- Joined
- Oct 12, 2011
- Messages
- 6,902
- Reaction score
- 4,825
- Location
- Space Coast
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 252,000 in December, and the unemployment rate declined to 5.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for October was revised from +243,000 to +261,000, and the change for November was revised from +321,000 to +353,000. With these revisions, employment gains in October and November were 50,000 higher than previously reported.
Employment Situation Summary
Another strong month of gains to cap off 2014. This, in addition to the positive revisions for the previous two months make it the strongest year of job growth since 1999. While some indicators did trend down during the month, the year as a whole was an undoubtedly positive one for the US economy.
Hard to say. I like to look for local clues that support national numbers, state numbers, and even local numbers. A relative works at a place that makes outdoor buildings/garden sheds. He indicated that their orders have picked up a lot so I take that as a good sign that the local economy is picking up some steam since those are not cheap and are largely discretionary.
Employment Situation Summary
Another strong month of gains to cap off 2014. This, in addition to the positive revisions for the previous two months make it the strongest year of job growth since 1999. While some indicators did trend down during the month, the year as a whole was an undoubtedly positive one for the US economy.
Employment Situation Summary
Another strong month of gains to cap off 2014. This, in addition to the positive revisions for the previous two months make it the strongest year of job growth since 1999. While some indicators did trend down during the month, the year as a whole was an undoubtedly positive one for the US economy.
Gains. The fact that the LFPR declined in no way dictates that job creation did not occur.Gains? or a shell game....?
From your link.
"In December, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or
longer) was essentially unchanged..."
and
"The civilian labor force participation rate edged down by 0.2 percentage point
to 62.7 percent in December. Since April, the participation rate has remained
within a narrow range of 62.7 to 62.9 percent."
What you and others portray as a conspiracy is in fact an established economic trend. As seasonal positions dry up for potential job seekers, the raw and non-seasonally adjusted amount of employees declines towards the median. It's happened every year for the last decade :shrug:Another strong month?
According to the household survey:
The average hourly and weekly earnings went down.
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
The non-seasonally adjusted number of workers went DOWN by 476,000 workers?!?
Table A-9. Selected employment indicators
'What is seasonal adjustment?
Seasonal adjustment is a statistical technique that attempts to measure and remove the influences of predictable seasonal patterns to reveal how employment and unemployment change from month to month.'
What is seasonal adjustment?
So, Americans made less per hour and per week AND (removing the BLS's creative math - er - 'statistical technique') almost 1/2 a million fewer Americans were employed.
That sure is not my example of a 'strong month'.
People, always look past the headlines.
Gains. The fact that the LFPR declined in no way dictates that job creation did not occur.
I don't think that a 30 hr per week job, is a full time job.
Further, the LFPR has not been accurate for quite some time now.
Who said it was? Furthermore, full time employment (seasonally adjusted) increased by roughly 400 thousand in the past month.
That's an opinion and frankly nothing more.
Who said it was? Obama, and democrats. That's who
..And yep, it's an opinion...Mine...I believe if we ever saw the true UE numbers, there would be outrage, and backlash against the government.
Citation needed.
:roll:
Gains? or a shell game....?
From your link.
"In December, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or
longer) was essentially unchanged..."
and
"The civilian labor force participation rate edged down by 0.2 percentage point
to 62.7 percent in December. Since April, the participation rate has remained
within a narrow range of 62.7 to 62.9 percent."
I believe that Declan has a good point. For those of us who are not economists, looking to local recoveries might well be the best way to judge the health of the economy. The county in which I live in Indiana had the unfortunate distinction of having the highest unemployment rate in the country at one point, topping out around 20.2 percent. Today, the unemployment rate here is 5.3 percent. I live in a manufacturing county, the "RV capital of the world" some call it. With the return of the RV industry, I think its safe to say that we are on a healthy rebound, and there isn't much to complain about here compared to what it used to be. Granted this isn't the same for everywhere else, but it certainly does represent a forceful economic upturn.
Citation?
The health insurance law said employees who work 30 hours a week must be considered “full-time” and must be offered health insurance by employers covered by the law.
Read more here: Definition of
First liberal progressives said to us, 'we don't need manufacturing, we will become a service based society in a global market place.' and we listened, now liberal progressives say that 'we don't need to work 40 hours, it should be 30' and you say you know nothing of it? Really? liberal progressives are killing this country.
The Labor Force Participation Rate is a nice number, but its change is not necessarily indicative of economic health. People often leave the Labor Force because they do not NEED to work (retire, go to school, become stay-at-home moms, start a business). The PPACA unbundled healthcare from employment, allowing people to cut the tether to jobs they did not want only to have the benefits they needed. An increasing LFPR can, in some circumstances, support the notion the economy is improving...
Unfortunately, all of the Cons predictions about our economic future levied in 2008 and 2012 have been proven to be wrong, so all they are left with is argue that underlying data wrong. Its a weak argument, but we all appreciate the fact that it is rapidly becoming their only argument.
Yeah, I've heard that argument before, however when asked to quantify, and back up that the Participation rate is due to Retirees, and people going back to school, I get crickets, so I am not buyin' it at the moment....
For decades, the retirement of the baby boom generation has been a looming economic threat. Now, it’s no longer looming — it’s here. Every month, more than a quarter-million Americans turn 65. That’s a trend with profound economic consequences. Simply put, retirees don’t contribute as much to the economy as workers do. They don’t produce anything, at least directly. They don’t spend as much on average. And they’re much more likely to depend on others — the government or their own children, most often — than to support themselves.
I believe that Declan has a good point. For those of us who are not economists, looking to local recoveries might well be the best way to judge the health of the economy. The county in which I live in Indiana had the unfortunate distinction of having the highest unemployment rate in the country at one point, topping out around 20.2 percent. Today, the unemployment rate here is 5.3 percent. I live in a manufacturing county, the "RV capital of the world" some call it. With the return of the RV industry, I think its safe to say that we are on a healthy rebound, and there isn't much to complain about here compared to what it used to be. Granted this isn't the same for everywhere else, but it certainly does represent a forceful economic upturn.
Every month more a quarter of a million Americans turn 65.
That equals over 3 million a year.
From a May 2014 article
What Baby Boomers’ Retirement Means For the U.S. Economy | FiveThirtyEight
What? Almost five years of job growth demonstrating that left wing economics work after right wing economics tanked the economy? Say it ain't so!
What? Almost five years of job growth demonstrating that left wing economics work after right wing economics tanked the economy? Say it ain't so!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?