88,00 jobs in March 2013, much below expectations

[Trajan]

so, as I said last month to the usual gaggle of Obamabot cheer leaders when we 'created' 0ver 230K, I said, wait, we have been here before, lets let it ride and see wher we are in the summer, we have had some good spring numbers in 10, 11 and 12 and there after there was a Summer of Recovery ( which became summer at bernies [sic] for job seekers) announced each and every time and......zip, zero, nada....




The U.S. economy added just 88,000 jobs in March, far below economists’ expectations of up to 200,000. The numbers–which showed the weakest job creation since June 2012–added to signs of weaker growth heading into the spring.

Live From New York! It's Jobs Friday! - MarketBeat - WSJ

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not acceptable. We will be moving quite a bit of money out of stocks over the next few weeks in the expectation of another recession happening. When and if that does happen, we will put the money into property.

 

[Mad Scientist]

It takes time people. Obama is only just starting his second term and cleaning up the mess that George Bush and his Deregulation Spree created.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

so, as I said last month to the usual gaggle of Obamabot cheer leaders when we 'created' 0ver 230K, I said, wait, we have been here before, lets let it ride and see wher we are in the summer, we have had some good spring numbers in 10, 11 and 12 and there after there was a Summer of Recovery ( which became summer at bernies [sic] for job seekers) announced each and every time and......zip, zero, nada....

The U.S. economy added just 88,000 jobs in March, far below economists’ expectations of up to 200,000. The numbers–which showed the weakest job creation since June 2012–added to signs of weaker growth heading into the spring.

Live From New York! It's Jobs Friday! - MarketBeat - WSJ

The proverbial "elephant in the room" that the Obamanistas don't want anybody to know about, is the FACT that roughly 340,000 people PER WEEK filed for FIRST TIME unemployment benefits in March, and that number has been consistent for a LONG time.

So "creating" 88,000 jobs is a JOKE, when you compare that paltry number to the 1.5 MILLION workers who are getting laid off from their jobs every month.

 

[The Rabbi]

We've had the highest level of gov't intervention in the economy and gotten the worst recovery on record. Why this surprises anyone is a surprise itself. Notice that the architects of this mess have long ago quit the administration.
Remember when the press pilloried Pres Bush in the 2002 recession over "the jobless recovery"? Don't hear much of that these days from the lapdog press.

 

[Truthmatters]

can you say sequester?

 

[boedicca]

88,000 jobs while 663,000 people left the labor force!

Heckuva job, Barry!

The Labor Force Participation Rate was 65.7% when Barry took office; it's now at its lowest level in 34 years: 63.3%.

If we had the same LPR now as when Obama took office, 5.9M more people would have jobs.

 

[boedicca]

can you say sequester?

Nonsense. The sectors that were supposed to be hurt by the sequester haven't been (government and defense didn't shed jobs).

Retail took a big hit.

The causes are increased taxes, ObamaCare, and the general regulatory overreach of Obamanomics which is crushing the private sector.

 

[S.J.]

Things are going exactly as planned.

 

[JWBooth]

can you say sequester?

Dipshit

 

[Lumpy 1]

can you say sequester?

Nonsense. The sectors that were supposed to be hurt by the sequester haven't been (government and defense didn't shed jobs).

Retail took a big hit.

The causes are increased taxes, ObamaCare, and the general regulatory overreach of Obamanomics which is crushing the private sector.

Democrats ..will they ever run out of excuses for Obama's pathetic leadership?

 

[JWBooth]

so, as I said last month to the usual gaggle of Obamabot cheer leaders when we 'created' 0ver 230K, I said, wait, we have been here before, lets let it ride and see wher we are in the summer, we have had some good spring numbers in 10, 11 and 12 and there after there was a Summer of Recovery ( which became summer at bernies [sic] for job seekers) announced each and every time and......zip, zero, nada....




The U.S. economy added just 88,000 jobs in March, far below economists’ expectations of up to 200,000. The numbers–which showed the weakest job creation since June 2012–added to signs of weaker growth heading into the spring.

Live From New York! It's Jobs Friday! - MarketBeat - WSJ

Unexpected I am sure....

 

[boedicca]

Fo shizzle.

And Bush's Fault!!!!!!!

 

[pinqy]

so, as I said last month to the usual gaggle of Obamabot cheer leaders when we 'created' 0ver 230K, I said, wait, we have been here before, lets let it ride and see wher we are in the summer, we have had some good spring numbers in 10, 11 and 12 and there after there was a Summer of Recovery ( which became summer at bernies [sic] for job seekers) announced each and every time and......zip, zero, nada....

The U.S. economy added just 88,000 jobs in March, far below economists’ expectations of up to 200,000. The numbers–which showed the weakest job creation since June 2012–added to signs of weaker growth heading into the spring.

Live From New York! It's Jobs Friday! - MarketBeat - WSJ

The proverbial "elephant in the room" that the Obamanistas don't want anybody to know about, is the FACT that roughly 340,000 people PER WEEK filed for FIRST TIME unemployment benefits in March, and that number has been consistent for a LONG time.

So "creating" 88,000 jobs is a JOKE, when you compare that paltry number to the 1.5 MILLION workers who are getting laid off from their jobs every month.

The 88,000 is the NET change and you're comparing it to the gross change in those getting laid off. How does that work?

To compare: the latest numbers available for Turnover are from January 2013 (non-farm payroll).
1.5 million people laid off/discharged
2.2 million quit
4.2 million hired
Job Openings and Labor Turnover

 

[Lumpy 1]

Fo shizzle.

And Bush's Fault!!!!!!!

Things just wont change until the Democrat sycophants come to their patriotic senses and care more about the suffering of the American people. It seems Democrats just want to hang their hats on winning elections without integrity.

 

[JakeStarkey]

can you say sequester?

Nonsense. The sectors that were supposed to be hurt by the sequester haven't been (government and defense didn't shed jobs).

Retail took a big hit.

The causes are increased taxes, ObamaCare, and the general regulatory overreach of Obamanomics which is crushing the private sector.

Support for your opinions, then we can consider them factually accurate.

 

[The Rabbi]

can you say sequester?

Nonsense. The sectors that were supposed to be hurt by the sequester haven't been (government and defense didn't shed jobs).

Retail took a big hit.

The causes are increased taxes, ObamaCare, and the general regulatory overreach of Obamanomics which is crushing the private sector.

Support for your opinions, then we can consider them factually accurate.

So sayeth Jake, King of the Unsubstantiated Statement! Hail, King!

That's real chutzpah, FakeyJakey. You never, NEVER, provide anything resembling support.

 

[KissMy]

No jobs have been added since Democrats took office in 2007. This is a jobs disaster. At this rate Bernanke will never stop printing money.

 

[boedicca]

can you say sequester?

Nonsense. The sectors that were supposed to be hurt by the sequester haven't been (government and defense didn't shed jobs).

Retail took a big hit.

The causes are increased taxes, ObamaCare, and the general regulatory overreach of Obamanomics which is crushing the private sector.

Support for your opinions, then we can consider them factually accurate.

The low economic growth rate and continued horrible unemployment picture are plenty of proof.

The sequester did not cause this problem - if you think it did, you are just an economic illiterate. This situation is just the logical outcome of the big government policies that Obama has pursued throughout his presidency.

Take a look at the third graph at the link. It tracks growth in government spending against increases in the rate of unemployment.

Calafia Beach Pundit: Federal finances update


The relationship is quite clear. Whenever government spending as a ratio of GDP increases, so does unemployment. Obama has increased Federal spending as a percent of GDP by 25%. And here we are: the worst recovery every with massive un and underemployment.

Heckuva job, Barry!

 

[kiwiman127]

Well somebody is making money but they aren't creating jobs or rewarding their workforce.