August Jobs Report

#4
#4
There's much more that goes into than that. Including people actively seeking work.
 
#5
#5
HSVol said:
There's much more that goes into than that. Including people actively seeking work.
Click to expand...

I understand the PC formula bs, but there is no way that we added almost no jobs and didn't see an uptick in unemployment. The revision will clearly show it.
 
#6
#6
I haven't seen the full report, but if payrolls were flat, it's very plausible that there would be no movement in the UE rate. I haven't seen anything that states we shed jobs.

Even if we lost 10k, it's likely the rate wouldn't move.
 
#7
#7
We have a low population growth but we still add workers every month/year. I forget the total but a certain number of jobs must be added monthly just to keep pace with population growth... IIRC, that number has not been hit during Obama's tenure.

The very real concern is that Obama's policies have actually destroyed jobs. His policies have or threaten to increase operating costs significantly. Under that threat, jobs are either permanently deleted or else shipped to foreign countries.

His policies have tilted the economics of moving jobs away. There is a cost associated with moving to another location and even greater cost to moving out of the country. If the cost of doing business here exceeds or threatens to exceed the cost of doing business elsewhere... then companies move operations... like Obama's "jobs czar's" company (GE) did just a few weeks ago.

Obama now IS the problem with job growth. The Dems would do the nation a great service by running and supporting a challenger that was more pro-business like Clinton... who didn't have a deep seeded hatred of the golden goose.
 
#8
#8
HSVol said:
There's much more that goes into than that. Including people actively seeking work.
Click to expand...

Having a hard time here. So if you are unemployed, but not seeking a job your not considered unemployed?
 
#9
#9
HSVol said:
I haven't seen the full report, but if payrolls were flat, it's very plausible that there would be no movement in the UE rate. I haven't seen anything that states we shed jobs.

Even if we lost 10k, it's likely the rate wouldn't move.
Click to expand...

10k? Are you serious?
 
#12
#12
BTW, there's no way that the "real" unemployment/underemployment rate didn't rise based on the released facts. It is likely that a large number are beginning to have their unemployment run out. I have run across several lately looking for jobs. They can no longer wait to make the $20-$30 per hour they were making before. They're applying for $10 jobs.
 
#14
#14
sjt18 said:
BTW, there's no way that the "real" unemployment/underemployment rate didn't rise based on the released facts.
Click to expand...

Probably a good thing the Labor Dept doesn't report on the "real" unemployment rate or underemployment rate.
 
#15
#15
BeecherVol said:
Having a hard time here. So if you are unemployed, but not seeking a job your not considered unemployed?
Click to expand...

It is the same kind of bogus calculation that allows gov't to call a 6% spending increase a budget cut.
 
#17
#17
BigPapaVol said:
we shed a helluva lot more than 10K jobs on a monthly basis.
Click to expand...

Just because people are laid off doesn't mean there's zero hiring. People are hired every day. This month's report indicates* that the hirings and layoffs were in lock-step.

*Not necessarily 100% accurate
 
#20
#20
BeecherVol said:
I see, so the govt is paying you to quit.
Click to expand...

I need to brush up on the conditions of receiving unemployment, but my understanding is that you have to be registered as unemployed, terminated through no fault of your own (laid off, not fired or quit), and actively seeking work.

Could be wrong, but that's how I think it works. That's the way it's supposed to work, anyway.
 
#21
#21
I wonder if we are going to get to see the amount of government or private/government contracted jobs lost when budget cuts kick in. I know a lot of people in Oak Ridge working for private firms performing gov't contracts.
 
#22
#22
HSVol said:
I need to brush up on the conditions of receiving unemployment, but my understanding is that you have to be registered as unemployed, terminated through no fault of your own (laid off, not fired or quit), and actively seeking work.

Could be wrong, but that's how I think it works. That's the way it's supposed to work, anyway.
Click to expand...

Key phrase.
 
#23
#23
I thought I heard yesterday on Bloomberg some discussion of the Verizon strike having something to do with these numbers being out of whack. Can't remember whether it was out of whack good or out of whack bad.
 
#24
#24
lawgator1 said:
I thought I heard yesterday on Bloomberg some discussion of the Verizon strike having something to do with these numbers being out of whack. Can't remember whether it was out of whack good or out of whack bad.
Click to expand...

the comment was that the two previous reports including the striking effect but they are back to work so it wouldn't impact this report.

the net is that what may have looked like a reduction in first time filers was really not a reduction if you don't include the Verizon impact (e.g. previous two numbers were inflated by the strike and without that impact the trend would be flat).
 
#25
#25
volinbham said:
the comment was that the two previous reports including the striking effect but they are back to work so it wouldn't impact this report.

the net is that what may have looked like a reduction in first time filers was really not a reduction if you don't include the Verizon impact (e.g. previous two numbers were inflated by the strike and without that impact the trend would be flat).
Click to expand...

okay, thanks
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top