Solid June Jobs Report: 213K New Jobs, 36K Manufacturing Jobs, April & May Nums Revised Upward

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Although by an odd statistical quirk, the unemployment rate rose by 0.2%, going from 3.8% to 4.0%, the BLS employment report for June is loaded with good news:

* The number of persons employed rose by 213,000: "Total non-farm payroll employment increased by 213,000 in June."

* 36,000 manufacturing jobs were created, the second largest increase in 10 years (Bureau of Labor Statistics Data). It is especially encouraging that "nearly all" of the new manufacturing jobs were in durable goods:

Durable goods manufacturing accounted for nearly all of the increase, including job gains in fabricated metal products (+7,000), computer and electronic products (+5,000), and primary metals (+3,000). Motor vehicles and parts also added jobs over the month (+12,000), after declining by 8,000 in May. Over the past year, manufacturing has added 285,000 jobs.​

* The numbers for April and May were revised upward: "The change in total non-farm payroll employment for April was revised up from +159,000
to +175,000, and the change for May was revised up from +223,000 to +244,000." That's an upward revision of 27,000 jobs for those two months.

* The number of "discouraged workers" has now dropped by 155,000 from June of last year: "Among the marginally attached, there were 359,000 discouraged workers in June, down by 155,000 from a year earlier."

* The labor force participation rate (LFPR) rose by 0.2%.

* Wages rose again: "In June, average hourly earnings for all employees on private non-farm payrolls rose by 5 cents to $26.98. Over the year, average hourly earnings have increased by 72 cents, or 2.7 percent. Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and non-supervisory employees increased by 4 cents to $22.62 in June."

Those shovel ready jobs finally kicking in, I see.

Because a meme told me so!

No, Voinovich told us so. Duh.

 

[edthecynic]

Oh, hogwash. I watched Fox News all the time in the Obama years, and their coverage of the economy was much more balanced than that.

Oh, hogwash!
The FOX Gossip Channel's idea of balanced was to use the U3 rate as the "REAL" unemployment rate for Bush and the U6 rate for Obama.

 

[rightwinger]

There was a time when I used to be impressed with a 4.0 Unemployment rate.

But EXPERTS at Fox News taught me that REAL Unemployment and Labor Participation Rate are the only numbers that matter

Oh, hogwash. I watched Fox News all the time in the Obama years, and their coverage of the economy was much more balanced than that.

I remember when U3 unemployment went up to 10 percent. Fox News experts ranted....forget about the stock market, GDP doesn’t matter, Unemployment is the number to care about

Once unemployment dropped below 6 percent they created the Labor Participation Rate and told us that U3 was fake...use U6

I learned my lesson

 

[rightwinger]

In reality, 172 million Americans are not working under Trump
Over half the population does not have a job

In reality, that is a comical argument. You must be joking. If you are not, you have no business posting anything on a public board because you clearly need to go back and finish high school.

Funny you wing-nuts didn't think the argument was so comical when it came out of Donnie Dirt Bag's foul mouth!!!

JAN. 11, 2017
TRUMP: And you’d have millions more workers right now in the United States that are — 96 million really wanting a job and they can’t get. You know that story. The real number — that’s the real number.

Wow, according to the numbers you lefties are putting up, we've gone from 172 million not working to 96 million not working....sounds pretty good to me.

No, we've gone from 96 million not working but eating in Jan 2017 to 102 million now.

LOL! Oh, yeah. You bet. You people are not to be taken seriously. Team Obama would have been thrilled to have had many more months just like June.

The Great Obama had many, many months over 213k

 

[busybee01]

By any measure the Trump economy is outperforming the Obama economy. And they're doing it without the Fed pumping billions of new dollars into the market.

It is a continuation of what started under Obama. It is being done with the federal government pumping trillions of dollars in new spending.

 

[busybee01]

The real ue numbers are 34%! Thanks Donald

Uh. . . . Yeah. . . . You bet. . . . Wow. . . . Heard of such things as retired people, stay-home moms and dads, disabled people, etc.?

Does your mom know you're using her computer?

The real ue numbers are 34%!

Thanks Donald

In reality, 172 million Americans are not working under Trump
Over half the population does not have a job

In reality, that is a comical argument. You must be joking. If you are not, you have no business posting anything on a public board because you clearly need to go back and finish high school.

Trump told us that the official numbers that came out under Obama was false. Now that he likes it, they are suddenly correct.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Oh, hogwash. I watched Fox News all the time in the Obama years, and their coverage of the economy was much more balanced than that.

Oh, hogwash!
The FOX Gossip Channel's idea of balanced was to use the U3 rate as the "REAL" unemployment rate for Bush and the U6 rate for Obama.

But the U-6 rate was lower under Bush than it was under Obama on average. The U-6 stayed unusually high under Obama, even though the U-2 dropped.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But the U-6 rate was lower under Bush than it was under Obama on average.

As one would expect, as people leave the workforce when unemployment and underemployment stay high for an extended period.

 

[rightwinger]

Oh, hogwash. I watched Fox News all the time in the Obama years, and their coverage of the economy was much more balanced than that.

Oh, hogwash!
The FOX Gossip Channel's idea of balanced was to use the U3 rate as the "REAL" unemployment rate for Bush and the U6 rate for Obama.

But the U-6 rate was lower under Bush than it was under Obama on average. The U-6 stayed unusually high under Obama, even though the U-2 dropped.

Those numbers are fake

Trump told us so

 

[task0778]

By any measure the Trump economy is outperforming the Obama economy. And they're doing it without the Fed pumping billions of new dollars into the market.

It is a continuation of what started under Obama. It is being done with the federal government pumping trillions of dollars in new spending.

No, it's an absolute improvement over the Obama economy.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No, it's an absolute improvement over the Obama economy.

But that is a vapid statement. When an economy is growing and improving, of course it gets better, as time passes

 

[task0778]

No, it's an absolute improvement over the Obama economy.

But that is a vapid statement. When an economy is growing and improving, of course it gets better, as time passes

Obama's economy barely averaged about 2% growth since the recession ended in June 2010, which isn't what I'd call growing and improving. And it didn't get better as time passed either. Not until Trump came along and started cutting regulations and taxes. You can call it vapid, I call it reality. They're saying the 2nd qtr GDP numbers will come in at around 3.8%, Obama's economy never got close to that. Wage growth is better now and so is the number of discouraged workers that gave up under Obama who are now re-entering the labor force. So you can talk shit all you want but the Trump economy is way better.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Obama's economy barely averaged about 2% growth since the recession ended in June 2010, which isn't what I'd call growing and improving

Of course, that is both growing and improving. And the last year of the Obama presidency was better on both counts than the first year of Trump's presidency. So your point is a bit thin.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Obama's economy barely averaged about 2% growth since the recession ended in June 2010, which isn't what I'd call growing and improving

Of course, that is both growing and improving. And the last year of the Obama presidency was better on both counts than the first year of Trump's presidency. So your point is a bit thin.

Well, actually, the economy began to pick up in 2016 because Obama agreed to the GOP-backed budget deal that protected well over $600 billion in tax cuts/tax breaks and lifted the ban on oil exports. Yet, manufacturing jobs fell under Obama, and, as noted, GDP growth was weak or modest for most of his presidency. You also need to consider that the U-6 unemployment rate has dropped dramatically under Trump, and that we have seen huge gains in manufacturing jobs under Trump.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well, actually, the economy began to pick up in 2016 because Obama agreed to the GOP-backed budget deal that protected well over $600 billion in tax cuts/tax breaks and lifted the ban on oil exports.

An interesting argument, but a specious one. For.one, Obama wanted the lion's share of those tax cuts, and wanted even more for lower earners. Second, allowing export of crude oil had little to no overall effect on the economy, as any increased profits were shared by very few.

While manufacturing jobs fell in 2016, they had large increases in 2011 and 2014. I won't waste my time looking for your posts of high praise from back then .

 

[whutTHEYsay]

mikegriffith1, post: 20301867

Although by an odd statistical quirk, the unemployment rate rose by 0.2%, going from 3.8% to 4.0%, the BLS employment report for June is loaded with good news:

Obama took the unemployment rate down from 10% to 5%. Right wing propaganda called 5% a cooked and fake number. Are we to really think Trump is Making America Great Again simply by seeing numbers hover around 4%?


Point being America was quite great in 2016. No need to color it Great Again when the black man is out of the White House.

 

[task0778]

The following is from forbes.com, written in Feb 2012:

When Barack Obama entered office in January, 2009, the labor force participation rate was 65.7%, meaning nearly two-thirds of working age Americans were working or looking for work.

When the recession supposedly officially ended in June, 2009, the labor force participation rate was still 65.7%.

In the latest, much celebrated, unemployment report, the labor force participation rate had plummeted to 63.7%, the most rapid decline in U.S. history. That means that under President Obama nearly 5 million Americans have fled the workforce in hopeless despair.

The trick is that when those 5 million are not counted as in the work force, they are not counted as unemployed either. They may desperately need and want jobs. They may be in poverty, as many undoubtedly are, with America suffering today more people in poverty than in the entire half century the Census Bureau has been counting poverty. But they are not even counted in that 8.3% unemployment rate that Obama and his media cheerleaders were so tirelessly celebrating last week.

If they were counted, the unemployment rate today would be a far more realistic 11%, better reflecting the suffering in the real economy under Obamanomics.

Just last month, while the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported finding 243,000 new jobs, they also reported in the same release that an additional 1.2 million workers had dropped out of the work force altogether, giving up hope under Obama. If labor force participation had remained the same in January, 2012 just as it was the month before in December, 2011, the unemployment rate would have risen to 8.7% in January rather than supposedly declining to 8.3% as reported.

Some additional facts highlight how misleading the reported unemployment rate, and the political rhetoric around it, can be. One year ago, 99 million Americans were unemployed or otherwise not working, and the unemployment rate was 9.1%. Today, while the reported unemployment rate is 8.3%, over 100 million Americans are unemployed or otherwise not working.

In January, 2009, 11.6 million Americans were unemployed, with 23% of those unemployed for more than 6 months. By January, 2012, 12.8 million were unemployed, with 43% of those out of work more than 6 months.

At the official end of the recession in June, 2009, America was 12.6 million jobs short of full employment. By January, 2012, we were 15.2 million jobs short, falling behind by another 244,000 in that month alone.

The time has come to begin to raise questions about the precipitous decline in the labor force assumed by BLS. Are the career bureaucrats there partial to President Obama, and favorable towards promoting his political chances for reelection? Or has the Obama Administration placed someone in a leadership slot over at the BLS or the unemployment statistics branch that is imposing this assumed sharp decline? Because of the oddness of this record setting decline, coinciding with President Obama’s ascension to office, these questions bear further investigation.

But even with the steep decline in labor force participation, the BLS report for January still shows some horrific numbers more than 4 years after the start of the recession. Besides the 12.8 million unemployed, another 8.2 million were “employed part time for economic reasons.” The BLS explains that “These individuals were working part-time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.”

Another 2.8 million “wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months,” but “were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the four weeks preceding the survey.”

That makes nearly 24 million Americans unemployed or underemployed. The unemployment rate in January counting them is not 11%, but 15.1% as reported by the BLS, a depression era level of unemployment.
.
.
In contrast, under Obama’s non-recovery America has suffered the longest period of unemployment this high since the Great Depression, with record numbers fleeing the work force in despair. More than four years after the recession started, we are still over 5 million jobs below the peak before the recession. Real median family income has fallen by 10%, all the way back to 1996 levels. More Americans are in poverty today than at any time since Census began keeping poverty records over 50 years ago. Last year, real economic growth totaled 1.7%.

When President Obama entered office in January, 2009, the recession was already in its 13th month. His responsibility was to manage a timely, robust recovery to get America back on track again. What he gave us instead, with his outdated, throwback, Keynesian economics, is the worst economic recovery since the Great Depression. A recovery now, way too little, way too late, cannot go back and change that record. For that record of American suffering and despair, the voters will now hold Obama accountable.

Don't Be Fooled, The Obama Unemployment Rate Is 11%

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Indeed, you get the feeling that liberals are angry that the economy is doing so well and that they simply do not want to hear good economic news as long as Trump is in the White House.

That is pure right wing common grade bs. Not angry that economy is doing well. Angry that the orange idiot is taking credit for what Obama set up so well for him. Nothing exceptionally is actually going on when one considers the economic trend for seven years prior to the shame filled Trumpo Presidency.

What about the Federal Debt. Any of you right wingers still angry about that?

What about the upcoming recession?

Trumpo’s tax cuts for himself and his fello rich are aggravating the Federal debt during economic good times. No concern by Trumpo and his deplorable minions in sight.

 

[fbj]

All lies! 100,000,000 have left the workforce!!

To do what? Become speed bumps?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

task0778, post: 20304171

When President Obama entered office in January, 2009, the recession was already in its 13th month. His responsibility was to manage a timely, robust recovery to get America back on track again.

Forbes opinion. Not facts based. I’m sure Forbes backed Romney in 2011.

Romney wanted a full four year term to deliver a 6% unemployment rate. Obama delivered below 6% in half that time.

NotfooledbyW, post: 10508596.

Thank god Romney didnt get to put his slow jobs policy in place.

.
U.S. Adds 252,000 Jobs In December; Unemployment Rate Declines To 5.6%

AP/HuffPost Posted: 01/09/15 08:31 AM ET Updated: 3 hours ago
The U.S. economy added 252,000 jobs in December, as the unemployment rate fell to 5.6 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday.

U.S. Adds 252 000 Jobs In December Unemployment Rate Declines To 5.6

.
“I can tell you that over a period of four years, by virtue of the policies that we’d put in place, we’d get the unemployment rate down to 6 percent, and perhaps a little lower,” Romney says in aTime magazine interview.

Romney vows to lower unemployment rate to 6 percent by end of first term TheHill

When Romney was projecting in 2011 that he would get the unemployment rate down to 6% by 2016 the CBO was projecting the UR to be at 5.3% with Obama's policies in place by then. You'd have to be a fool to vote for Romney after he said that. He must not have known what the CBO was projecting for 2016. Since he was talking out of his behind anyway Romney should have promised to get to 5% by 2016 if he thought he could do better than Obama.

So it is getting impossible for Republicans to claim and be believed that Obama's has a failed policy on unemployment and the economy,

Their guy in 2008 was proposing a failed jobs policy as a campaign pledge.

Get real people. Romney is white and half as good as Obama on unemployment rate reduction.