Unemployment down to 3.9%

[Rexx Taylor]

Labor force participation rate about the same as obama left it. Not such an important number anymore?

So Sad!!!

So now it doesn’t matter? Cause under obama the unemployment rate went down, but it was really the participation rate that mattered. Hypocrisy is funny.

even using the same calculation methods, Trump's numbers are better.

remember how bad things were this time during the Obama term? its was total depression in 2010.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Wages are comparable lower by 11% than in 2001. Also there are less tech jobs now than in 2001.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

No one has denied that the Obama economy, which Trump is riding, is good.

Trump is the election focus, no matter how much the GOP will try to sell differently.

The American electorate is now wise to the GOP/Alt Right Fake Alt Right Media (FARM) propaganda.

Aw, come on. That's just the irrational butthurt talkin. This is great news for the country.

yeah but NONE of this is going to matter soon if Trump wont get the balls to stand up to Israel and cut off aide to the bastards,if he keeps Kissing Israels ass as every president since LBJ has,he is going to get us into world war three. If Israel has its way with Trump Israel with our aide will topple Syria and Iran and the next country they will coerce the united states to invade is Russia which will in fact start world war three.

Trump should stop saying make america great and say make the WORLD great. His forieng policys suck.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Trump is right
The real unemployment rate is 52 percent

I do not know what it really is. But Trump IS right that the U-3 is a hoax. It is a ridiculous joke.

It isn’t a hoax. It is a formula. It provides the reader with data based on a set of criteria.

If the U3 rate was 10% five years ago and it is 5% today, we can infer that the employment situation has improved.

You may find the criteria used to be lacking. That’s fine. But the U3 serves as a data point just fine.

It serves as a data point to you just fine.

But as a measurement of unemployment...it is a joke. Plus, it makes everything seem MUCH better than it really is. Which is EXACTLY why Congress agreed to change it back in the 1990's. The employment-population ratio is a FAR better barometer.

Even the Fed has stopped using it as THE metric for employment.

You seem upset. As long as the formula used remains constant, good info can be gleaned from the data.

LOL...and you seem ignorant. How on Earth can one get upset in a chat forum?

Hey...you want to embrace the U-3? Go right ahead.

Go to Wall Street and tell those in the know about your love of the U-3...see how they react to your 'expertise'.


Well, since your mind is clearly closed about this...we are done here (as I try not to waste too much time on such types).

Good day.

Yeah. It’s rough being smarter than everyone else. Right? How do you make it through the day surrounded by morons?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Good news for America. Lowest since 2000.

160k new jobs. Good news.

Happy Friday!

This is refreshing OP no politics involved.

 

[Meathead]

His forieng policys suck.

Ebonics?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Aw, come on: I know the truth irks you, Dschrute3. I have been pleased with the economy since 2016. It's running fine until the unwise GOP policies once again bust it. And, once again, I will be in position to do well because of GOP greed. The election, though, is a referendum on Trump and GOP foolish.

bullshit

The blue surge is not because of a good economy, Redfish: you know that. It is that Donald is crazy and the GOP absolutely messed up because it control the squeals in the Alt Right and the Freedom Caucus. Watch what happens to the far right and alt right squeals in the fall this year in the elections.

 

[Brain357]

Labor force participation rate about the same as obama left it. Not such an important number anymore?

So Sad!!!

So now it doesn’t matter? Cause under obama the unemployment rate went down, but it was really the participation rate that mattered. Hypocrisy is funny.

even using the same calculation methods, Trump's numbers are better.

Participation rate is about the same. Which according to republicans is really bad.

 

[Brain357]

Labor force participation rate about the same as obama left it. Not such an important number anymore?

So Sad!!!

So now it doesn’t matter? Cause under obama the unemployment rate went down, but it was really the participation rate that mattered. Hypocrisy is funny.

even using the same calculation methods, Trump's numbers are better.

remember how bad things were this time during the Obama term? its was total depression in 2010.

Obama was handed 2 wars, a recession, a housing bubble, auto industry was about to collapse... Trump was handed a strong economy and declining deficits. So far he's messed up one of the two.

 

[rightwinger]

Good news for America. Lowest since 2000.

160k new jobs. Good news.

Happy Friday!

No, it's not good news actually.

1) Trump said many times on the campaign trail that the U-3 (the official unemployment rate) is 'bogus'. And he was dead right (and 'yes'...it was still 'bogus' under Obama - I am not a Dem or a Rep).

Trump Says the Unemployment Rate Is Bogus -- and His Labor Pick Puzder Agrees

So the drop in the U-3 means nothing.


2) Plus, even if you do care about the U-3? It is NOT based on the Establishment Survey (the number in the OP). The U-3 is based on the Household Survey. And that survey showed only 3,000 more people employed in April.

The only reason the U-3 dropped was because 236,000 people left the labor force in April.

Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted


3) A FAR better measurement of the employment situation is the Employment-Population ratio. And that went down last month (down is bad).

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data


So, the employment picture for April actually got a little worse...not better.

ALWAYS look beyond the headlines.

Republican president and suddenly the liberals want to ignore the U3. We don't change the rules when the outcome is favorable to your opposition. If the numbers look "worse" for liberals, it's because there are more jobs than can be filled.

A) I am neither Dem nor Rep. I was knocking the numbers under Obama as well.

B) Trump himself has called the U-3 a 'Hoax' several times (rightly).

C) The U-3 is based on the Household Survey...and that only went up 3,000 last month.

So if you support the U-3 (against Trump's own advice), then you have to accept that only 3,000 jobs were created last month in the Household Survey.
The '164,000' number has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the unemployment rate.


My guess is that you have little idea what you are talking about on this and just get all bent out of shape when someone knocks fed numbers while Trump is in power...like Trumpbots do.
Obamabots did the same thing when he was in the WH.

Trump is right
The real unemployment rate is 52 percent

I do not know what it really is. But Trump IS right that the U-3 is a hoax. It is a ridiculous joke.

Trump claiming 3.9 percent unemployment is a hoax

fake news

 

[rightwinger]

Good news for America. Lowest since 2000.

160k new jobs. Good news.

Happy Friday!

View attachment 191807
The Black man is better than an Orange Man. Facts Matter!

And he was just a community organizer

 

[my2¢]

Thankfully a topic other than Mueller and such!

What has had me worried about Trump since even before the election has been protectionism. I'm not at all comfortable with these tariffs and so have been waiting to see how manufacturing is doing. With your notice that the numbers were out I went looking. And was so relieved to find good news indeed.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics said that manufacturers added 24,000 workers in April, extending the 22,000 gain seen in March. It was the seventh consecutive month with robust growth in hiring in the sector, averaging 26,571 per month over that time frame. As such, the latest jobs numbers confirm that the labor market has tightened significantly, with manufacturers increasing employment by a rather robust 19,000 per month on average since the end of 2016. That is quite a turnaround from the sluggish job growth experienced in 2016, and it is a sign that firms have continued to accelerate their hiring as the economic outlook has strengthened and demand and production have improved considerably.

U.S. Economy Adds 164,000 Jobs In April, Unemployment Ticks Down To 17-Year Low​

 

[LoneLaugher]

Trump woke up today and someone told him that the UE rate “broke 4”. He had no idea.

 

[expat_panama]

...from 2009 to 2016 we had both millions losing their jobs and a huge drop in productivity...

...I think you are referring to the recession Obama inherited...

That's the meme going around favored especially by party hacks, in fact maybe most folks prefer to see business/economics in those terms. My situation is I have to work w/ what is whether I do or do not end up with an "is" I'm happy with. I'd like to think that's your situation too.

In this case we're looking at a employment/population ratio that was still 62% when Obama got elected and he as he took office productivity was still growing at more than 3%. By the middle of Obama's first term productivity growth plunged to near zero and the employment/pop ratio fell to 58% --a situation that lasted for years.

First we see what is; later we can guess about the "why".

 

[McRocket]

It serves as a data point to you just fine.

But as a measurement of unemployment...it is a joke.

What are your specific objections and what exactly are you claiming makes it a hoax? I find it interesting that you haven’t said.

Plus, it makes everything seem MUCH better than it really is.

It is a measure of the percent of available labor that is not being used. That’s it. So what do you mean by “everything?”

Which is EXACTLY why Congress agreed to change it back in the 1990's. The employment-population ratio is a FAR better barometer.

Before 1994, a person who had benn hired and woul start work within the next 4 weeks was classified as unemployed even if there was no job search activity in the previous 4 weeks. That exception was removed and that was the ONLY change to the definition of unemployment. I rather doubt that had any effect on the rate.

The employment-population ratio measures the percent of the adult civilian non-institutional population. It is heavily affected by demographic changes, so I’m not sure what you think it’s a better barometer of.

Even the Fed has stopped using it as THE metric for employment.

Untrue. The Fed stopped setting unemployment goals, but the U-3 is still the rate they use.

I am not wasting my time with a closed-minded, ex-BLS (claiming), bureaucrat loser who gets his kicks on going around chat forums and trying to a) make himself feel more important by pointing out tiny minutia about his (supposed) ex-workplace; and b) has a totally and completely closed mind that the BLS is nothing but a wonderful organization....even though it is a terrible government agency that perpetuates lies and misinformation.

Welcome to my Ignore list...again.

 

[Roudy]

Good news for America. Lowest since 2000.

160k new jobs. Good news.

Happy Friday!

But but but...RUSSIA!!

 

[pinqy]

It serves as a data point to you just fine.

But as a measurement of unemployment...it is a joke.

What are your specific objections and what exactly are you claiming makes it a hoax? I find it interesting that you haven’t said.

Plus, it makes everything seem MUCH better than it really is.

It is a measure of the percent of available labor that is not being used. That’s it. So what do you mean by “everything?”

Which is EXACTLY why Congress agreed to change it back in the 1990's. The employment-population ratio is a FAR better barometer.

Before 1994, a person who had benn hired and woul start work within the next 4 weeks was classified as unemployed even if there was no job search activity in the previous 4 weeks. That exception was removed and that was the ONLY change to the definition of unemployment. I rather doubt that had any effect on the rate.

The employment-population ratio measures the percent of the adult civilian non-institutional population. It is heavily affected by demographic changes, so I’m not sure what you think it’s a better barometer of.

Even the Fed has stopped using it as THE metric for employment.

Untrue. The Fed stopped setting unemployment goals, but the U-3 is still the rate they use.

I am not wasting my time with a closed-minded, ex-BLS (claiming), bureaucrat loser who gets his kicks on going around chat forums and trying to a) make himself feel more important by pointing out tiny minutia about his (supposed) ex-workplace; and b) has a totally and completely closed mind that the BLS is nothing but a wonderful organization....even though it is a terrible government agency that perpetuates lies and misinformation.

Welcome to my Ignore list...again.

Hmmm you joined only a month ago. But I recignize your posting. Why did you get banned from the other board? I never heard.

For everyone else: note that he presented no facts or explanations.

 

[expat_panama]

We just got a tax cut.

Right. Mac & I were talking about trends over long periods of time but you're absolutely right about the impact of the tax cut--

--note how both wages and total comp went up (w/ the corp tax cut) but wages jumped more (w/ the income tax cut).

 

[Brain357]

According to trump the unemployment rate is really much higher.

 

[expat_panama]

The Black man is better than an Orange Man. Facts Matter!

True, the umemployment rate did in fact drop a lot more --after it soared into double digits in during the first year your faction's leader ran things. Still, by looking at the very beginning to the very end he still showed a 3% drop --not bad.

My concern goes beyond just looking at the beginning and the end points in time, but rather the entire eight years between: