Please be mindful of the tone of your posts, and avoid using tone that might be perceived as aggressive, confrontational, or dismissive. Instead, try to use a tone that is respectful, friendly, and supportive.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 2
Snip
'U.S. job growth slowed more than expected in October, a sign the labor market is finally softening in the face of higher interest rates, stubborn inflation and other economic uncertainties.
Employers added 150,000 jobs in October, the Labor Department said in its monthly payroll report released Friday, missing the 180,000 jobs forecast by Refinitiv economists.
The unemployment rate, meanwhile, unexpectedly ticked up to 3.9% ' the highest level in nearly two years. The pickup in the jobless rate suggests that layoffs are on the rise; the survey of households shows that the number of workers laid off rose in October by 92,000 from the previous month.
The report also contained steep downward revisions to job growth at the end of the summer. Gains for August and September were revised down by a total of 101,000 jobs to a respective 165,000 and 297,000, the government said, suggesting that the labor market is weaker than it previously appeared.'
https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-jobs-report...More bad news for SlowJoe..
Even at the 'Dollar Store".....every item is now $1.25. Up 25%.
No. of Recommendations: 6
LurkerMom: More bad news for SlowJoe.
Right.
Job growth was slightly slower in Trump's first three years before Covid than it was during the last three years of the Obama administration, when the economy added 2.7 million jobs a year on average. Under Trump, that average was 2.2 million, until the pandemic wiped out all of Trump's gains and made him the first president since Hoover to have a net loss of jobs.
Average monthly jobs gains pre-pandemic under Trump were about 183,000.
Biden's averaging, what, about 425,000 jobs a month?
The unemployment rate has been below 4 percent for nearly two years, a stretch not achieved since the late 1960s.
Any way you measure it, Biden has kicked the Great Job Creator's ass.
Facts are pesky things.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Job growth was slightly slower in Trump's first three years before Covid than it was during the last three years of the Obama administration,
Well so what?....
The article is not talking about ancient history. It is about the here and now of
SlowJoe and his bad numbers on his poor job growth and growing unemployment.
All which will affect his bid for a second term.
Please follow the bouncing ball and stay on subject.
No. of Recommendations: 8
LurkerMom: Well so what?....
The article is not talking about ancient history.
Ancient history? We're talking about measuring jobs growth performance here. The only way to do so is to compare jobs growth of past administrations to the current administration. Pre-pandemic, Trump was adding about 185,000 jobs per month on average. Biden is adding about 425,000 jobs per month.
Simple question: is 425,000 considerably better than 185,000?
And since you seem to have missed the news, the strike against automakers impacted the unemployment rate. About 201,000 people dropped out of the labor force which contributed to the rise in the unemployment rate.
Rather than "bad numbers," these are numbers that, in conjunction with the third-quarter report on productivity and costs, clearly indicate that the economy is on a more sustainable path of declining inflation and solid growth.
LurkerMom: Please follow the bouncing ball and stay on subject.
I am entirely on subject. Here's your Subject line: U.S. Job Growth Slowed/Unemployment Ticked Up. I'm sorry that you don't like the facts that weaken your argument.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Ancient history? We're talking about measuring jobs growth performance here. The only way to do so is to compare jobs growth of past administrations to the current administration.
No, you're talking about it. What was, was.
It's your way of changing the subject to reflect favorable results for SlowJoe.
The fact is in the here and now SlowJoe's performance U.S. job growth and unemployment numbers are slipping.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Given the strike, I take it with a grain of salt. During the strike, the workers were technically unemployed. I would expect the numbers to "tick up" a bit. Get back to me in a month or two when that all settles out.
Joe is doing an adequate job. Economy is better, relations with our allies are better, he's taking positive steps to counter Putin and Xi...I can't ask for much more than that.
As a side note, I was reading someone complaining that "the world is going to hell under Biden". As if Biden could control Putin, or Xi, or Hamas, or any of a number of situations around the world. The POTUS isn't god. He can't wave his hand and make things go away. All he can do is strengthen ties with our allies, and make various strategic moves to attempt to limit those bad actors (e.g. arming Taiwan, which we have begun doing since China is being very bellicose about Taiwan lately). He is doing that.
No. of Recommendations: 4
will you give Biden the credit for the pop up when the automaker strike ends? I suspect not.
Some of us read past the deceptive headlines.
Alan
No. of Recommendations: 0
And since you seem to have missed the news, the strike against automakers impacted the unemployment rate. About 201,000 people dropped out of the labor force which contributed to the rise in the unemployment rate.
Workers who go on strike don't qualify for unemployment benefits. Only two states, New York and New Jersey are the exception to that rule.
If one is not receiving unemployment benefits they are not counted in the unemployment count,
making your numbers way out of wack.
Same as a laid off worker who exceeded his unemployment benefits is no longer counted as unemployed.
No. of Recommendations: 0
That's simply incorrect. You don't have to be receiving unemployment benefits to be counted in the statistics.
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htmThough, apparently, if you're in a labor dispute, you're considered employed.
Who is counted as employed?
People are considered employed if they did any work at all for pay or profit during the survey reference week. This includes all part-time and temporary work, as well as regular full-time, year-round employment. Individuals also are counted as employed if they have a job at which they did not work during the survey week, whether they were paid or not, because they were:
On vacation
Ill
Experiencing child care problems
On maternity or paternity leave
Taking care of some other family or personal obligation
Involved in a labor dispute
Prevented from working by bad weather
These people are counted among the employed and tabulated separately as with a job but not at work, because they have a specific job to which they will return.The two primary categories are U3 and U6. U3s are unemployed, but still part of the work force (i.e. underemployed, or looking for work). U6s include the "discouraged" workers who aren't looking anymore. You can google the details if you're interested.
No. of Recommendations: 4
LurkerMom:
Workers who go on strike don't qualify for unemployment benefits.Ah, I see you're confused. Striking workers have a ripple effect on other worker's jobs. That's how the economy works. And other industries beyond manufacturing felt that ripple effect. Plus, how striking workers are counted in the unemployment rate is more complicated than whether or not they're collecting unemployment benefits; for example, the number of days they're on strike.
The US economy added a modest 150,000 jobs in October following an especially strong September report -- but the ongoing auto workers and actors strikes both registered a hit to the jobs report last month as strike activity continues to weigh on growth.
According to data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics Friday morning, employment in manufacturing decreased by 35,000 in October, reflecting a decline of 33,000 jobs in motor vehicles and parts "that was largely due to strike activity." This was the first time the auto strike's impact showed up in the monthly jobs report.Regardless, Biden has added nearly 14 million jobs since taking office. Trump lost over two million jobs during his presidency.
Is that a difference of 16 million jobs or not?
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-job-growth-s....
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/08/business/striking-w....
https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/uaw-strike-th...
No. of Recommendations: 1
Commonone , good morning, did you watch Joe, try, to respond the past few days? This isn't funny , you must be a very young guy. Getting old is no joke, and 80 plus is even harder for most. Someone will be kind enough to end the embarrassment and abuse by year end. Watch, have a grand day.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Ah, I see you're confused. Striking workers have a ripple effect on other worker's jobs.
A striker who voluntary walked off his job, a worker who just ups and quits his job, a worker who has exceeded his unemployment benefits do not receive unemployment benefits.
If they are not on the rolls for collecting unemployment benefits they are not counted in the unemployment category.
The ripple effect might cause a parts shortage for a worker who depends on parts made by the strikers to be able to do his job. Therefore that worker could be laid off through no fault of
his own and is eligible for unemployment benefits.
New York and New Jersey are the exception. Those two states pay unemployment to strikers.
Some Unions have strike benefits or a minimum strike payout.
Your links are mote.
