BIG EMPLOYMENT GAIN … BUT IS IT ALL ABOUT HIKING INTEREST RATES?
Just when it appeared the U.S. economy was hanging on by the thinnest of threads, along comes the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) to announce an unexpectedly huge spike in jobs.
According to the agency’s latest data (.pdf here), total non-farm payroll employment surged by a whopping 271,000 in October – well above the projected gain of 184,000. That’s the highest monthly employment increase since last December. Job gains from August and September were also revised upward – adding 12,000 new positions.
That’s a markedly different picture of the economy from what the BLS reported last month – when jobs underperformed.
Want more good news? There was real wage growth last month. Hourly and weekly earnings both ticked up – with average hourly earnings posting their biggest gain since 2009.
The bad news? A total of 94.5 million working age Americans remain out of the labor force – although that number that dipped by 100,000 from last month. Still, the nation’s labor participation rate remained stuck at an abysmal 62.4 percent.
Overall, though, the data was much better than anyone expected … although that leads to a troubling question: Did the economy really turn around this much from September to October?
Or – as many suspect – is this data more about the Federal Reserve wanting to raise interest rates in December?
“If there was any doubt if the Fed would hike rates in December, it is gone now,” the website Zero Hedge opined.
The secretive central bank hasn’t raised the cost of borrowing since 2006. In fact interest rates have been at or near zero since December 2008, when they were slashed in an effort to stimulate the economy. Those cuts mean rates for a typical 30-year mortgage on a home are roughly 4 percent – compared to pre-recession levels of 6-7 percent.
Raising the cost of borrowing will make it even harder for millennials to move out of their parents’ homes …
61 comments
From CNBC:
The labor force participation rate remained at a generational low of 62.4 percent, though the decline in the total labor force slowed a bit. There were 97,000 fewer Americans counted as not in the labor force, a number that remains at record highs at 94.5 million.
Big deal you idiot. That narrative has been debunked for over a year. Gains in college students, stay at home Mom’s, early retirees. God, you’re like a regurgitation of Breitbart every day. Why don’t you just go out and get a life. In the meantime, 5% unemployment, rising wages, falling numbers on food stamps, uninsured rate down to 9% (nearly half of the rate during the Bush years) – all this great news for America and you say it sucks for you. Clue – move!!!!! Panama is nice.
What do you have against Panama?
It’s fueled with cartel cash. As a frequent visitor to Latin America – I try and stay away from areas with cartel cash. It usually is accompanied with guys with automatic weapons. But I’d love Tango to move there since he thinks America sucks so bad.
i think he should go to Somalia and tighten up all the blacks, he has all the answers for them
“…falling numbers on food stamps…”
Yeah, they’re falling – though they have to fall by almost 20,000,000 users to get back to 2008 levels. I don’t think I’d claim that as a victory. http://www.solitudecanyon.com/resources/snap%20participation%20rate.jpg
We just went through the worst recession since the great depression. Some even say it should have been called a depression. How long should it take for people to recover from that? The economy is coming back. The higher poverty rates caused by the recession are beginning to drop.
“Worst Recession since the Great Depression” sounds good – but it ain’t so.
1980-81 Recession lasted as long and had higher unemployment
1937-38 Recession lasted longer and had double the unemployment
However, it might be said, that the 1980 recession did not have the threat to Capital markets as this one had, and we were not forced to recapitalize the banks.
We weren’t forced to do a damn thing, we chose to do it and it was probably a mistake.
No, we did it to tame inflation. Unfortunately, we kept them up too long.
Well, we didn’t get from Normandy to the Rhine over night either.
No, it took exactly 274 days.
I need to switch out my “daily” reading material – had the D-Day story around too long. Need to move back to Citizen Soldiers.
It really doesn’t surprise me that food stamp usage is still high. Its a lagging indicator. It follows the poverty rate which your own chart shows skyrocketed during the Bush years. As the poverty rate comes down, food stamp usage will fall.
Might want to take a second look at that chart
“…uninsured rate down to 9% (nearly half of the rate during the Bush years)…”
Patently demonstrably false and ignores the fact that the rates went as high as 18% in 2013 before the fines kicked in. Wonder what will happen when the coops fail?
http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/1-ppp0dw-koqxiy_iobspg.png
except your chart is outdated, it has dropped in the last 3 quarters to what the Squirrel has posted, this is from Forbes.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2015/08/12/for-first-time-americas-uninsured-rate-is-below-10/
The graph I posted shows that trend and that’s not the point – the point is it went significantly up during Obamacare’s roll out. The rate of uninsureds during the bush years was in the 15-16% range – not 18% http://www.cbpp.org/research/the-number-of-uninsured-americans-continued-to-rise-in-2004
Argue with this chart showing the great news of the last 8 years: http://s23.postimg.org/6e6ssyc2z/poverty.jpg
The Squirrel?!?! I’m chuckling at that one.
ok, The Man from S.Q.U.I.R.R.E.L.
Rocky – damnit!!!!
Actually Colonel I was looking at that yesterday – close. It was really in the 16 to 17 range.
Never topped 16.0%
I don’t have the graph I looked at yesterday at my finger-tips but it ran from like 16.1 to 17.2 depending on the year, averaged around 16.3. But OK, we can say it was 15% and we have a 40% improvement.
what i am seeing is constant rise from 2000 then a spike starting in 2006 with Obama inheriting a skyrocketing spike in 2008, in 2010 we turned the corner and things have been improving since. having a military background i would think you could interpret the intel a little better.
What you are seeing is a trend that has remained stagnant for 5 years because of the policies of this administration. “Bush’s Recession” might account for 1 to 1.5% of the increase. Obama owns all of the rest of the 1.5-2% increase and the current stagnant situation.
stagnant would be a straight line, we both know that
No – you may “know that” but you’re wrong.
stag·nant
?sta?n?nt/
adjective
(of a body of water or the atmosphere of a confined space) having no current or flow and often having an unpleasant smell as a consequence.
“a stagnant ditch”
synonyms:still, motionless, static, stationary, standing, dead, slack; More
showing no activity; dull and sluggish.
“a stagnant economy”
synonyms:inactive, sluggish, slow-moving, lethargic, static, flat, depressed,declining, moribund, dying, dead, dormant
“a stagnant economy”
now we are talking interpretation subjective not the raw numbers facts.
Come on – really?!? Less than half a percentage point over 5 years when the previous 5 moved by almost three and the chart shows a fairly consistent movement.
in what direction?
What do you think should have been done instead, policy wise? And what specifically, what policies are you thinking of with this comment?
In leadership class, I hope your or your staff are teaching students about the leadership skill that involves not allowing people to just “pitch the bitch” (complain) and then stand back, play “drop a bomb and run” or how to deal with subordinates who want to drop monkeys (problems) on your desk then walk away. The simple technique involves invoking the rule that you don’t get to pitch the bitch unless it is followed by “so I recommend that…” I say this because this this thread, like so many, has a great array of complaints and claims, but nothing constructive in terms of solutions and viable alternatives.
I guess i don’t see your point on that last chart. Even you would have to concede that compared to the Bush years the last 8 years look pretty damn good.
So you think poverty rates at a 20+ year high, sustained for almost five years is good?
No I think falling poverty rates are much better than rapidly escalating poverty rates. Bush drove poverty rates through the roof. At least now they are coming down.
Apparently you don’t know how to read the graph. Under Bush, the poverty rate never exceeded 12.7% it did climb initially by a point or so but was headed down by the end of his second term until the recession started under the Democrat Congress. Under Obama, it shot up above 15% and stayed there until the Republican Congress took over when it marginally began then minimal decline we’ve seen.
Spending money we don’t have drives the poverty rate.
You mean like 2 unfunded wars, massive tax cuts in time of war, and an unfunded Medicare part D? That kind of credit card spending?
Yep, that kind, and in the last seven years we’ve doubled the amount of the balance on our credit card – even though our current White House occupant said this in 2006: “…The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is ‘‘trillion’’ with a ‘‘T.’’ That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion…”
You are going to have to sue a sharper pen or knife to break down these budget issues. Too broad a brush, Fort example, in 2014 non -defense discretionary spending was under 17% budget. And how about the impact of reduced revenues due to the recession? Important omission. A
Revenue was up from 2012-2014 over revenue during the Bush years.
Where did you get that quote? I ask because it would seem the source would be highly partisan and it would be important to know that, kinda like who is doing the funding of certain studies. And, since in it you have entered the land of truthiness, let’s go there together: Obama; great President, or greatest President?
I try very hard not to write bovine excreta: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/debtlimit.asp
Unless I’m doing it in purpose…
So is your statement patently demonstrably false and ignoring facts? Most Republicans do that anyway. Its a side effect of excessive Fox usage.
What do you recommend?
Getting a life would require him to get out of his house and get a job. Then he would lose his welfare and Medicaid.
Like I said: I’m just showing you there is poison in the Kool-Aid. I know that won’t stop you from gulping it down…
Fortunately, the voters have figured it out…and the GOP will run an alternative to your misery and failure…this time. Sucks to be you…LMAO…
The Baby Boom generation has already ‘baked in’ a continual drop in labor participation for several years now, and that will continue for at least the next decade.
Is that why there are 100 applicants for every job. And why the number of college graduates living w/ parents is at the highest level in history?
Your numbers are for fools…go peddle that Bullshit to the ignorant. They are the only ones who will buy it.
“Is that why there are 100 applicants for every job. ”
If true then a lot of them already have jobs or are applying for 50 jobs at a time.
See fifth chart and paragraph above it.
The puppet masters know who the ignorant drones are. I live in the real world. I know what people are ACTUALLY experiencing.
You read what they tell you to form your opinion..That’s why Obama, liar and danger that he is, is in office.
That’s called the U-6 Jobs Report.
The real one,
The BS U-3 is the one the Obama Administration is hyping.
That doesn’t make sense. Janet Yellen can change rates when she wishes. She doesn’t run the DOL and she has discussed raising rates for a year. She wants data to support raising rates. Why would she want cooked numbers that would make raising rates bad for the economy?
would you find it more believable if the economy was tanking?
No. The economy rarely tanks before it has recovered. 2014 had more improvement than 2015, but it’s still improving.
?
OBAMA’s U-3 Report things getting much better.
REAL JOBS REPORT U-6: unemployment rate 9.8%.
Not getting any better.
“Smoke and Mirrors” economy.
Ok, while we were “gaining” those jobs, how many did we lose?
A skirt showing some legs with the word “hiking” in the subtitle… as close to the old FITS as we’re ever going to get!
And you want a Teabagger in office so they can cut wages……Lol. Cater to the Kochs..