Jobs Data Dim Recovery Hopes - unemployment ticks up to 9.2%

[Trajan]

there doesn't appear to be any good news here. Just another "bump in the road" ?





Nonfarm payrolls rose 18,000 last month, far fewer than expected, as small gains in the private sector were just enough to outweigh continued government-job losses, the Labor Department said Friday in its survey of employers.

Payrolls data for the previous two months were revised down by a total 44,000 to show increases of only 25,000 jobs in May and 217,000 in April.

snip-

The jobless rate, which is obtained from a separate household survey, increased for the third straight month to 9.2% in June from 9.1% in May. It was the highest level since December 2010. There are 14.1 million Americans who would like to work but can't get a job.

Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had forecast payrolls would rise by 125,000 and the jobless rate would remain steady at 9.1%.

The choppy two-year-old recovery is proving to be one of the worst since the 1930s. It has been too slow to make up for all the jobs lost after the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009. With little scope left for policy to help, President Barack Obama is likely to confront the highest unemployment rate of any postwar incumbent when he seeks re-election in the fall of 2012.

Friday's report showed private-sector employers, which account for about 70% of the work force, added 57,000 jobs in June, down from 73,000 in May. The weakness was broad-based.

Manufacturing employment remained weak, adding 6,000 jobs. Economists were expecting a rebound as disruptions to manufacturing production stemming from Japan's earthquake should be easing. Employment in the battered construction sector was broadly unchanged. The housing sector remains a big drag on the economy.

snip-

Employment in professional and business services, which had shown strong gains in previous months, rose by 12,000.

Government employment fell by 39,000, the eighth drop in a row, following declines in all levels of government struggling to close budget gaps.

more at-

Jobs Data Dim Recovery Hopes - WSJ.com

 

[Wiseacre]

Think about this, the amount of overtime hours usually goes up when the economy is picking up when employers try to make do satisfying demand with the existing employees they have. When that sn't enough, then they start hiring more people. But in June the overtime hours number dropped, which signifies we ain't moving in the right direction.

The other thing is temporary hires, employers will also hire temps before they begin to hire permanent employees. But again in June the temp hires is also down, so it's another sign of economic trouble.

I just don't know what can be done to turn things around without reversing just about all of Obama's policies. I think we need a fresh approach, what we're doing now ain't working.

 

[American Cowboy]

"One way to make sure crime doesn't pay would be to let the government run it." -Ronald Reagan

 

[Trajan]

Think about this, the amount of overtime hours usually goes up when the economy is picking up when employers try to make do satisfying demand with the existing employees they have. When that sn't enough, then they start hiring more people. But in June the overtime hours number dropped, which signifies we ain't moving in the right direction.

The other thing is temporary hires, employers will also hire temps before they begin to hire permanent employees. But again in June the temp hires is also down, so it's another sign of economic trouble.

interesting note wiseacre.......

I just don't know what can be done to turn things around without reversing just about all of Obama's policies. I think we need a fresh approach, what we're doing now ain't working.

yes well good luck. as they see it its all still bushs fault. when you are in denial you cannot begin to formulate a cogent response

 

[iamwhatiseem]

ADP reported fewest number of people hired since September 2010.
Only the financial institutions are doing well...good to be a banker.

 

[Trajan]

ADP reported fewest number of people hired since September 2010.
Only the financial institutions are doing well...good to be a banker.

you sure, I heard they are dumping folks, or maybe it was wall street...

 

[iamwhatiseem]

ADP reported fewest number of people hired since September 2010.
Only the financial institutions are doing well...good to be a banker.

you sure, I heard they are dumping folks, or maybe it was wall street...

Sorry...meant investment banker.
Hell...the Dow is now highest in history except 2007 and one month in 2008. There has never been so much money made in the history of investment since the economy collapsed.
Never - not ever - has the markets shot up so fast. The government throwing $900,000,000,000 of taxpayer money into the hands of finance has done the financial market wonders.
Something the Obamanites can't seem to grasp.

 

[Trajan]

ADP reported fewest number of people hired since September 2010.
Only the financial institutions are doing well...good to be a banker.

you sure, I heard they are dumping folks, or maybe it was wall street...

Sorry...meant investment banker.
Hell...the Dow is now highest in history except 2007 and one month in 2008. There has never been so much money made in the history of investment since the economy collapsed.
Never - not ever - has the markets shot up so fast. The government throwing $900,000,000,000 of taxpayer money into the hands of finance has done the financial market wonders.
Something the Obamanites can't seem to grasp.

check this, I 'heard' that the banks are being allowed to borrow at 2% from the fed. and are loaning F&F at 3 to 4%...I am to scared to check..have you heard that?

 

[Wiseacre]

you sure, I heard they are dumping folks, or maybe it was wall street...

Sorry...meant investment banker.
Hell...the Dow is now highest in history except 2007 and one month in 2008. There has never been so much money made in the history of investment since the economy collapsed.
Never - not ever - has the markets shot up so fast. The government throwing $900,000,000,000 of taxpayer money into the hands of finance has done the financial market wonders.
Something the Obamanites can't seem to grasp.

check this, I 'heard' that the banks are being allowed to borrow at 2% from the fed. and are loaning F&F at 3 to 4%...I am to scared to check..have you heard that?

FYI, from Cato:

Banks Are Lending, but to Whom?
Posted by Mark A. Calabria
A recurring concern we have heard since the financial crisis erupted is that banks are simply not lending, and that this is holding back economic activity. If only banks would lend, the economy would grow. As usual, the truth is a little more complex.
Unlike in the Great Depression, and despite about 300 bank failures, the balance sheets and deposits of insured commercial banks and thrifts has been steady, if slowly, expanding throughout the financial crisis and recess. Banks have continued lending during this time; however, they have changed who they are lending to. Over the last two years we have witnessed a massive shift from lending to the private sector to lending to the public.
The chart below shows banking business lending and bank holdings of U.S. government securities. The chart suggests that the approximately $500 billion increase in bank lending to Uncle Sam came at the expense of a $400 billion decline in lending to private business. If one assumes that bank balance sheets have either been stable or increased slightly, then a loan to the government must off-set a loan otherwise made somewhere else.

[the chart didn't copy, don't know why]

While its hard to exactly measure the job impact of this reduced business lending, some estimates have been made on the impact of SBA lending. According to one study, every $41,600 in new small business loans is associated with 1 new job created. While this number should be taken with a grain of salt, it implies that the $400 billion reduction in business lending has cost over 9 million jobs. Of course, one might argue that the half-trillion in lending to the govt has created or “saved” some jobs. Accepting the difficulty of coming up with a reliable estimate, I think its fair to say that on net a few million jobs have been lost due to this shift of lending from the private to the public sector.
Also of interest is that since the financial crisis, and despite the failures of Fannie and Freddie, commercial banks and thrifts have increased their holdings of Fannie/Freddie/Ginnie securities by over $300 billion.
Textbook economics usually teaches that government crowding out of private investment only really occurs when we are near full-employment. Yet looking at the balance sheets of our commercial banks and thrifts, would suggest that U.S. Treasuries and Agency securities have crowded out significant lending that would otherwise go to the private sector. But this should come as no surprise, since banks can borrow for close to zero and invest risk-free in government debt, earning a nice spread of 3 to 4 percentage points.
Mark A. Calabria • December 16, 2010 @ 3:14 pm

Banks Are Lending, but to Whom? | Cato @ Liberty

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Sorry...meant investment banker.
Hell...the Dow is now highest in history except 2007 and one month in 2008. There has never been so much money made in the history of investment since the economy collapsed.
Never - not ever - has the markets shot up so fast. The government throwing $900,000,000,000 of taxpayer money into the hands of finance has done the financial market wonders.
Something the Obamanites can't seem to grasp.

check this, I 'heard' that the banks are being allowed to borrow at 2% from the fed. and are loaning F&F at 3 to 4%...I am to scared to check..have you heard that?

FYI, from Cato:

Banks Are Lending, but to Whom?
Posted by Mark A. Calabria
A recurring concern we have heard since the financial crisis erupted is that banks are simply not lending, and that this is holding back economic activity. If only banks would lend, the economy would grow. As usual, the truth is a little more complex.
Unlike in the Great Depression, and despite about 300 bank failures, the balance sheets and deposits of insured commercial banks and thrifts has been steady, if slowly, expanding throughout the financial crisis and recess. Banks have continued lending during this time; however, they have changed who they are lending to. Over the last two years we have witnessed a massive shift from lending to the private sector to lending to the public.
The chart below shows banking business lending and bank holdings of U.S. government securities. The chart suggests that the approximately $500 billion increase in bank lending to Uncle Sam came at the expense of a $400 billion decline in lending to private business. If one assumes that bank balance sheets have either been stable or increased slightly, then a loan to the government must off-set a loan otherwise made somewhere else.

[the chart didn't copy, don't know why]

While its hard to exactly measure the job impact of this reduced business lending, some estimates have been made on the impact of SBA lending. According to one study, every $41,600 in new small business loans is associated with 1 new job created. While this number should be taken with a grain of salt, it implies that the $400 billion reduction in business lending has cost over 9 million jobs. Of course, one might argue that the half-trillion in lending to the govt has created or “saved” some jobs. Accepting the difficulty of coming up with a reliable estimate, I think its fair to say that on net a few million jobs have been lost due to this shift of lending from the private to the public sector.
Also of interest is that since the financial crisis, and despite the failures of Fannie and Freddie, commercial banks and thrifts have increased their holdings of Fannie/Freddie/Ginnie securities by over $300 billion.
Textbook economics usually teaches that government crowding out of private investment only really occurs when we are near full-employment. Yet looking at the balance sheets of our commercial banks and thrifts, would suggest that U.S. Treasuries and Agency securities have crowded out significant lending that would otherwise go to the private sector. But this should come as no surprise, since banks can borrow for close to zero and invest risk-free in government debt, earning a nice spread of 3 to 4 percentage points.
Mark A. Calabria • December 16, 2010 @ 3:14 pm

Banks Are Lending, but to Whom? | Cato @ Liberty

You bet...look at the enormous profits European banks have made loaning Greece money at engorged rates...then when they began running into trouble - no problem! In comes the IMF, other Euro governments and naturally Uncle Sam to ensure they lose no profits. The U.S. government has no pause when it comes to giving away our tax dollars.
In fact - France is strongly advocating Euro banks to start loaning to the Greek government again - round two!

 

[Mad Scientist]

"Tricky Dick Tater" Obama said "The economy has turned the corner... down a dark alley way".

 

[uscitizen]

"One way to make sure crime doesn't pay would be to let the government run it." -Ronald Reagan

Huh? Ronald Reagan was part of the gummit.
and he helped us get to where we are now.


Eliminate organized crime, the government hates competition.

 

[Trajan]

Sorry...meant investment banker.
Hell...the Dow is now highest in history except 2007 and one month in 2008. There has never been so much money made in the history of investment since the economy collapsed.
Never - not ever - has the markets shot up so fast. The government throwing $900,000,000,000 of taxpayer money into the hands of finance has done the financial market wonders.
Something the Obamanites can't seem to grasp.

check this, I 'heard' that the banks are being allowed to borrow at 2% from the fed. and are loaning F&F at 3 to 4%...I am to scared to check..have you heard that?

FYI, from Cato:

Banks Are Lending, but to Whom?
Posted by Mark A. Calabria
A recurring concern we have heard since the financial crisis erupted is that banks are simply not lending, and that this is holding back economic activity. If only banks would lend, the economy would grow. As usual, the truth is a little more complex.
Unlike in the Great Depression, and despite about 300 bank failures, the balance sheets and deposits of insured commercial banks and thrifts has been steady, if slowly, expanding throughout the financial crisis and recess. Banks have continued lending during this time; however, they have changed who they are lending to. Over the last two years we have witnessed a massive shift from lending to the private sector to lending to the public.
The chart below shows banking business lending and bank holdings of U.S. government securities. The chart suggests that the approximately $500 billion increase in bank lending to Uncle Sam came at the expense of a $400 billion decline in lending to private business. If one assumes that bank balance sheets have either been stable or increased slightly, then a loan to the government must off-set a loan otherwise made somewhere else.

[the chart didn't copy, don't know why]

While its hard to exactly measure the job impact of this reduced business lending, some estimates have been made on the impact of SBA lending. According to one study, every $41,600 in new small business loans is associated with 1 new job created. While this number should be taken with a grain of salt, it implies that the $400 billion reduction in business lending has cost over 9 million jobs. Of course, one might argue that the half-trillion in lending to the govt has created or “saved” some jobs. Accepting the difficulty of coming up with a reliable estimate, I think its fair to say that on net a few million jobs have been lost due to this shift of lending from the private to the public sector.
Also of interest is that since the financial crisis, and despite the failures of Fannie and Freddie, commercial banks and thrifts have increased their holdings of Fannie/Freddie/Ginnie securities by over $300 billion.
Textbook economics usually teaches that government crowding out of private investment only really occurs when we are near full-employment. Yet looking at the balance sheets of our commercial banks and thrifts, would suggest that U.S. Treasuries and Agency securities have crowded out significant lending that would otherwise go to the private sector. But this should come as no surprise, since banks can borrow for close to zero and invest risk-free in government debt, earning a nice spread of 3 to 4 percentage points.
Mark A. Calabria • December 16, 2010 @ 3:14 pm

Banks Are Lending, but to Whom? | Cato @ Liberty

unreal.

 

[ShackledNation]

This is the result of the fallacy of the broken window perpetuated by Keynesian economics. The story goes like this:

A mischievous boy hurls a rock at a plate glass store window, and breaks the glass. As a crowd gathers round, the first-level analysis, common sense, comments on the event. Common sense deplores the destruction of property in breaking the window, and sympathizes with the storekeeper for having to spend his money repairing the window. But then comes the second-level, sophisticated analyst or what we might call a Keynesian. The Keynesian says: oh, but you people don't realize that the breaking of the window is really an economic blessing. For, in having to repair the window, the storekeeper invigorates the economy by his spending, and gives welcome employment to glaziers and their workers. Destruction of property, by compelling spending, therefore stimulates the economy and has an invigorating "multiplier effect" on production and employment.

But then in steps the third-level analyst, and points out the grievous fallacy in the destructionist Keynesian position. The alleged sophisticated critic, says the third, concentrates on "what is seen" and neglects "what is not seen." The sophisticate sees that the storekeeper must give employment to glaziers by spending money to repair his window. But what he doesn't see is the storekeepers's opportunity foregone. If he did not have to spend the money on repairing the window, he could have added to his capital, and to everyone's standard of living, and thereby employed people in the act of advancing, rather than merely trying to sustain, the current stock of capital. Or, the storekeeper might have spent the money on his own consumption, employing people in that form of production.

This is why the economy is stagnant. The window is the economy, the stone taxation. Taxation removes wealth from the economy. People have less savings and money to invest or spend. Government then tries to "repair the broken window" through endless spending, bailouts, and tax cuts. But all that can do is sustain the current situation. Because of government bureaucracy, corruption, political games, and inefficiency, much money is wasted. Not only does government fail to grow the economy, it can't even fix the windows it shattered. The best way to fix the economy is to halt the power of the stone thrower--our government.

 

[expat_panama]

...banks are being allowed to borrow at 2% from the fed. and are loaning F&F at 3 to 4%...

--and bankers are evil and profit is evil and bankers making profit is evil upon evil!!!

That's the nut of the problem America faces, it's blind paralyzing mindless hatred for one another and it's got to stop right now. You know you use banks and you need banks. You don't run a bank because it's a lot of hard work and like most people you prefer work that's not so hard.

Hard work pays better than not so hard work. This is the Planet Earth and we need to deal with it.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

...banks are being allowed to borrow at 2% from the fed. and are loaning F&F at 3 to 4%...

--and bankers are evil and profit is evil and bankers making profit is evil upon evil!!!

That's the nut of the problem America faces, it's blind paralyzing mindless hatred for one another and it's got to stop right now. You know you use banks and you need banks. You don't run a bank because it's a lot of hard work and like most people you prefer work that's not so hard.

Hard work pays better than not so hard work. This is the Planet Earth and we need to deal with it.

Nobody in this thread is saying banks shouldn't make a profit...not sure why you are saying this.

 

[Samson]

"One way to make sure crime doesn't pay would be to let the government run it." -Ronald Reagan

Huh? Ronald Reagan was part of the gummit.
and he helped us get to where we are now.


Eliminate organized crime, the government hates competition.

REEEEAAAAAAGGGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN........BOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSHHHH!!



You're nothing if not consistant.

The Dem strategy of bleeting a republican president's name every time they're in power gets old.

 

[expat_panama]

...Nobody in this thread is saying banks shouldn't make a profit...not sure why you are saying this.

My first reaction is to say "nobody in this thread is saying that someone on this thread says banks shouldn't make a profit...not sure why you are saying this." I won't because only a moron talks like that. Here's how Trajan talks:

...check this, I 'heard' that the banks are being allowed to borrow at 2% from the fed. and are loaning F&F at 3 to 4%...I am to scared to check..have you heard that?

Fine, so let's check it. The overnight rate that banks pay to the Fed is less than what consumers pay. Trajan wrote his post in a manner suggesting that this is bad. I wrote in a manner suggesting it's good.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

...Nobody in this thread is saying banks shouldn't make a profit...not sure why you are saying this.

My first reaction is to say "nobody in this thread is saying that someone on this thread says banks shouldn't make a profit...not sure why you are saying this." I won't because only a moron talks like that. Here's how Trajan talks:

...check this, I 'heard' that the banks are being allowed to borrow at 2% from the fed. and are loaning F&F at 3 to 4%...I am to scared to check..have you heard that?

Fine, so let's check it. The overnight rate that banks pay to the Fed is less than what consumers pay. Trajan wrote his post in a manner suggesting that this is bad. I wrote in a manner suggesting it's good.

I have no idea what this post is about.
Other than I think you called me a moron...I would hope not.

And Trajan is not complaining whatsoever about banks paying a lower % than consumers...he is saying that is is a bit strange that the government would borrow from banks at 3-4% when they themselves could borrow from the Fed at 2%.
Say your wife wants $50 from your own bank account, but she doesn't do that...she instead takes out a loan for $50 at a different bank and then pays the loan off with the original $50 plus interest.