NationStates Jolt Archive

http://money.cnn.com/2004/05/07/news/economy/jobless/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - U.S. employers added more jobs than expected in April, signaling a continuing economic recovery but also adding to expectations that interest rates will be rising soon.

The 288,000 job growth reported Friday by the Labor Department was above the 173,000 jobs anticipated in a survey of economists by Reuters; it was even above the high end of the 60,000-250,000 range of individual estimates.

The March number was revised up to 337,000 jobs from the 308,000 reported last month.

The Labor Department report said the unemployment rate eased to 5.6 percent. Economists had been looking for unemployment to hold steady at March's 5.7 percent rate.

The job growth was widespread. Even the manufacturing sector, which had been losing jobs as other sectors showed signs of growth, added 21,000 jobs in the month. Manufacturing had seen a decline in jobs for 42 straight months until a revision showed a gain in the sector each of the last three months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, unemployment drops, jobs in almost every sector are created, intrest rates are still the lowest in quite some time, and the average monthly income for the American worker has increased. This is the 8th month in a row that the US economy has produced jobs. How will the Kerry Camp try to make this into a negative thing for America?

This is the 8th month in a row that the US economy has produced jobs. How will the Kerry Camp try to make this into a negative thing for America?

Oh thats simple :)

He'll claim that its better to be unemployed because then you don't have to get out of bed just to get to work :roll:

http://money.cnn.com/2004/05/07/news/economy/jobless/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - U.S. employers added more jobs than expected in April, signaling a continuing economic recovery but also adding to expectations that interest rates will be rising soon.

The 288,000 job growth reported Friday by the Labor Department was above the 173,000 jobs anticipated in a survey of economists by Reuters; it was even above the high end of the 60,000-250,000 range of individual estimates.

The March number was revised up to 337,000 jobs from the 308,000 reported last month.

The Labor Department report said the unemployment rate eased to 5.6 percent. Economists had been looking for unemployment to hold steady at March's 5.7 percent rate.

The job growth was widespread. Even the manufacturing sector, which had been losing jobs as other sectors showed signs of growth, added 21,000 jobs in the month. Manufacturing had seen a decline in jobs for 42 straight months until a revision showed a gain in the sector each of the last three months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, unemployment drops, jobs in almost every sector are created, intrest rates are still the lowest in quite some time, and the average monthly income for the American worker has increased. This is the 8th month in a row that the US economy has produced jobs. How will the Kerry Camp try to make this into a negative thing for America?Fear not-they will find a way :roll:
I think what they will do is try to sweep it under the rug. They will simply not talk about it on the news and people will still think unemployment is high. That's their only possible tactic.

Hopefully, there will be more people who find out the truth instead of believing anything that comes out of Kerry's mouth.

Speaking of which, he recently criticized Bush for "not reacting quickly enough or appropriately" to the prisoner abuse. What the hell would he have done differently?

Kerry would have been in that Situation in the first place.

Its all Lies everyword of it!

Seriously though. I wonder how many jobs were lost during that Period?

wow! Ever notice when something like this is posted on here the liberals do not reply to it in an attempt to bury it and to make the American public believe that the economy is in the gutter, when it really isn't?

wow! Ever notice when something like this is posted on here the liberals do not reply to it in an attempt to bury it and to make the American public believe that the economy is in the gutter, when it really isn't?
^
.
.
.
.
.

:Ignores post Right above his own:

And besdies Job figures were never a subject for heated debate.
It works the same for conservatives so dont throw stones.

sorry about that New Astorlia. if you look at our post times there were only 2 minutes in between. And the server has been giving me hell all day.

can you re-state what you meant by this post?

Kerry would have been in that Situation in the first place.

Its all Lies everyword of it!

Seriously though. I wonder how many jobs were lost during that Period?

The first line was in response to Reynes post. The second to the Article posted. And the third was a lame comeback in Refutement of the Growing job figures.

All right, here we go.

Great. Now all Bush needs to do is create another 1.7 million jobs by November and we'll be at the exact same place we were 4 years ago. Then he can start to fill his original campaign promise of 800,000 jobs a year on top of that.

Also, most economist are saying that, while this is good news, it does not indicate a trend. Joshua Feinman chief economist for Deutsche Bank Asset Management had this to say in the article cited, "...we need to resist the temptation to put too much weight on any one month's report -- probably the best thing to do is to average out the past few months; that gives a clearer picture."

As for the increase in payrolls, "It is too early to celebrate," said Sung Won Sohn, chief economist at Wells Fargo in Minneapolis. He noted that most of the increase was because of part-time workers. The number of people who worked part time for economic reasons rose to 4.7 million in March, up from 4.4 million the previous month. From CBS/AP, April 2nd, 2004.

We're still seeing a steady hemoraging of offshoring jobs to the tune of about 250,000 jobs a year permanently gone. Now that the companies doing this are making record profits, let's see if they actually reinvest some of that profit in creating more domestic jobs that are at a level comprable to what's been shipped overseas.

These increases were not all permanent jobs. 71,000 of those jobs were in the construction sector which got a boost due to good weather and the end of the California grocery workers strike helped pump up retailer's payrolls to 47,000.

Every month between 150,000 and 200,000 employees enter the work force and the average gain in employment over the past few months has hovered around 95,000. Obviously there's a disparity here and unless we see continued and sustainable job growth in full time, fairly paying jobs then it doesn't matter how good April's figures were.

Additionally, while payrolls increased, it was mostly in the service sector, not in the manufacturing sector where they are still hurting.

Unemployment figures also grew from 5.6% to 5.7%.

So, like John Kerry said about this report, "After three years of punishing job losses, the one-month job creation announced today is welcome news for America's workers. I hope it continues."

Unemployment figures also grew from 5.6% to 5.7%.


I saw some little show that said parts of Ohio, the unemployment rate is 21% :shock:

The job exporting is driving me bonkers! I have not seen price drops or stablization from their savings.

Also, we have noticed that a support call before India was about 1/2 hour on the average. After India we now run about 1 1/2 to 2 hours now! :x

I guess that is the Repubs plan on creating more jobs. The cheap labor ties up your people so you have to hire more to make of for the time loss! :wink:

As was pointed out I would be curious of the job loss figures as well. Bragging about new jobs does not mean much.

Time will tell. People that have had a severe reduction in their standard of living are going to be going "Yea the Republicans found me a job! Yea the President has the economy going again."

Just talking to the people in my company, people don't feel the economy is better. People here range from arch-conservative to arch-liberal.

Unemployment figures also grew from 5.6% to 5.7%.

So, like John Kerry said about this report, "After three years of punishing job losses, the one-month job creation announced today is welcome news for America's workers. I hope it continues."
no, unemployment dropped from 5.7% to 5.6%.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=&e=2&u=/ap/20040507/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/economy

Also, it is the 8th month in a row (not the first) that there has been positive job creation.

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20040507/payrolls_042004_revised_graphic.gif

The job exporting is driving me bonkers! I have not seen price drops or stablization from their savings.

Also, we have noticed that a support call before India was about 1/2 hour on the average. After India we now run about 1 1/2 to 2 hours now! :x

I guess that is the Repubs plan on creating more jobs. The cheap labor ties up your people so you have to hire more to make of for the time loss! :wink:
Thank your buddy Clinton for signing NAFTA and the WTO causing the "exporting" of jobs, not Bush.

And besdies Job figures were never a subject for heated debate. Bull.
You must have missed the news for the last couple of months, because employment has been central in this election. Of course, now that things are picking up the dems are going to try to distance themselves from their accusations.

Remember this one?
So where's Saddam? We went into Iraq to find him, so where is he?

no, unemployment dropped from 5.7% to 5.6%.

You're right, Coors, I misquoted. The March unemployment numbers went from 5.6% to 5.7% and they fell again in April back to 5.6%.


Also, it is the 8th month in a row (not the first) that there has been positive job creation.

I referred to this in my post. It is the first month where the number of created jobs has outweighed the number of new workers looking for jobs. If this trend continues, it's a good thing, but if you average out the last 8 month, you will see the huge difference in the number of jobs created versus the number of people entering the workforce and looking for jobs. So yes, this qualifies as the first month of seeing these scales tip the other direction. Like I said, I hope this continues. If it does, it will most certainly ease some of the pressure on Bush. However, after only 1 month of these figures, it's far too early to assume this is a trend and that buisness will start reinvesting in job creation.

The job exporting is driving me bonkers! I have not seen price drops or stablization from their savings.

Also, we have noticed that a support call before India was about 1/2 hour on the average. After India we now run about 1 1/2 to 2 hours now! :x

I guess that is the Repubs plan on creating more jobs. The cheap labor ties up your people so you have to hire more to make of for the time loss! :wink:
Thank your buddy Clinton for signing NAFTA and the WTO causing the "exporting" of jobs, not Bush.

Well having never met him, I doubt I can call him my buddy.

I don't recall India being part of NAFTA. So that falls under the shrubs watch. His people said it was good for the economy!

The job exporting is driving me bonkers! I have not seen price drops or stablization from their savings.

Also, we have noticed that a support call before India was about 1/2 hour on the average. After India we now run about 1 1/2 to 2 hours now! :x

I guess that is the Repubs plan on creating more jobs. The cheap labor ties up your people so you have to hire more to make of for the time loss! :wink:
Thank your buddy Clinton for signing NAFTA and the WTO causing the "exporting" of jobs, not Bush.

NAFTA both created jobs in some markets and destroyed them in others. However, NAFTA has nothing to do with the structural redesign we're seeing today. The offshoring to India and now starting in China is a legacy of the Bush administration and the tax breaks it instituted to incourage businesses to do this. Time will tell if this is simply more protectionisim for the wealthy or a realistic plan to encourage job creation here at home through record-breaking profits gained overseas.

You are 100% right that NAFTA did not "export" jobs to India, only Canada and Mexico. I was talking about the WTO that Clinton drug the US into in 1995, while pulled the US into the GATS, and the TRIPs Agreement.

These economic "treaties" signed into law by Clinton, along with the dot-com bubble bust and Sept. 11th, were the cause of the economic recession that this country is now over. Bush did not cause the dot-com bust, Sept. 11th, or sign these "treaties" so what could Bush have done to prevent what was put in motion by the Clinton administration?

I think that _all_ western countries where it pays a lot to manufacture anything that can be done cheaper in China or India, are losing jobs to the Far East, not just the USA. And the countries everywhere are at a loss as to what to do over this.

Any ideas except to think that people will want to trust 'home-made' rather than 'made in China' or whatever?

All right, here we go.

Great. Now all Bush needs to do is create another 1.7 million jobs by November and we'll be at the exact same place we were 4 years ago. Then he can start to fill his original campaign promise of 800,000 jobs a year on top of that.He is achieving the 800,000 jobs a year goal right now. If you add up job growth in this year so far (keep in mind it's only the April stats) and there are already 67,000 jobs more than that goal that have been created in this year alone.

Also, most economist are saying that, while this is good news, it does not indicate a trend. Joshua Feinman chief economist for Deutsche Bank Asset Management had this to say in the article cited, "...we need to resist the temptation to put too much weight on any one month's report -- probably the best thing to do is to average out the past few months; that gives a clearer picture."Yes, but the last eight months have shown rapid job growth. I'd say that means there is a trend.

As for the increase in payrolls, "It is too early to celebrate," said Sung Won Sohn, chief economist at Wells Fargo in Minneapolis. He noted that most of the increase was because of part-time workers. The number of people who worked part time for economic reasons rose to 4.7 million in March, up from 4.4 million the previous month. From CBS/AP, April 2nd, 2004.300,000 new part-time jobs, eh? Well, good point. However, there is still 567,000 new full-time jobs.

We're still seeing a steady hemoraging of offshoring jobs to the tune of about 250,000 jobs a year permanently gone. Now that the companies doing this are making record profits, let's see if they actually reinvest some of that profit in creating more domestic jobs that are at a level comprable to what's been shipped overseas.Yes, but with 867,000 new jobs so far this year alone to recoup that loss...

These increases were not all permanent jobs. 71,000 of those jobs were in the construction sector which got a boost due to good weather and the end of the California grocery workers strike helped pump up retailer's payrolls to 47,000.Yes, but the majority of them are full-time, permanent jobs.

Every month between 150,000 and 200,000 employees enter the work force and the average gain in employment over the past few months has hovered around 95,000. Obviously there's a disparity here and unless we see continued and sustainable job growth in full time, fairly paying jobs then it doesn't matter how good April's figures were.Again, eight months.

Additionally, while payrolls increased, it was mostly in the service sector, not in the manufacturing sector where they are still hurting.Do you have a source?

Unemployment figures also grew from 5.6% to 5.7%.Actually, they dropped from 5.7% to 5.6%.

So, like John Kerry said about this report, "After three years of punishing job losses, the one-month job creation announced today is welcome news for America's workers. I hope it continues."We can draw two conclusions from this:
1) Kerry must have missed the other seven months.
2) Job growth most likely will continue.

Unemployment rates are not accurate. It depends on who you count as unemployed. As far as I know, they count those who already worked and they are counted as unemployed for 13 weeks. It means that after 13 weeks you are no more unemployed even if you don't have a job and that young people who can't find a first job and not unemployed. That could mean that short term unemployement is decreasing while long term is increasing or that the population is going older or many different things.

I'm afraid you are all horribly ill-informed on the statistics here. The seasonally adjusted employment figures released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics show 288,000 jobs increased; however, the actual raw (seasonally unadjusted) increase is 732,000 (most of this increase occurs between March and April of every year.) Similarly, the real unemployment rate dropped from 6.0 to 5.4 percent; however, the unemployment rate is a poor measure of the general status of the job market. It is, at best, a short term relative indicator.

The actual employment/population level rose in April to 62.1%, up from 61.6% in January (61.8% in February and 61.9% in April) but down from October through December of the previous year, and remaining down from last April's actual employment level of 62.3%... which in turn was lower than April 2002 (62.6%), which was lower than April 2001 (63.9%), which was in turn lower than April 2000 (64.4%). In fact, the last ten years have seen no April with an employment rate this low (before that, I'd have to do some serious digging.)

In other words, while this April's figures are indeed good news, we're still in a deep dark hole with no signs of long term job recovery. In fact, if we use different seasonal adjustment algorithms, April barely looks past breaking even with a flatline job trend.

All right, here we go.

Great. Now all Bush needs to do is create another 1.7 million jobs by November and we'll be at the exact same place we were 4 years ago. Then he can start to fill his original campaign promise of 800,000 jobs a year on top of that.He is achieving the 800,000 jobs a year goal right now. If you add up job growth in this year so far (keep in mind it's only the April stats) and there are already 67,000 jobs more than that goal that have been created in this year alone.

Even if those numbers are solid, which I doubt, the fact is that he made a promise to increase the job market by 800,000 his first year in office. This year he's promised to create 2.6 million jobs. Now, four years since he took office, the US has shed 2.8 million jobs and we're still waiting for corporations to put their record profits made overseas back to work in the US and start hiring again.


Also, most economist are saying that, while this is good news, it does not indicate a trend. Joshua Feinman chief economist for Deutsche Bank Asset Management had this to say in the article cited, "...we need to resist the temptation to put too much weight on any one month's report -- probably the best thing to do is to average out the past few months; that gives a clearer picture."Yes, but the last eight months have shown rapid job growth. I'd say that means there is a trend.

No, they haven't. They've shown sluggish job growth that was out of line with predictions and certainly out of line with the supposedly growing economy.

"]As for the increase in payrolls, "It is too early to celebrate," said Sung Won Sohn, chief economist at Wells Fargo in Minneapolis. He noted that most of the increase was because of part-time workers. The number of people who worked part time for economic reasons rose to 4.7 million in March, up from 4.4 million the previous month. From CBS/AP, April 2nd, 2004.300,000 new part-time jobs, eh? Well, good point. However, there is still 567,000 new full-time jobs.

Many of which are temporary or are far below the standard of jobs lost. If a senior director goes back to work as a McDonald's cashier, it doesn't count.


We're still seeing a steady hemoraging of offshoring jobs to the tune of about 250,000 jobs a year permanently gone. Now that the companies doing this are making record profits, let's see if they actually reinvest some of that profit in creating more domestic jobs that are at a level comprable to what's been shipped overseas.Yes, but with 867,000 new jobs so far this year alone to recoup that loss...

Four years after the promise was made, still over 2 million people out of work, increasing in offshoring and job exporting and the quality of the jobs created in terms of compensation is no where near the jobs that were lost. With almost half of that number being either part time or temporary.


These increases were not all permanent jobs. 71,000 of those jobs were in the construction sector which got a boost due to good weather and the end of the California grocery workers strike helped pump up retailer's payrolls to 47,000.Yes, but the majority of them are full-time, permanent jobs.

That "majority" consists of just over 100,000 jobs.


Every month between 150,000 and 200,000 employees enter the work force and the average gain in employment over the past few months has hovered around 95,000. Obviously there's a disparity here and unless we see continued and sustainable job growth in full time, fairly paying jobs then it doesn't matter how good April's figures were.Again, eight months.

No, you might be able to claim two months with March's gains being revised upward to 308,000. However, February's gain was only 83,000 and January's gain less still, with around 32,000 of those being temporary positions. Add to this an employment pool of 2.8 million and an involuntary part-time employment pool of around 4.8 million and he's got a long way to go to make his promise of creating 2.6 million jobs this year alone (which is around 300,000 a month, a figure they've only managed to hit twice out of the four months already down).


Additionally, while payrolls increased, it was mostly in the service sector, not in the manufacturing sector where they are still hurting.Do you have a source?

http://www.jobwatch.org/

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm), since January 1st the manufacturing sector has added 37,000 jobs, with 20,000 of them coming in April. In a market which has shown steady decline since August of 2004, that's hardly a dent. Additionally, new jobs created in this sector are being created in foriegn markets, so this is not a hard number.


Unemployment figures also grew from 5.6% to 5.7%.Actually, they dropped from 5.7% to 5.6%.

I corrected this in another post.


So, like John Kerry said about this report, "After three years of punishing job losses, the one-month job creation announced today is welcome news for America's workers. I hope it continues."We can draw two conclusions from this:
1) Kerry must have missed the other seven months.
2) Job growth most likely will continue.

1. No, like I said and like I've showed, at most you can claim a two month trend. Prior to March and April, the job market was stagnant at best and I defy you to find me an economist who didn't share that view or at least was surprised by how little the job market was growing in what some termed an explosive economic recovery.

2. Based on what? Two months of data, only one of which actually meets the job goals set by the Bush administration? To claim the last 8 months as being positive when you have more people entering the workforce than you have new jobs being created. It's a deficit situation and while there may have been trickles of increase within the last 8 months, there is nothing to suggest that the April 2004 numbers are the new norm. In fact, with the Feds now eyeing and interest rate hike next month because of April's showing, job indicators suggest that April's growth won't be repeated.

Kerry would have been in that Situation in the first place.

Its all Lies everyword of it!

Seriously though. I wonder how many jobs were lost during that Period?

those stats are done on a net basis.

I've stayed out of this debate because, quite frankly, I don't understand much about statistics--never taken a class in it and math isn't my strongest suit in the first place. But I found an interesting article on the job creation subject from, of all places, the NY Post (which just goes to show you that even partisan papers can do journalism when they try).

Here's the link (http://nypost.com/business/23936.htm) and here are the highlights.
Back in the March employment report, the government added 153,000 positions to its revised total of 337,000 new jobs because it thought (but couldn't prove) loads of new companies were being created in this economy.

That estimate comes from the Labor Department's "birth/death model." You can look up these numbers on the Department's Web site.

As staggering as the assumption about new companies was in March, the Labor Department got even more brazen in April.

Last Friday, it was disclosed that these imaginary jobs had been increased by 117,000 to 270,000 for the latest month - because, I guess, the stat jockeys got a vision from the gods of spring.

Without those extra 117,000 make-believe jobs, the total growth for April would have been just 171,000 - sub-par for an economy that's supposed to be growing at more than 4 percent a year, but right on the pros' targets.

Take away all 270,000 make-believe jobs and, well, you have the sort of pessimism that the political pollsters are seeing.

If I was the suspicious type (and if I thought Washington was smart enough), I'd suspect a nasty motive behind the sudden surge in these mystery jobs. But for now, let's just acknowledge their existence.

Also keep in mind that the government doesn't distinguish between good companies being created and, say, a guy doing consulting work out of his basement because he can't find real work.

What does this new job announcement mean in the real world?

It means there will be more pressure on the financial markets, as we've seen for a while but especially since last Thursday.

It also means that the Federal Reserve now has the excuse it needs to raise interest rates in June (as I've said before would happen) and will probably start regretting that move by the end of the summer.

And President Bush will probably give in to temptation and start crowing about the economy, going against the mood, as captured by pollsters.

This will make him look as out of touch with reality as his father did.

Bolded parts mine. Now remember, this is a paper owned by the same guy who owns Fox News, and they're printing that the jobs picture isn't as good as the administration says it is. I've got to say, if you're a Bush supporter and you're not nervous about the election, yo're simply not paying attention.

Unemployment figures also grew from 5.6% to 5.7%.


I saw some little show that said parts of Ohio, the unemployment rate is 21% :shock:

The job exporting is driving me bonkers! I have not seen price drops or stablization from their savings.

Also, we have noticed that a support call before India was about 1/2 hour on the average. After India we now run about 1 1/2 to 2 hours now! :x

I guess that is the Repubs plan on creating more jobs. The cheap labor ties up your people so you have to hire more to make of for the time loss! :wink:


No, the Repubs plan is to create more jobs. They never said those "more jobs" would be created IN AMERICA...FOR AMERICANS!!!

Since when has a Republican ever gave a shit about domestic concerns, anyway?

F**k the Republicans! They need to be out where they have put millions of Americans...on the goddam unemployment line!!

These country-club pin-headed assholes need to be brought down a few, you know it?

Unemployment figures also grew from 5.6% to 5.7%.


I saw some little show that said parts of Ohio, the unemployment rate is 21% :shock:

The job exporting is driving me bonkers! I have not seen price drops or stablization from their savings.

Also, we have noticed that a support call before India was about 1/2 hour on the average. After India we now run about 1 1/2 to 2 hours now! :x

I guess that is the Repubs plan on creating more jobs. The cheap labor ties up your people so you have to hire more to make of for the time loss! :wink:
Maybe the call is delayed while they dig up and Hindi-English English-Hindi dictionary :D


No, the Repubs plan is to create more jobs. They never said those "more jobs" would be created IN AMERICA...FOR AMERICANS!!!You can thank Clinton's WTO and NAFTA for job outsourcing.

Since when has a Republican ever gave a shit about domestic concerns, anyway?Ever heard of a guy named Ronald Reagan (you know, actor, alzheimers, the picture tacked to your dartboard :D )? He started supply-side economics, as you well know. When he entered office, Carter had left unemployment at 7.6% and rising. Towards the beginning of Reagan's first term, unemployment peaked at 9.5%, but by the end of his second term, his policy had brought it down to 5.5%. Note: most economists agree that the level of full employment (the acceptable level of unemployment for peak economic efficiency) is anywhere between 5.5% and 6%. Incidentally, the current unemployment rate is in the lower half of that range. A 0% unemployment rate is unacheivable. Hell, during WWII when everybody was working, there was unemployment. There are always people between jobs, for example. There is seasonal unemployment, such as construction.

F**k the Republicans! They need to be out where they have put millions of Americans...on the goddam unemployment line!!And a lot of us were and are on the unemployment line. Don't kid yourself. Job layoffs are nondiscriminatory.

The job growth we are seeing is a direct result of the Bush tax cut. If you cut taxes (government pumps more money into the economy by creating a deficit) for the wealthiest people, they increase their investing (the majority of Bill Gates' net worth is in stock (investment)). If that happens, the economy picks up and more jobs are created, therefore more taxes are brought in due to economic growth (Source: Economics: Thirteenth Edition) The downside is that a deficit is inevitable. The only ways that the government can pump more money into the economy and spur growth is to cut taxes or increase spending, both of which result in a deficit. (same source. I don't have my textbook today, but I will return with direct quotes.)

Finally, we're not all "country-club pinhead assholes." I am in a blue-collar family who went through the layoff thing (remember our conversation in "Republicanism is Genetic, New Study Finds"?) just as these others did, but my father actively looked for a job and found one. Many of the others who were also laid off are sapping off of their savings waiting for a callback instead of looking for a place to work, as they have for over a year now. We pulled through, but we didn't change our political ideals as a result.

"Country-club pinhead assholes." Be careful using that description. There are many democrats who fit that description, too (Warren Buffet and John Kerry come immediately to mind (John Kerry has a net worth of half a billion dollars according to Newsweek))

The job growth we are seeing is a direct result of the Bush tax cut. If you cut taxes (government pumps more money into the economy by creating a deficit) for the wealthiest people, they increase their investing (the majority of Bill Gates' net worth is in stock (investment)). If that happens, the economy picks up and more jobs are created, therefore more taxes are brought in due to economic growth (Source: Economics: Thirteenth Edition) The downside is that a deficit is inevitable. The only ways that the government can pump more money into the economy and spur growth is to cut taxes or increase spending, both of which result in a deficit. (same source. I don't have my textbook today, but I will return with direct quotes.)

I'm familiar with the theory of trickle-down economics; unfortunately, I have a great deal of difficulty believing in it. I'm also not believing in the "spurred growth"

Unfortunately for your conclusion that we are now seeing job growth due to the Bush tax cuts, we have yet to actually begin any visible job growth trends on even as much as the annual scale. See the above BLS figures that I cited at the top of this page; if anything, April's "optimistic" and "cheering" figures appear as part of a long term negative trend in employment. If we are to take Reagan's results as a model for what should be happening due to the common thread of tax cuts for the rich, the Bush results are, in fact, anomalous to this theory. Any good scientist would seek to confirm these results through controlled experiments, but this is not possible in economics, and economists seem as liable to cite new, previously unknown factors instead of flaws in their theories when the facts do not match their theories.

For this reason, I'm not particularly impressed by economics as a "science."

(A small bibliographic note: I'm sure there are many textbooks name Economics; for this reason, one usually cites editors/authors, makes it much easier to track down what you're talking about.)

I realize this thread hasn't gotten a lot of play, but still no one has mentioned the article I posted from the NY Post that all but said the April job numbers were pulled out of the Labor Department's collective ass. Just wondering why.

I realize this thread hasn't gotten a lot of play, but still no one has mentioned the article I posted from the NY Post that all but said the April job numbers were pulled out of the Labor Department's collective ass. Just wondering why.

Well... honestly, I can make a strong argument stating that the figures are still indicating general negative employment growth without bashing anything except the BLS's seasonal adjustment algorithms, so I haven't been citing that all up in people's faces, and most of the people on the other side of the fence don't want to address the possibility that the figures are bogus, because their argument falls apart.

In fact, I don't think many of the Bush supporters want to talk about it in a thread with posts strongly proposing that the job picture remains bleak.

Kerry would have been in that Situation in the first place.

Its all Lies everyword of it!

Seriously though. I wonder how many jobs were lost during that Period?Did you know that this number is the total number of jobs lost and gained in the same period. So if you have 1,000,000 jobs one month and 1,288,000 the next it is a gain of 288,000. If you have 712,000 in the second month it is a loss of 288,000. Just the way the stats work.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/05/07/news/economy/jobless/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - U.S. employers added more jobs than expected in April, signaling a continuing economic recovery but also adding to expectations that interest rates will be rising soon.

The 288,000 job growth reported Friday by the Labor Department was above the 173,000 jobs anticipated in a survey of economists by Reuters; it was even above the high end of the 60,000-250,000 range of individual estimates.

The March number was revised up to 337,000 jobs from the 308,000 reported last month.

The Labor Department report said the unemployment rate eased to 5.6 percent. Economists had been looking for unemployment to hold steady at March's 5.7 percent rate.

The job growth was widespread. Even the manufacturing sector, which had been losing jobs as other sectors showed signs of growth, added 21,000 jobs in the month. Manufacturing had seen a decline in jobs for 42 straight months until a revision showed a gain in the sector each of the last three months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, unemployment drops, jobs in almost every sector are created, intrest rates are still the lowest in quite some time, and the average monthly income for the American worker has increased. This is the 8th month in a row that the US economy has produced jobs. How will the Kerry Camp try to make this into a negative thing for America?
From the 2nd paragraph of the Article that you posted:

While good news for people looking for jobs, the report also makes it much more likely that the Federal Reserve will start raising interest rates sooner rather than later -- which raised some worries on Wall Street.

Also from the Bureau of Labor Statistics is this fact:

Both the unemployment rate, 5.6 percent, and the number of unemployed persons, 8.2 million, were essentially unchanged in April. The unemployment rate has been either 5.6 or 5.7 percent since last December.

What this basically is saying, is that the new jobs being created are just covering off the number of NEW jobs that would normally be created by people entering the workforce.

And the following:

May 11, 2004

Senate Refuses to Extend Unemployment Benefits;
Fails to Help 2.1 Million Jobless Workers

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today the U.S. Senate failed to extend unemployment benefits for jobless workers. Sen. Maria Cantwell's amendment that would provide unemployment insurance for 2.1 million workers in the next six months fell just one vote short of passage.

“We have lost 1.6 million jobs since President Bush took office, and too many people are struggling with long term unemployment,” Cantwell said. “Until we erase this jobs deficit, we have an obligation to support families who are looking for work but can't find it.”

Although the majority – 59 members – of the Senate supported Cantwell's legislation, it failed because Senate budget rules require a three-fifths supermajority.

“We had an opportunity to help 2.1 million jobless workers and we failed them,” Cantwell stated.

There apparently is a long way to go before the GOP can kick up its' heels in celebration?

Unemployment figures also grew from 5.6% to 5.7%.


I saw some little show that said parts of Ohio, the unemployment rate is 21% :shock:

The job exporting is driving me bonkers! I have not seen price drops or stablization from their savings.

Also, we have noticed that a support call before India was about 1/2 hour on the average. After India we now run about 1 1/2 to 2 hours now! :x

I guess that is the Repubs plan on creating more jobs. The cheap labor ties up your people so you have to hire more to make of for the time loss! :wink:

As was pointed out I would be curious of the job loss figures as well. Bragging about new jobs does not mean much.

Time will tell. People that have had a severe reduction in their standard of living are going to be going "Yea the Republicans found me a job! Yea the President has the economy going again."

Just talking to the people in my company, people don't feel the economy is better. People here range from arch-conservative to arch-liberal.

You are obviously overlooking the Labor Department's reclassification of yobs as jobs. Chin up, if the gas prices peak at $2.50 or less there may still be opportunities to work the window at the drive thru.

SHL

Unemployment rates are not accurate. It depends on who you count as unemployed. As far as I know, they count those who already worked and they are counted as unemployed for 13 weeks. It means that after 13 weeks you are no more unemployed even if you don't have a job and that young people who can't find a first job and not unemployed. That could mean that short term unemployement is decreasing while long term is increasing or that the population is going older or many different things.

Thank you Toto for pulling back the curtain on the Wizzard. Smoke, mirrors and one hell of a sound system.

SHL

I've stayed out of this debate because, quite frankly, I don't understand much about statistics--never taken a class in it and math isn't my strongest suit in the first place. But I found an interesting article on the job creation subject from, of all places, the NY Post (which just goes to show you that even partisan papers can do journalism when they try).

Here's the link (http://nypost.com/business/23936.htm) and here are the highlights.
S N I P

Thanks, I especially had a laugh at the Grasso comments in the post script. The PPS is a 'nother burner thread.

SHL

http://money.cnn.com/2004/05/07/news/economy/jobless/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - U.S. employers added more jobs than expected in April, signaling a continuing economic recovery but also adding to expectations that interest rates will be rising soon.

The 288,000 job growth reported Friday by the Labor Department was above the 173,000 jobs anticipated in a survey of economists by Reuters; it was even above the high end of the 60,000-250,000 range of individual estimates.

The March number was revised up to 337,000 jobs from the 308,000 reported last month.

The Labor Department report said the unemployment rate eased to 5.6 percent. Economists had been looking for unemployment to hold steady at March's 5.7 percent rate.

The job growth was widespread. Even the manufacturing sector, which had been losing jobs as other sectors showed signs of growth, added 21,000 jobs in the month. Manufacturing had seen a decline in jobs for 42 straight months until a revision showed a gain in the sector each of the last three months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, unemployment drops, jobs in almost every sector are created, intrest rates are still the lowest in quite some time, and the average monthly income for the American worker has increased. This is the 8th month in a row that the US economy has produced jobs. How will the Kerry Camp try to make this into a negative thing for America?
From the 2nd paragraph of the Article that you posted:

While good news for people looking for jobs, the report also makes it much more likely that the Federal Reserve will start raising interest rates sooner rather than later -- which raised some worries on Wall Street.

Also from the Bureau of Labor Statistics is this fact:

Both the unemployment rate, 5.6 percent, and the number of unemployed persons, 8.2 million, were essentially unchanged in April. The unemployment rate has been either 5.6 or 5.7 percent since last December.

What this basically is saying, is that the new jobs being created are just covering off the number of NEW jobs that would normally be created by people entering the workforce.

And the following:

May 11, 2004

Senate Refuses to Extend Unemployment Benefits;
Fails to Help 2.1 Million Jobless Workers

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today the U.S. Senate failed to extend unemployment benefits for jobless workers. Sen. Maria Cantwell's amendment that would provide unemployment insurance for 2.1 million workers in the next six months fell just one vote short of passage.

“We have lost 1.6 million jobs since President Bush took office, and too many people are struggling with long term unemployment,” Cantwell said. “Until we erase this jobs deficit, we have an obligation to support families who are looking for work but can't find it.”

Although the majority – 59 members – of the Senate supported Cantwell's legislation, it failed because Senate budget rules require a three-fifths supermajority.

“We had an opportunity to help 2.1 million jobless workers and we failed them,” Cantwell stated.

There apparently is a long way to go before the GOP can kick up its' heels in celebration?

Or Kerry - he was absent and missed casting the deciding vote that would have passed this.

SHL