Unemployment rate at 8.3% despite 150k people leaving the workforce

Cancel 2016.2

The Almighty
http://www.cnbc.com/id/48480887

Despite the seemingly good news, the report's household survey showed that the actual amount of Americans working dropped by 195,000, with the net job gain resulting primarily from seasonal adjustments in the establishment survey. The birth-death model, which approximates net job growth from newly added or closed businesses, added 52,000 to the total.

The household survey also showed 150,000 fewer Americans in the workforce.

In all, the government said private payrolls added 172,000 positions — about in line with Wednesday's report from ADP and Macroeconomic Advisors — while government subtracted 9,000.

The next three months are going to be very interesting. If things continue to deteriorate, even Romney's pathetic campaign could win.
 
As Damocles said when the employment rate was going down, its the direction that matters not the numbers.
 
And that's not to say that things aren't deteriorating. I think they are. But these jobs numbers don't reflect that. And that's to be expected given that jobs lag quite a bit.

There's nothing anyone can do about it at this point except the FED. And they decided they don't feel like doing anything.
 
Try reading the fucking article dipshit...


Alternatively, Sunshine, you could explain what in the article leads you to conclude that this jobs report shows that things are "continuing to deteriorate." I read the article. I read the jobs report. I don't see it.
 
Alternatively, Sunshine, you could explain what in the article leads you to conclude that this jobs report shows that things are "continuing to deteriorate." I read the article. I read the jobs report. I don't see it.

Dear moron... read the OP... try reading the portion of the article that I quoted...
 
Dear moron... read the OP... try reading the portion of the article that I quoted...


I see. You focus exclusively on the negative, while ignoring the positive? I mean, it's really really difficult to spin a credible argument that things are "continu[ing] to deteriorate" when you have an increase of 172,000 jobs. But I can always count on you.

By the way, did you factor the 150,000 reentrants into your analysis?
 
I see. You focus exclusively on the negative, while ignoring the positive? I mean, it's really really difficult to spin a credible argument that things are "continu[ing] to deteriorate" when you have an increase of 172,000 jobs. But I can always count on you.

By the way, did you factor the 150,000 reentrants into your analysis?

Do you get the fact that the unemployment rate went up? That is a deteriorating condition you dolt. The fact that it went up despite another 150,000 people leaving the workforce shows that the problem is still deteriorating. When was the last time the labor participation rate was this low Dung? (I will save you the time, it was almost 30 years ago... 1983)

A rising unemployment rate with a declining labor participation rate is a deteriorating situation.

as for your pathetic attempt to claim I am only looking at the negative, you are continually pointing to the 172k jobs... in the PRIVATE sector, you aren't even quoting the total net jobs.
 
Do you get the fact that the unemployment rate went up? That is a deteriorating condition you dolt.

The unemployment rate went from 8.217% in June to 8.254% in July. A net increase of 0.037%. That's basically unchanged. The difference is that in June it rounded down and in July it rounded up.

The fact that it went up despite another 150,000 people leaving the workforce shows that the problem is still deteriorating.

That's a specious conclusion to draw unless you have the raw data and are not relying on seasonal adjustment. I mean, the labor force in July is higher than it was in May. In June it increased by about 150,000 and now in July it decreased by about 150,000. So to jump up and down and say that the problem is "still deteriorating" is pretty silly.

By the by, when did this deterioration begin?


When was the last time the labor participation rate was this low Dung? (I will save you the time, it was almost 30 years ago... 1983)

Uh, April.


A rising unemployment rate with a declining labor participation rate is a deteriorating situation.

And if you add in +172,000 private sector jobs it looks to me like things are neither deteriorating nor improving. They're about holding steady, which is apparently what the FED wants.


as for your pathetic attempt to claim I am only looking at the negative, you are continually pointing to the 172k jobs... in the PRIVATE sector, you aren't even quoting the total net jobs.

But you are only looking at the negative. Aren't you?

And, yes, I am only looking at the private sector. Government jobs are decreasing because that's what you and yours want what with all the belt-tightening and such. The issue is how the private sector is doing. That's why I look to the private sector numbers. Are you suggesting that the -9,000 government jobs is a reflection of the economy as opposed to tight fiscal policies?
 
The unemployment rate went from 8.217% in June to 8.254% in July. A net increase of 0.037%. That's basically unchanged. The difference is that in June it rounded down and in July it rounded up.

ROFLMAO... wow... first... link us up to your data...

Second... could you be more desperate???

That's a specious conclusion to draw unless you have the raw data and are not relying on seasonal adjustment. I mean, the labor force in July is higher than it was in May. In June it increased by about 150,000 and now in July it decreased by about 150,000. So to jump up and down and say that the problem is "still deteriorating" is pretty silly.

By the by, when did this deterioration begin?

Hilarious... I acknowledge that it began under Bush. The point dear twit is that it is continuing to decline. Obama's economic policies have failed.

Uh, April.

Good lord... yes, I understand that Obama has several months where it has been that low... tell us when was the time a President OTHER than Obama has experienced a rate that low.


And if you add in +172,000 private sector jobs it looks to me like things are neither deteriorating nor improving. They're about holding steady, which is apparently what the FED wants.

Labor participation rate lower, unemployment rate higher. Not a drastic move on either, but both are deteriorating.
 
ROFLMAO... wow... first... link us up to your data...

Second... could you be more desperate???

Just do the math from the BLS data. And I don't see how pointing out that the actual unemployment rate is largely unchanged from June in response to the assertion that things "continue to deteriorate" can be considered desperate.


Hilarious... I acknowledge that it began under Bush. The point dear twit is that it is continuing to decline. Obama's economic policies have failed.

So it began under Bush but Obama's economic policies have failed? That makes a lot of sense, SF. Also, too, an aging population may have some bearing on this. Crazy notion, I know.


Good lord... yes, I understand that Obama has several months where it has been that low... tell us when was the time a President OTHER than Obama has experienced a rate that low.

Well, you seemed confused. I mean, it was lower in April. You said otherwise. Also, too, tell me the last time the country had the age demographics it has now.

Labor participation rate lower, unemployment rate higher. Not a drastic move on either, but both are deteriorating.

I think that's ridiculous in light of the jobs numbers.

Also, too, when did this deterioration begin? You didn't answer that.
 
Just do the math from the BLS data. And I don't see how pointing out that the actual unemployment rate is largely unchanged from June in response to the assertion that things "continue to deteriorate" can be considered desperate.

LMAO... I used the BLS data... it stated 8.2% last month, 8.3% this month. Link us up if you have something that shows otherwise. Again, rising unemployment, shrinking labor participation rate... both signs of deterioration.

So it began under Bush but Obama's economic policies have failed? That makes a lot of sense, SF. Also, too, an aging population may have some bearing on this. Crazy notion, I know.

yes you idiot... he was elected knowing that we were in an economic crisis. He was elected to lead us out of the recession. He has failed in that for over three years unemployment has remained above 8%. His economic policies have failed to stimulate the economy. This is by far the worst economic recovery we have ever had after a recession.

Saying 'it began under Bush', while true, does not change the fact that Obama has had almost 4 years, 2 with his own party in super majorities in both houses of Congress to make things better.

Well, you seemed confused. I mean, it was lower in April. You said otherwise. Also, too, tell me the last time the country had the age demographics it has now.

LMAO how about you show that age is the factor driving down the labor participation rate. Just saying 'the population is getting older on average' doesn't mean that is what is causing the decline.

I am not confused as to what I meant. I was showing morons like you that the participation rate has not been this low under any President since Reagan. The fact that Obama has failed so miserably that he continues to see low numbers doesn't alter that. We know Obama's policies suck. That is the point you twit.

I think that's ridiculous in light of the jobs numbers.

Also, too, when did this deterioration begin? You didn't answer that.

1) You realize that the unemployment rate and the labor participation rate are a part of the jobs reports? Are you going to pretend that the jobs number was the only data released?

2) I most certainly did answer when the deterioration began. You even referenced it earlier in this very post.
 
LOL

President Obama’s top economic aide described the July jobs report — which shows a small increase in the national unemployment rate — “further evidence” that the economy is recovering.



“While there is more work that remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to recover from the worst downturn since the Great Depression,” Alen Krueger, chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, wrote.

These guy's have been drinking the Obama Kool-Aid so long its made the brains totally useless.
 
How do you figure an increase of 172,000 private sector jobs means things are "continuing to deteriorate?" I mean, you really have to try to reach that conclusion.

Nooo, you are the one spinning.

the report's household survey showed that the actual amount of Americans working dropped by 195,000, with the net job gain resulting primarily from seasonal adjustments in the establishment survey.
 
Dung's logic goes something like this: if I lose a million dollars, but get back $700K, I got a good deal.


That's not a terribly good analogy for a number of reasons, not least of which is the fact you assume that the people not working actually want to work. That's just not so given that the unemployment rate remained largely unchanged.


Edit: The above is wrong but I don't have time to go through it so I'll just leave it there with this note.
 
Back
Top