Job growth continues plunge

someoneyouknow

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Posts
28,274
Only 85,000 jobs were created in August.

What's that? You saw a 130,000 figure? 25,000 jobs are one-time only census takers, i.e. government jobs. Take them out. Then take out the revised downward 20,000 jobs from June and July. Voila! 85,000 jobs. Even if you don't want to believe the 85,000 figure, consider that everyone was predicting job growth of around 170,000. Even by that standard, reality came in 23.5% lower.

Total hours worked are also slumping. Every sector has seen a contraction.

As shown in the four graphs, this supposed "great" economy is no better than Obama's, the one the con artist kept saying was horrible. As it stands now, the con artist will create fewer jobs than Obama did during the same time period and growth will be no better, either.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-creates-just-130000-new-jobs-in-august-keeping-fed-on-track-to-cut-rates-2019-09-06

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-economy-is-just-like-the-one-trump-ran-against-in-2016-except-one-thing-2019-09-06?mod=mw_latestnews

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/demand-for-labor-weakens-as-stimulus-fades-and-tariffs-rise-2019-09-06?mod=mw_latestnews
 
3.7% holding steady unemployment.

And that was Liberal news...
 
News flash, "Full Employment didn't grow last month!!!!!!!" Hard to add water to a glass that's already full.
 
Continued growth to historic highs in participation rates and historic lows in unemployment on top of an economy you claim was robust is less impressive than the rising numbers over a long span of time from a recession?

Would you have preferred stagnation?
 
No. Two and a half years in, with a new tax code in full effect and a shitty trade war that wasn't around with Obama. He owns it.

What's shitty about this trade war with China?
Are you opposed to China stealing intellectual property from U.S. industry, something Obama showed little or no interest in?
It's clear Trump should own the huge rebound in U.S. manufacturing jobs, since Obama mocked him for promising those jobs would come back. They did, in part due to the new tax code.
 
So you agree this is Trump's economy. Noted for the future.


What's shitty about this trade war with China?
Are you opposed to China stealing intellectual property from U.S. industry, something Obama showed little or no interest in?
It's clear Trump should own the huge rebound in U.S. manufacturing jobs, since Obama mocked him for promising those jobs would come back. They did, in part due to the new tax code.
 
Coal, steel, agriculture, manufacturing, residential investment, consumer sentiment are definitely all on a roll.
 
I love how the doomsayers are shrieking that the economy is stagnating because there aren't any "new jobs".

Unemployment is at record lows, there aren't many "new employees" available to fill "new jobs" because nearly everyone is "working" already.

But, instead of that, the doomsayers are gloating over a fantasy economy crash because they believe it will help defeat Trump in next year's election.

Imagine that, they want to hurt every American just so they can oust Trump from office. And they try to make it out like that's a good thing.
 
Most people work in underplayed jobs. They are always looking for higher paying jobs. Now if you look at the data, you will see there is always a drop in new hires EVERY August. Why? Because those making the decisions are on fucking vacation.
 
Most people work in underplayed jobs. They are always looking for higher paying jobs. Now if you look at the data, you will see there is always a drop in new hires EVERY August. Why? Because those making the decisions are on fucking vacation.

Don't be a killjoy.

Let someoneyouknow celebrate the good tidings of great cheer that the economy will surely implode, this time.
 
What might that portend for manufacturing growth, earnings growth, and inflation?

IF manufacturers want to expand their labor force, then they're going to need to pay higher wages in order to entice workers in other fields to switch jobs.

Higher wages across the board.

Which will result in inflation but you can't one without the other. Unless you believe in socialism.
 
IF manufacturers want to expand their labor force, then they're going to need to pay higher wages in order to entice workers in other fields to switch jobs.

Higher wages across the board.

Which will result in inflation but you can't one without the other. Unless you believe in socialism.

. . .where you get neither.
 
IF manufacturers want to expand their labor force, then they're going to need to pay higher wages in order to entice workers in other fields to switch jobs.

Higher wages across the board.

Which will result in inflation but you can't one without the other. Unless you believe in socialism.

But then who fills the positions vacated by those who were enticed away from the other fields?
 
But then who fills the positions vacated by those who were enticed away from the other fields?

Machines. Technical progress is almost always powered by labor shortages. (Remember, the plague triggered the industrial revolution.) But short term, those will be illegals of course.
 
Which will result in inflation but you can't one without the other. Unless you believe in socialism.

Ah yes, the newest excuse for why workers can't get raises but companies have no problems giving raises and higher bonuses to folks making 300% more than the average worker.

Whatever happened to "trickle down" when companies were given massive tax cuts? Seems to me people were saying these cuts would result in workers getting higher wages. How did that work out?
 
Ah yes, the newest excuse for why workers can't get raises but companies have no problems giving raises and higher bonuses to folks making 300% more than the average worker.

Whatever happened to "trickle down" when companies were given massive tax cuts? Seems to me people were saying these cuts would result in workers getting higher wages. How did that work out?

He said nothing of the sort. It was merely pointing out that you don't get the workers you need in a tight labor market unless you pay for them. Which is true. It's called basic supply and demand economics. You should try it sometime
 
I don't see the conservatives problem with rising unemployment and dropping job growth. After all, it's all the fault of (Bill) Clinton and Obama anyway.
 
He said nothing of the sort. It was merely pointing out that you don't get the workers you need in a tight labor market unless you pay for them. Which is true. It's called basic supply and demand economics. You should try it sometime

I was referring to the last statement about raising wages leads to inflation which leads to socialism.

However, since you brought it up, if the labor market is as tight as employers whine about, why aren't wages rising significantly? Since the con artist assumed the throne, wages have risen only 2.4%, which is below the rate of inflation. From June of this year:

They have increased 2.4% since Trump took office, from an average $308.21 per week to $315.74 per week in May, the most recent figures available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
. . .
During Obama’s last four years in office the average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers went up 4.9%. Over Obama’s entire two-term tenure, wages were up 4.2%.​

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/06/are-wages-rising-or-flat/

Since I entered the labor market decades ago, all I've heard is employers whine they can't find people while at the same time offering only bottom dollar wages. As you said, if employers are desperate for people they have to raise wages. Which they're not. At least not for the average worker. On the other hand, CEOs are making out like a bandit.
 
Back
Top