300,000 new jobs - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Food Eater Lad · 11-07-2003, 09:00 PM

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...d=668&ncid=716

Quote:

By LEIGH STROPE, AP Labor Writer

WASHINGTON - The economy has created nearly 300,000 new jobs in the past three months after a half-year drought, pushing unemployment down to 6 percent in October and leaving little doubt that the jobs market is bouncing back.

AP Photo

Related Quotes
JHF
DJIA
NASDAQ
^SPC
35.41
9809.79
1970.74
1053.21
+0.17
-47.18
-5.63
-4.84

delayed 20 mins - disclaimer
Quote Data provided by Reuters

The Labor Department (news - web sites) reported Friday that payrolls grew by 126,000 last month, many more than economists had predicted. That followed a revised 125,000 new jobs in September, more than double what initially was reported. U.S. companies added 35,000 to their payrolls in August.

October's job gains were in a range of service industries, including temporary employment, health care, social work, education, retail, leisure and hospitality, law and accounting.

"We can finally put the nail in the coffin of the jobless recovery," said Ken Mayland, president of ClearView Economics. "We are back on a rising job track."

But many of the new jobs were part-time or in low-paying industries, causing some economists to temper their enthusiasm over Friday's report. Still, the unemployment rate's decline to a six-month low — from the standstill 6.1 percent of the previous three months — buoyed Wall Street.

Stocks advanced on the better-than-expected employment report. The Dow Jones industrial average was up 16 points and the Nasdaq gained almost 13 points in midday trading.

The jobs market has been a weak link in the recovery, with companies hesitant to hire new, full-time workers out of concern that the improvements wouldn't last.

"I think we've finally shifted from jobless recovery to sustained expansion," said Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services Inc. The report is "the one we've been waiting for, providing unambiguous good news about the labor market."

The improvement could benefit President Bush (news - web sites)'s re-election effort. Democrats had hoped to use the lack of new jobs as a political issue to win back the White House next year.

"The economy continues to grow and jobs are being created. It's another positive sign for America's workers and families," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. "But we cannot be complacent."

For many jobseekers, the employment outlook still isn't rosy.

The new jobs added last month mostly were in lower-paying industries such as retail and temporary employment firms. Average weekly earnings in those sectors are $366 and $318 respectively, said John A. Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray and Christmas, an employment research and recruiting firm. The national average is $521 per week.

Also, 1.4 million workers were only able to find part-time work, up 27 percent from a year ago. To make ends meet, 7.5 million Americans worked two or more jobs last month, up from 7.3 million a year ago.

One of four people out of work were unemployed for 27 weeks or longer last month. Nearly half of those were white-collar workers in management, professional, sales and office jobs, Challenger said.

The hard-hit manufacturing sector continued to shed jobs in October, losing 24,000. It was the 37th consecutive month of declines, though the pace has slowed considerably.

For blacks, the jobless rate climbed three-tenths of a percentage point last month to 11.5 percent. The rate fell for whites, Hispanics, Asians, men and women.

"It's quite alarming that the Bush administration is celebrating ... a very, very minuscule decrease in the overall unemployment rate while African-Americans are still standing in the unemployment line," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus (news - web sites).

"I see nothing to celebrate in these numbers," he said.

A Democrat-led effort in the GOP-controlled Congress to pass another extension of unemployment benefits probably will fail, Cummings said.

Federal Reserve (news - web sites) Chairman Alan Greenspan (news - web sites) struck an optimistic tone about the employment outlook in a Thursday speech to the Securities Industry Association, saying hiring was expected to rebound.

The Fed has left a key short-term interest rate it controls at a 45-year low of 1 percent, and Greenspan repeated assurances that the central bank will not feel the need to quickly start raising interest rates at the first signs of economic growth.

October's employment report is a positive prelude to the holiday season, economists said. Consumer confidence should spike, making shoppers more willing to open their wallets. That will help reduce business inventory and lead to more new jobs.

With this news and the fact that 29 states have or just elected republican governors, some of which had been strictly democrat for years, shows that Bush will most likely be your president again come 04.

Phaenx · 11-07-2003, 09:11 PM

Yeah, I think the Dems are boned this year. Glad to see the cycle still comes as reliably as ever.

Food Eater Lad · 11-07-2003, 09:25 PM

I thought CLinton was the only dem that got boned?

Simmer down, it was a joke.

seretogis · 11-07-2003, 09:45 PM

Quote:

"I see nothing to celebrate in these numbers," he said.

Haha, I bet he doesn't. If it's not politically beneficial to him, no one else should be able to make a living, right?

mml · 11-07-2003, 11:16 PM

As an American, and someone who needs a job, I am very happy that things are looking up. Does it mean that Bush we get four more years, no, but it does help. I always felt that regardless of whether it was Bush or Gore we were looking at a one term president. I still think that the nation is split almost 50-50 and that if the Dems produce a serious candidate they could still win. But yes, it is getting more and more difficult.

Phaenx · 11-07-2003, 11:42 PM

I think Dean will win the democratic nomination, and he looks like a walking penis (or has like a badger in his ass or something). Things aren't looking up for them now, they weren't looking up for them before. They're boned.

Ustwo · 11-08-2003, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Phaenx
I think Dean will win the democratic nomination, and he looks like a walking penis (or has like a badger in his ass or something). Things aren't looking up for them now, they weren't looking up for them before. They're boned.

Yea they are boned, BUT I still wonder if they boned themselves on purpose. (They being the DNC leadership) When Bush gave his 9/11/01 speech Hilary Clinton saw her aspirations for 2004 take a nosedive. (Remembers those looks on her face?) The last thing she would want is a democrat to win in 2004, she is not for the party, she is for herself, and losing to Bush isn't going to help her much. On the other hand 2008 where the Republican is still unknown (run Rice run) she would have a much better chance, and making SURE no other Democrat could win in 2004 would be a must.

onetime2 · 11-08-2003, 05:08 AM

It's still early in the election, a lot can happen. I don't believe Bush is unbeatable but the Dems have to get a cohesive story together that isn't just a bunch of criticism of the President. They need to narrow the field quickly and quit hacking each other off at the knees.

So far Bush has the right strategy, he's publicly focused on running the country and privately focused on the campaign. What those that keep posting about how polls show the nation is evenly divided on Bush don't seem to grasp is that he hasn't started campaigning yet.

There's still a long way to go with the economy and there are risks. Not the least of which is inflation/deflation (Personally, I see a bigger risk in inflation than deflation but that's another topic altogether).

Sparhawk · 11-08-2003, 06:16 AM

Before y'all start doing your happy dance, I just wanted to remind you that we're still 2.4 million jobs away from what we had at the end of Clinton's term. And we're still bleeding jobs in the manufacturing sector.

Cheers to the 300,000 homies who found jobs last quarter!

onetime2 · 11-08-2003, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sparhawk
Before y'all start doing your happy dance, I just wanted to remind you that we're still 2.4 million jobs away from what we had at the end of Clinton's term. And we're still bleeding jobs in the manufacturing sector.

Cheers to the 300,000 homies who found jobs last quarter!

Of course productivity is a hell of a lot higher than it was at the end of Clinton's term. This, of course, means fewer people are required to produce the same amount of goods.

mml · 11-08-2003, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
It's still early in the election, a lot can happen. I don't believe Bush is unbeatable but the Dems have to get a cohesive story together that isn't just a bunch of criticism of the President. They need to narrow the field quickly and quit hacking each other off at the knees.

You are absolutely correct. If the Dems could get it down to even three or four candidates it would be a HUGE improvement.

MuadDib · 11-08-2003, 09:30 PM

First, these jobs are mostly in the service sector. Manufacturing jobs are still going down the drain. Second, its the holiday season. There is always a jump in jobs this time of year. Third, there was a similar jump to this last year at exactly this time and it went the way of the dinosaur. Fourth, 2.4 million more to go before we are back at square one.

I'm not saying that the economy is not going to recover nor that this might not be the start of that recovery. However, the highly political election cycle starting has got everyone jumping the gun on issues like this. A sudden surge (especially this time a year) means nothing. However, it is a good sign that this year followed normal annual trends in the job market. That being said it could be taken as an indicator of a return to normal affairs which could imply that the down turn is over. Ultimately, I am glad many Americans are returning to work but we have a long way to go to get the rest of the recently unemployed back to work AND at the same level of pay they were receiving in the Clinton years. Whats more, there is no sign that Bush's tax cuts had anything to do with this beyond the most simplistic of conjecture. I find it very humorous to see the same people that touted the 10 year doctrine for economic change now trying to credit this recent upturn to a year old policy.

onetime2 · 11-09-2003, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MuadDib

Ultimately, I am glad many Americans are returning to work but we have a long way to go to get the rest of the recently unemployed back to work AND at the same level of pay they were receiving in the Clinton years.

Whats more, there is no sign that Bush's tax cuts had anything to do with this beyond the most simplistic of conjecture. I find it very humorous to see the same people that touted the 10 year doctrine for economic change now trying to credit this recent upturn to a year old policy.

Clinton pay levels should not be a goal. It could be argued that the pay/benefit levels that were so easily thrown about by companies while unemployment was low and the economy was booming amplified the unemployment situation and made companies slower to rehire.

As far as the tax cuts, I agree they are not the main driver but when one party screams that the tax cuts are the cause of the slowed economy, the one responsible for the tax cuts must equally scream that they are responsible for the upturn. That's just what happens when an issue gets politicized like that with an upcoming election.

Johnny Rotten · 11-09-2003, 09:18 PM

Okay, so 300,000 new jobs in the past three months. But how many people lost their jobs in that same time frame? This number has apparently been buried. I haven't read a single article on the story that took the cumulative numbers into account. I suspect this number is not insignificant.

Add to that the fact that the new jobs are low-paying and temporary and part-time (sounds mostly to be holiday season work to me) and I don't understand the widespread good cheer I've seen in the press.

Mojo_PeiPei · 11-09-2003, 09:25 PM

Unemployment is not THAT bad. These new jobs brought us down to an even 6%. In the eighties it was double that. The problem is a lot of jobs were lost in the technology and manufactering areas, also fucking asshole bitches ship out America jobs to increase profits. As technology improves this will continue to happen, why pay people to do it when machines can do it cheaper and more efficently?

Johnny Rotten I hear what your saying about the new jobs. What I percieve to be the good signs behind it is that with more people in the work force (even if it is low paying or part time), people will be making money again and be spending it. That in turn will hopefully open the door for more full time and part time jobs.

aceventura3 · 11-10-2003, 10:48 AM

"Okay, so 300,000 new jobs in the past three months. But how many people lost their jobs in that same time frame? This number has apparently been buried. I haven't read a single article on the story that took the cumulative numbers into account. I suspect this number is not insignificant.

Add to that the fact that the new jobs are low-paying and temporary and part-time (sounds mostly to be holiday season work to me) and I don't understand the widespread good cheer I've seen in the press."

Anyone who wants to work can find work. When people are unemployed it is usually because they are receiving unemployment compensation, severence packages, or just living off of savings. If they really needed to go to work they would. Also, these official numbers don't take into account the "underground" economy. Do you think a skilled carpenter would ever have to be unemployed unless he wanted to be?

mml · 11-10-2003, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by aceventura3

Anyone who wants to work can find work. When people are unemployed it is usually because they are receiving unemployment compensation, severence packages, or just living off of savings. If they really needed to go to work they would. Also, these official numbers don't take into account the "underground" economy. Do you think a skilled carpenter would ever have to be unemployed unless he wanted to be?

This is a very simplistic way of looking at the job market. I am not sure where you live, but many manufacturing plants are located in smaller towns and when there are layoffs, there are not other jobs to be picked up. Also, in larger cities, while other jobs may be available, underemployment can be a problem. Yes, it is better to take a job a McDonalds than to not work at all, but it can damage your ability to get a job commensurate with your pervious employment and interfere with your ability to interview for employment that may be more appropriate to your skill level.

The news of an increase in jobs is good, but it is not the whole story. Let's hope that the trend continues and leads to a resurgence of the U.S. economy.

Rodney · 11-10-2003, 06:55 PM

Well, according to what I've read the economy needs 2 million jobs a year just to absorb new workers. We're not there yet, and it's uncertain whether we _will_ get there.

If the number of jobs continues to increase slower than the workforce, there'll still be big trouble. And if the newly created jobs are of lower quality, pay, and benes than the manufacturing jobs and tech jobs that are going offshore, the newly employed still will not feel particularly happy.

nirol · 11-10-2003, 07:22 PM

1) Manufacturing jobs have been declining since the 50s as a percentage of the work force, as have agricultural jobs. Service jobs have always been increasing, but that is a very broad sector definition.
2) In a recovery, employment lags other indicators. The cost of employing people is very expensive and often the new workers do not contribute enough to justify what they cost. THis makes employers reticent to hire until certain that they will profit from the new labor. They delay the new hiring through temp services, contract labor, and overtime. They also put more work on existing employees, hence the productivity gains. These will ebb as more are employed.

11-07-2003, 09:11 PM	#2 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	Yeah, I think the Dems are boned this year. Glad to see the cycle still comes as reliably as ever. __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

11-07-2003, 11:16 PM	#5 (permalink)
mml Adrift Location: Wandering in the Desert of Life	As an American, and someone who needs a job, I am very happy that things are looking up. Does it mean that Bush we get four more years, no, but it does help. I always felt that regardless of whether it was Bush or Gore we were looking at a one term president. I still think that the nation is split almost 50-50 and that if the Dems produce a serious candidate they could still win. But yes, it is getting more and more difficult. __________________ Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." -Douglas Adams

11-07-2003, 11:42 PM	#6 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	I think Dean will win the democratic nomination, and he looks like a walking penis (or has like a badger in his ass or something). Things aren't looking up for them now, they weren't looking up for them before. They're boned. __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

11-08-2003, 05:08 AM	#8 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	It's still early in the election, a lot can happen. I don't believe Bush is unbeatable but the Dems have to get a cohesive story together that isn't just a bunch of criticism of the President. They need to narrow the field quickly and quit hacking each other off at the knees. So far Bush has the right strategy, he's publicly focused on running the country and privately focused on the campaign. What those that keep posting about how polls show the nation is evenly divided on Bush don't seem to grasp is that he hasn't started campaigning yet. There's still a long way to go with the economy and there are risks. Not the least of which is inflation/deflation (Personally, I see a bigger risk in inflation than deflation but that's another topic altogether). __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

11-08-2003, 06:16 AM	#9 (permalink)
Sparhawk Dubya Location: VA	Before y'all start doing your happy dance, I just wanted to remind you that we're still 2.4 million jobs away from what we had at the end of Clinton's term. And we're still bleeding jobs in the manufacturing sector. Cheers to the 300,000 homies who found jobs last quarter! __________________ "In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

11-07-2003, 09:25 PM	#3 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	I thought CLinton was the only dem that got boned? Simmer down, it was a joke.

11-08-2003, 09:30 PM	#12 (permalink)
MuadDib Psycho	First, these jobs are mostly in the service sector. Manufacturing jobs are still going down the drain. Second, its the holiday season. There is always a jump in jobs this time of year. Third, there was a similar jump to this last year at exactly this time and it went the way of the dinosaur. Fourth, 2.4 million more to go before we are back at square one. I'm not saying that the economy is not going to recover nor that this might not be the start of that recovery. However, the highly political election cycle starting has got everyone jumping the gun on issues like this. A sudden surge (especially this time a year) means nothing. However, it is a good sign that this year followed normal annual trends in the job market. That being said it could be taken as an indicator of a return to normal affairs which could imply that the down turn is over. Ultimately, I am glad many Americans are returning to work but we have a long way to go to get the rest of the recently unemployed back to work AND at the same level of pay they were receiving in the Clinton years. Whats more, there is no sign that Bush's tax cuts had anything to do with this beyond the most simplistic of conjecture. I find it very humorous to see the same people that touted the 10 year doctrine for economic change now trying to credit this recent upturn to a year old policy. __________________ "The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

11-09-2003, 09:18 PM	#14 (permalink)
Johnny Rotten lost and found Location: Berkeley	Okay, so 300,000 new jobs in the past three months. But how many people lost their jobs in that same time frame? This number has apparently been buried. I haven't read a single article on the story that took the cumulative numbers into account. I suspect this number is not insignificant. Add to that the fact that the new jobs are low-paying and temporary and part-time (sounds mostly to be holiday season work to me) and I don't understand the widespread good cheer I've seen in the press. __________________ "The idea that money doesn't buy you happiness is a lie put about by the rich, to stop the poor from killing them." -- Michael Caine

11-09-2003, 09:25 PM	#15 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Unemployment is not THAT bad. These new jobs brought us down to an even 6%. In the eighties it was double that. The problem is a lot of jobs were lost in the technology and manufactering areas, also fucking asshole bitches ship out America jobs to increase profits. As technology improves this will continue to happen, why pay people to do it when machines can do it cheaper and more efficently? Johnny Rotten I hear what your saying about the new jobs. What I percieve to be the good signs behind it is that with more people in the work force (even if it is low paying or part time), people will be making money again and be spending it. That in turn will hopefully open the door for more full time and part time jobs. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

11-10-2003, 10:48 AM	#16 (permalink)
aceventura3 Junkie Location: Ventura County	"Okay, so 300,000 new jobs in the past three months. But how many people lost their jobs in that same time frame? This number has apparently been buried. I haven't read a single article on the story that took the cumulative numbers into account. I suspect this number is not insignificant. Add to that the fact that the new jobs are low-paying and temporary and part-time (sounds mostly to be holiday season work to me) and I don't understand the widespread good cheer I've seen in the press." Anyone who wants to work can find work. When people are unemployed it is usually because they are receiving unemployment compensation, severence packages, or just living off of savings. If they really needed to go to work they would. Also, these official numbers don't take into account the "underground" economy. Do you think a skilled carpenter would ever have to be unemployed unless he wanted to be? __________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

11-10-2003, 06:55 PM	#18 (permalink)
Rodney Observant Ruminant Location: Rich Wannabe Hippie Town	Well, according to what I've read the economy needs 2 million jobs a year just to absorb new workers. We're not there yet, and it's uncertain whether we _will_ get there. If the number of jobs continues to increase slower than the workforce, there'll still be big trouble. And if the newly created jobs are of lower quality, pay, and benes than the manufacturing jobs and tech jobs that are going offshore, the newly employed still will not feel particularly happy.

11-10-2003, 07:22 PM	#19 (permalink)
nirol Crazy Location: South East US	1) Manufacturing jobs have been declining since the 50s as a percentage of the work force, as have agricultural jobs. Service jobs have always been increasing, but that is a very broad sector definition. 2) In a recovery, employment lags other indicators. The cost of employing people is very expensive and often the new workers do not contribute enough to justify what they cost. THis makes employers reticent to hire until certain that they will profit from the new labor. They delay the new hiring through temp services, contract labor, and overtime. They also put more work on existing employees, hence the productivity gains. These will ebb as more are employed. __________________ 'Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than open one's mouth and remove all doubt. Samuel Johnson (1709 - 1784)