yourself, my man.  I didn't 'spin' anything.  I didn't make one comment on the numbers or what was released.  You simply read that purported spin into my post.  All I commented on was the reaction to the news, not the news itself.  If all you can do is get personal in response to the point made, I suggest you use PM.

 

I'll let the moderators, not you and ragerunner, decide what is appropriate for this thread.  I have made the point about consumer confidence several times and it hasn't seen the axe yet, so I will keep on keepin on..... dig it?

 

FYI.... looks like the pinko commie bastard, Boreas, is breaking your 'rules' too ^..........  TBideon too v

8.3%

No holiday seasonal employment increases to blame/credit

Despite overt Republican obstruction, our country is on its way.

Looks like Wall Street is in on the spin scam too with the help of the lamestream media....

 

Strong jobs report sends Dow to highest since '08

 

NEW YORK -- The Dow Jones industrial average has closed at its highest level since before the 2008 financial crisis.

 

*  *  *  *  *

 

Before the market opened, the Labor Department said companies hired 243,000 employees in January. That's the strongest job growth in nine months.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/02/strong_jobs_report_sends_dow_t.html

 

Again... the comments are priceless!  DOW up, positive jobs report, friday = meltdown mode

no complaints here.  I invested all I had in the market last fall.  Go baby go.  I projected the Dow to hit 13,000 by June or July but it might do it this month or next for sure it seems.

 

Tbideon - republican obstruction comment aside, I wouldn't say we're anywhere out of the woods in terms of this recession.  We all know the unemployment percentage is a very misleading stat, underemployed is a huge problem, housing market still stuck in the gutter....

Oh I agree.

 

But you take what you can get sometimes, and here we have some positive direction

I think each person must decide the value of the data being put out. Both up and down. I personally struggle with the BLS data that get seasonlly adjusted and automatically assumes a certain amount of jobs are being created in certain industries every month no matter what.

 

We also saw some noticable data adjustments on the high end during the run up to the last election. Why would we expect anything different during the run up to this years national elections. This is not a political comment, both parties seem to enjoy this type of data assistance. Once the election is over than numbers will get their slow revisions after no one really pays any attention.

 

So what is the really job number over the last two months?

 

TrimTabs Explains Why Today's "Very, Very Suspicious" NFP Number Is Really Down 2.9 Million In Past 2 Months

 

In one of his more colorful episodes, and rightfully so, Charles Biderman notes that "Either there is something massively changed in the income tax collection world, or there is something very, very suspicious about today’s BLS hugely positive number," adding, "Actual jobs, not seasonally adjusted, are down 2.9 million over the past two months. It is only after seasonal adjustments – made at the sole discretion of the Bureau of Labor Statistics economists – that 2.9 million fewer jobs gets translated into 446,000 new seasonally adjusted jobs." A 3.3 million "adjustment" solely at the discretion of the BLS? And this from the agency that just admitted it was underestimating the so very critical labor participation rate over the past year?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/trimtabs-explains-why-todays-very-very-suspicious-nfp-number-really-down-29-million-past-2-mont

Boy, we sure are hearing a lot about seasonal adjustments all of a sudden.  Even though they seasonally adjust every month, and have for a long time.

Just take the news for what it is: A small dose of good news.  The attempts to spin it into something nefarious are obviously waide of the mark, and attempts to claim that we're out of the woods and off to the races again are equally wide of the mark (though I haven't seen that on this thread--just keeping things in perspective).  Remember that while a downward trend is good, an 8.3% unemployment rate would have been extraordinarily high just a few years ago.

 

As for Republican obstructionism: Who's to say that Republican obstructionism--i.e., blocking bad proposals from becoming bad laws--isn't a significant part of why we're starting to see a small but sustained downtrend in unemployment?  After all, just labeling something a "jobs bill" doesn't mean that it will do a darn thing to create jobs.  The Republican conventional wisdom is that the less the government does, on balance, the better it is for the economy.  They have enforced a certain degree of inactivity over the past year and a half (since their 2010 midterm win), which will give them plenty of room to build their own narrative about why the economy is getting back on track because of Republican resistance to Democratic central-planning measures (even if they were not quite able to stop ObamaCare, or at least are reduced to challenging that through the courts).

 

The economy has often performed well under divided government over the past two generations, in fact.

Boy, we sure are hearing a lot about seasonal adjustments all of a sudden.  Even though they seasonally adjust every month, and have for a long time.

 

You are correct. But, the BLS has stated on their own website that their data usually has more accuracy when the economy is doing well and less accuracy during downturns/poor economic times. That is why their adjustments recently have totaled a million plus in the negative column.

and attempts to claim that we're out of the woods and off to the races again are equally wide of the mark (though I haven't seen that on this thread--just keeping things in perspective).

 

Someone did well on the reading comprehension portion of his SATs......

Somebody is celebrating our do-nothing legislature with its 9% approval rating.