132,000 new jobs in May

**Topspin** · 07-06-2007, 06:40 AM

U.S. employers added a stronger-than-expected 132,000 new jobs in June and also boosted payrolls more strongly than previously thought in April and May, according to a Labor Department report that underlined a strengthening job market.

The June hiring figure topped forecasts for 120,000 jobs made by Wall Street economists surveyed by Reuters. But additionally, the government said some 75,000 more jobs than it previously estimated were created in April and May -- a surprisingly solid pace of hiring throughout the second quarter that signals a pickup in the pace of economic growth after a first-quarter lull.

The Labor Department revised its estimate for May job growth up to 190,000 from a previously reported 157,000 and said there were 122,000 new jobs in April instead of the 80,000 it previously estimated.

Overtime hours and the average workweek both increased in June, which may fan fears about inflation pressures in tightening labor markets. The national unemployment rate was 4.5 percent in June, unchanged from May.

All the hiring came in service industries during June. There were 135,000 new jobs in the service sector including in health services, hospitality businesses and government. The goods-producing sector shed 3,000 jobs. There were 18,000 fewer jobs in manufacturing businesses in June, on top of 7,000 lost in May.

**LadyT** · 07-06-2007, 06:44 AM

"There were 135,000 new jobs in the service sector including in health services, hospitality businesses and government. The goods-producing sector shed 3,000 jobs. There were 18,000 fewer jobs in manufacturing businesses in June, on top of 7,000 lost in May. "

Not good news if you're in manufacturing.

I just heard on CSPAN that in England they have an over abundance of nurses and other health technicians that graduated and have not been able to find work in the UK. I wonder if hospitals here will try to recruit them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6276336.stm

**Topspin** · 07-06-2007, 08:09 AM

that's an all too typical weak dem taling point. Assembling something for $13 hr is not a good job.
A nurse making $70,000 is a good job. We have a shortage of nurses and doctors.

**Blackwater Lunchbreak** · 07-06-2007, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by LadyT

"There were 135,000 new jobs in the service sector including in health services, hospitality businesses and government. The goods-producing sector shed 3,000 jobs. There were 18,000 fewer jobs in manufacturing businesses in June, on top of 7,000 lost in May. "

Not good news if you're in manufacturing.

I just heard on CSPAN that in England they have an over abundance of nurses and other health technicians that graduated and have not been able to find work in the UK. I wonder if hospitals here will try to recruit them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6276336.stm

In socialized systems with no choice and a state monopoly, hiring enough doctors is not something they have to do to keep their business going. The people will wait. What are they gonna do? NOT take what they're given?

**Cypress** · 07-06-2007, 08:17 AM

132,000 is weak, dude. That total would have been laughable in the Clinton admin.

We need like 150,000 just to keep up with population growth.

**Topspin** · 07-06-2007, 08:20 AM

Your joking right Cypress.
Is your economic ability soley tied to vs Clinton.
that's a really good number, so high that the market is afraid it will spark inflation.
What would be a good number?
unempoyment is at 4.5% so obviously your wrong

**uscitizen** · 07-06-2007, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by Topspin

that's an all too typical weak dem taling point. Assembling something for $13 hr is not a good job.
A nurse making $70,000 is a good job. We have a shortage of nurses and doctors.

But this is a world economy spinner. If we don't make things to sell to other countries we will slide down the tubes.
or did you sleep thru economics 101 gashopper ?

This massive trade defecit is not eternally sustainable.

**Cypress** · 07-06-2007, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by Topspin

Your joking right Cypress.
Is your economic ability soley tied to vs Clinton.
that's a really good number, so high that the market is afraid it will spark inflation.
What would be a good number?
unempoyment is at 4.5% so obviously your wrong

The unemployment rate is fine.

Take a look at the total number employed. And look at wages of new jobs. People have been either dropping out of the labor pool (going back to school, etc), or have been accepting jobs with lower wages. So, it makes the unemployment number look reasonable.

**Blackwater Lunchbreak** · 07-06-2007, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by uscitizen

But this is a world economy spinner. If we don't make things to sell to other countries we will slide down the tubes.
or did you sleep thru economics 101 gashopper ?

This massive trade defecit is not eternally sustainable.

The west down the tubes is the goal. We've been placated and stupified with an intentionally created materialistic bubble, while our right to control our thoughts, our land, our resources, and our government are being stripped away systematically.

**Topspin** · 07-06-2007, 08:31 AM

usc china/mexico can assemble for $30 day what we pay $30 hr for.
Since the globalization horse left the barn 20 yrs ago there is no going back. Is that bad for the uneducated part snapper together person; sure. So is the 20 mm illegals.
That said the productive americans (now using brain vs back real economics 101 usc which you didn't take) are doing much better.

**Blackwater Lunchbreak** · 07-06-2007, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by Topspin

usc china/mexico can assemble for $30 day what we pay $30 hr for.
Since the globalization horse left the barn 20 yrs ago there is no going back. Is that bad for the uneducated part snapper together person; sure. So is the 20 mm illegals.
That said the productive americans (now using brain vs back real economics 101 usc which you didn't take) are doing much better.

Yes. The economic reality has been constructed thusly. But as humans, we can prioritize our values in other ways besides a pure profit motive orientation. We should also recognize the unmonetized value of staying productive and self reliant, despite the "cost", as measured in statist fiat currency, of doing so.

**Blackwater Lunchbreak** · 07-06-2007, 08:36 AM

Topspin. Don't run for office. "yes it's bad for you, so what." is not a good campaign slogan.

**uscitizen** · 07-06-2007, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by Cypress

The unemployment rate is fine.

Take a look at the total number employed. And look at wages of new jobs. People have been either dropping out of the labor pool (going back to school, etc), or have been accepting jobs with lower wages. So, it makes the unemployment number look reasonable.

the unemployment number is artificially low. If you are not drawing unemployment or actively job searching thru the employment office you are considered employed.
and the numbers are further massaged. For instance Regan started counting the military in the employed ranks for the first time. But denied them unemployment benefits when they get out....

**Blackwater Lunchbreak** · 07-06-2007, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by uscitizen

the unemployment number is artificially low. If you are not drawing unemployment or actively job searching thru the employment office you are considered employed.

Yeah. Not to mention that more shitty jobs just isn't the blessing they're presenting it as. It's good there's more. You need about four to make it.