July jobs report: 209,000 jobs added, jobless rate 6.2%

posted at 11:21 am on August 1, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

The US economy added fewer jobs in July than in the previous three months, and the unemployment rate ticked up slightly, although job creation still outpaced population growth. The addition of 209,000 jobs is the lowest level since March, while the slight change in the jobless rate is the first uptick since January:

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 209,000 in July, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 6.2 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in professional and business services, manufacturing, retail trade, and construction.

Both the unemployment rate (6.2 percent) and the number of unemployed persons (9.7 million) changed little in July. Over the past 12 months, the unemployment rate and the number of unemployed persons have declined by 1.1 percentage points and 1.7 million, respectively. (See table A-1.) …

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for adult women increased to 5.7 percent and the rate for blacks edged up to 11.4 percent in July, following declines for both groups in the prior month. The rates for adult men (5.7 percent), teenagers (20.2 percent), whites (5.3 percent), and Hispanics (7.8 percent) showed little or no change in July. The jobless rate for Asians was 4.5 percent (not seasonally adjusted), little changed from a year earlier. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

Both the U-3 (the official jobless rate) and U-6 measures moved up slightly in July. U-3 went from 6.1% to 6.2%, and U-6 from 12.1% to 12.2%. These may not reflect moves of much significance, and could be rounding artifacts, but it’s worth noting that both moved up slightly.

There was a little good news on the full-time/part-time front. The number of workers in part-time jobs for economic reasons dropped a bit, from 7.544 million to 7.511 million. That’s still the second-highest reading of the year and well above May’s 7.269 million, but it suggests that the growth in jobs for July came in full-time positions — unlike that in June. On the other hand, the ranks of government workers swelled again to 20.453 million, an increase from June of 96,000. That is the highest level of government workers in the economy all year, and over 400,000 more than since May — and these figures are seasonally adjusted.

MSN noted that the report missed expectations, and says “growth cools” in July:

U.S. job growth slowed in July and an unexpected rise in the unemployment rate pointed to some slack in the labor market that could give the Federal Reserve room to keep interest rates low for a while.

Nonfarm payrolls increased 209,000 last month after surging by 298,000 in June, the Labor Department said on Friday.

Data for May and June were revised to show a total of 15,000 more jobs created than previously reported, showing underlying momentum and taking some of the sting from the report. …

Economists polled by Reuters had expected payrolls to increase 233,000 last month and the unemployment rate to hold steady at 6.1 percent.

The cooling in hiring is unlikely to change perceptions about strong economic growth in the third quarter.

“It still points to a job market and an economy that is improving, but we also have the absence of wage pressures building, which is becoming another concern for investors,” said Sean Lynch, managing director of global equity and research strategy at Wells Fargo Private Bank in Omaha, Nebraska.

The Wall Street Journal gives a tepid thumbs-up:

In July, hiring was broad-based. Payrolls rose in the professional and business services, manufacturing, retail, construction and public sectors.

But much pain remains in a labor market that still bears scars from the 2007-09 recession. Some 3.2 million people in July had been out of work for more than six months, down 1.1 million from a year earlier but still accounting for 32.9% of all unemployed Americans. The number of people working part-time jobs because they couldn’t find full time work was 7.5 million in July, largely unchanged from June.

A broad measure of unemployment known as the U-6, which includes people working part-time jobs because they can’t find full-time work and people who are marginally attached to the labor force, was 12.2% in July. That’s up slightly from 12.1% in June but down 1.7 percentage points from 13.9% in July 2013.

The labor-force participation rate ticked up slightly in July, to 62.9% from 62.8% in June, but remained near its lowest level since the late 1970s.

Wage gains remained sluggish in July. Average hourly earnings for private-sector workers rose 1 cent from June to $24.45 last month, up 2% from a year earlier.

The average workweek in July was unchanged at 34.5 hours.

The US economy needs to add 150,000 jobs a month just to keep up with population growth at the current workforce participation rate. At the rate we are adding jobs in July, it would take us another four and a half years to re-employ the 3.2 million chronically unemployed noted in the report. Even at last month’s pace, we’d be almost two years in regenerating those jobs, and that’s assuming we can sustain the 298,000 pace for a solid two years — when we haven’t been able to do so for any length in the five-plus years of the Obama recovery.

I’d be curious to know where the government is doing all that hiring, too. That metric has fluctuated quite a bit this year, but it’s definitely trending upward.

Update: Jim Pethokoukis says the economy has finally hit its stride … and that’s the problem:

In other words, the Obama recovery seems to have hit its sweet spot. And that’s the problem. This may be as good as it gets given that the expansion is five-years old and GDP growth seems stuck in low gear. The US employment rate of 59.0% is still well below its prerecession level of 62.9%, a gap of nearly 10 million jobs. There are still 3.2 million long-term unemployed vs. 1.3 million in December 2007. And as Capital Economics points out, “Despite the strength of employment gains and the decline in the unemployment rate, there is still no sign of an acceleration in average hourly earnings, which were unchanged in July.” …

We have a long way to go, and we are getting there oh-so slowly. Here are two more stats for you: 1.) Since 2000, the US economy has generated 5.2 million private-sector jobs vs. a total of 42.5 million in the 1980s and 1990s; 2.) The US economy has only produced three quarters of 4% or faster growth since 2000 vs. 36 in the 1980s and 1990s. There is little happening in the economy right now that suggests this expansion will ever be a whole lot more than what it currently is.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I’d be curious to know where the government is doing all that hiring, too.

On paper, same place they tuck away all the unemployed people so as to not spoil that awesome U3 number.

Gatsu on August 1, 2014 at 11:25 AM

How many are government make work useless jobs?

How many are crappy part time jobs that desperate people taking until they can get a full time job.

How many are nit pickers on the borders fighting the lice epidemic in the illegals?

Probably very few real, productive, private sector full time jobs.

txdoc on August 1, 2014 at 11:28 AM

How many of these jobs added were babysitters for the illegals crossing our southern border?

meci on August 1, 2014 at 11:29 AM

What happened to the 4% growth rate in the economy? Or is that figure going to be revised down, once again?

major dad on August 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Both the U-3 (the official jobless rate) and U-6 measures moved up slightly in July. U-3 went from 6.1% to 6.2%, and U-6 from 12.1% to 12.2%. These may not reflect moves of much significance, and could be rounding artifacts, but it’s worth noting that both moved up slightly.

They’re not rounding artifacts. June unemployment, rounded to the nearest hundredth of a percent, was 6.09%, while July’s was 6.20%. With that said, it appears it’s more of a desire to return to work as the number of employed also increased (just not as much as the number of unemployed).

The unseasoned labor force participation rate of 63.5% is the weakest July since 1977, and the 59.4% employment-population ratio (also unseasoned) is the weakest July between 1983 (59.3%) and 2010 (58.9%), with July 1978, July 1979, July 1980 and July 1981 also coming in stronger.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM

I don’t believe it.

weedisgood on August 1, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Five years and counting. Yet no mobs in the streets demanding heads to roll.

We are emasculated.

platypus on August 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM

Maybe if we gave amnesty to millions of unskilled workers it would help the economy somehow.

Flange on August 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM

I’m throwing the BS flag on this status. Another source pegged the unemployment rate at/about 18%, factoring in:
1. People who’ve stopped looking for work.
2. People filling part-time positions (who couldn’t find anything else).
3. People who are under-employed (although I don’t know how that can accurately be measured).

Corky on August 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM

An unemployment rate of 6.5%? Do these reports have any credibility whatsoever anymore? We know this administration has lied about just about everything else for political posturing. Why would this be any different?

job creation still outpaced population growth.

It hasn’t outpaced population growth when you factor in the hundreds of thousands of illegals running over the border. Oopsie. Someone forgot that tiny detail.

HotAirian on August 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM

These numbers raise more questions about the 2nd Qtr GDP number…

The economy is not as spiffy as so many Obamaists want to paint it as…and remains the slowest, weakest recovery since the Second World War.

Nice return for the $4.5T added to the Fed balance sheet, with QE still on-going at a rate of $25B per month and effectively doubling the national debt (by the scheduled end of Obama’s tenure).

Athos on August 1, 2014 at 11:38 AM

As Nobel winning economist Paul Krugman explained
 

Add in the need to make up lost ground, and we’re at around 18 million jobs over the next five years — or 300,000 a month.
 
So that’s a useful benchmark. Even if we add 300,000 jobs a month, we’re looking at a prolonged period of suffering — a huge cost from the Great Recession. So that’s kind of a minimal definition of success. Anything less than that, and it’s bad news.
 
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/10/the-jobs-deficit/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

 
Have we seen even a single month with 300K jobs since Obama took office five plus years ago?

rogerb on August 1, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Just wait until the employer mandate kicks in (after the elections)! That’ll really get the job creation machine running…..

Any guest pundit on Morning Jew. /

Happy Nomad on August 1, 2014 at 11:41 AM

The unseasoned labor force participation rate of 63.5% is the weakest July since 1977, and the 59.4% employment-population ratio (also unseasoned) is the weakest July between 1983 (59.3%) and 2010 (58.9%), with July 1978, July 1979, July 1980 and July 1981 also coming in stronger.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM

LIAR…. (please note sarc tag here) the economy improved 4 percent this quarter…

oscarwilde on August 1, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Maybe if we gave amnesty to millions of unskilled workers it would help the economy somehow.

Flange on August 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM

There’s an article on Drudge about a renovated detention facility near San Antonio. Each suite includes a flat screen TV and landline (who are these filthy invaders going to call? Their relatives already here illegally?) There are facilities for classes, an artifical turf soccer field, a playground, and computer lab. It’s costing somebody $104/night for each parasite to stay here. Yet, homeless families here in DC are put up at a motel so unsafe that a girl was kidnapped and her body has still not been found.

There is something wrong with our priorities.

Happy Nomad on August 1, 2014 at 11:45 AM

The US economy needs to add 150,000 jobs a month just to keep up with population growth at the current workforce participation rate.

Does this factor in the population growth that is happening due to illegal immigration?? Me thinks the real number is actually a bit higher.

KMC1 on August 1, 2014 at 11:48 AM

There is something wrong with our priorities.

Happy Nomad on August 1, 2014 at 11:45 AM

Yes, unlike our glorious leader, we are not trying hard enough to destroy our country…

oscarwilde on August 1, 2014 at 11:48 AM

There is something wrong with our priorities.

Happy Nomad on August 1, 2014 at 11:45 AM

You got that right. I think it’s time to have a reverse Mariel boat lift. Round up all the illegals and ship them to Gitmo. Let Cuba deal with them.

Flange on August 1, 2014 at 11:49 AM

The US economy needs to add 150,000 jobs a month just to keep up with population growth at the current workforce participation rate.

Does this factor in the population growth that is happening due to illegal immigration?? Me thinks the real number is actually a bit higher.

KMC1 on August 1, 2014 at 11:48 AM

Funny how I seem to remember that when Bush was president, we needed 340,000 to keep pace with population growth.

oscarwilde on August 1, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Its the weather.

MikeInBA on August 1, 2014 at 11:51 AM

Funny how I seem to remember that when Bush was president, we needed 340,000 to keep pace with population growth.

oscarwilde on August 1, 2014 at 11:50 AM

You are obviously in need of re-education. Report to your nearest commissar. Remember to bring warm clothes and a shovel.

platypus on August 1, 2014 at 11:52 AM

I love it. When the unemployment rate goes up 0.1 percent, it’s considered “changed little” but if it went down 0.1 percent, then it’s a “drop in unemployment.”

With the flick of a few words, the media can spin sh*t into chocolate candy.

Walter L. Newton on August 1, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Does David Brooks new writing gig under the alias; Noah Rothman account for one of those jobs?

StubbornGreenBurros on August 1, 2014 at 11:53 AM

If only the republicans would just stop hatin

Ellis on August 1, 2014 at 11:53 AM

This is bullsh!t. Everybody, including the knee pad-wearing Obamamedia , knows it. But God forbid (can I still say “God”, or is the IRS going to come after me?) they do their job and report the truth. The effing media is complicit in the downfall of the country. Hell…never mind merely “complicit” — they’re actively pursuing it…

Dopenstrange on August 1, 2014 at 11:54 AM

The employment diffusion index, which measures the percent of industries increasing employment, remained above 60% (61.9%), continuing to signal that a broad percentage of industries are hiring, i.e., it’s a diverse job market making it easier for people to find work. During the last expansion, 2002-2007, the diffusion index never made it above 60% for a sustained period, i.e., it was a narrow job market. The strength in manufacturing employment helps explain the strength in the diffusion index.

Also today, in the main report, we highlight the biggest risk to global growth remains Russia, with the expanded sanctions hitting European companies in particular, and in turn, Eurozone growth. This potential weakness in the Eurozone is a risk to 3Q company earnings, and in turn, the U.S. economy. So, far, the U.S. economy seems to be somewhat isolated from this turmoil, as reflected in the decline in unemployment claims and rising trend in consumer confidence. Junk spreads are showing some strains, but BAA spreads remain low. We’ll be watching these timely indicators for signs that the U.S. economy is also being hit. Declining gasoline prices and sold employment are certainly important supports for the U.S. economy/consumer. Indeed, CSM’s Weekly Retail Sales Monitor continued to accelerate in late July.

jake-the-goose on August 1, 2014 at 11:55 AM

More Americans than ever give up looking for work freed from job-lock!

ShainS on August 1, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Does David Brooks new writing gig under the alias; Noah Rothman account for one of those jobs?

StubbornGreenBurros on August 1, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Not one, but five!

(All part-time …)

ShainS on August 1, 2014 at 12:00 PM

209k ADJUSTED.

Please look at the non adjusted data. If I am reading that correctly WE LOST JOBS

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t17.htm

138,666 – July
139,776 – June

But hey lets look at that ADJUSTMENT!

138,795 – June
139,004 – July

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Still, over 6%?

The administration promised us 5% by 2014 Q1 according the stimulus employment chart. As a matter of fact, they projected 5.1% by now if we DIDN’T pass that monstrosity.

So I have to conclude that the gigantic slush fund (and debt burden laid on our children) not only failed in its promise, it most likely stunted real growth.

That’s what the Left does… makes up lies to get things passed, knowing that when the time comes, the press won’t hold them accountable.

mankai on August 1, 2014 at 12:05 PM

I’m throwing the BS flag on this status. Another source pegged the unemployment rate at/about 18%, factoring in:
1. People who’ve stopped looking for work.
2. People filling part-time positions (who couldn’t find anything else).
3. People who are under-employed (although I don’t know how that can accurately be measured).

Corky on August 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM

That source probably double-counted items 2 and 3, which are the same thing for the purposes of calculating the broadest U-6 unemployment/underemployment rate.

Using seasonally-adjusted numbers (except as noted):

- There were 6,259,000 people who wanted a job but were not counted as unemployed because they last looked for work prior to mid-June. This includes the 2,178,000 (not seasonally-adjusted) who last looked for work between mid-July 2013 and mid-June 2014 and are considered “marginally-attached” to the workforce.

- Add that to the 9,671,000 who are officially unemployed and there are 15,930,000 people who want a job. Similarly, add that 6.3 million who want a job but aren’t part of the labor force to the labor force and there are 162,282,000 who potentially are part of the labor force.

- Divide that 15.9 million who want a job but are jobless into the 162.3 million potential labor force, and the unemployment rate would be 9.8%, not the 7.5% the U-5 that includes the “marginally attached” would suggest.

- Add the 7,511,000 who are working part-time for economic reasons (those who can only find part-time work, those who are part-time because of slack work or business conditions, and those who are part-time for other, unspecified economic reasons) to the 15.9 million out of a job and that sums to 23,441,000.

- Divide that 23.4 million into the 162.3 million potential labor force and total unemployment/underemployment would be 14.4%, not the 12.2% that the U-6 that includes the “marginally attached” and the underemployed would suggest.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Embrace the suck, ladies and gents. It won’t get any better anytime soon, I’m afraid…

bimmcorp on August 1, 2014 at 12:11 PM

209k ADJUSTED.

Please look at the non adjusted data. If I am reading that correctly WE LOST JOBS

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t17.htm

138,666 – July
139,776 – June

But hey lets look at that ADJUSTMENT!

138,795 – June
139,004 – July

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 12:01 PM

There always is a massive drop in jobs on an unadjusted basis between June and July (I refer you to Tom Blumer’s jobs post, specifically, his chart from 2001-2013). The seasonal adjustmen, as imprecise sa it is, is an attempt to “smooth” the monthly data to allow comparisons between different months of the year and not frighten those who don’t pay very close attention every month for multiple years.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Yes, I know. Still one has to question that large an adjustment.

There are still far too many temporary part time positions and far too few permanent breadwinner jobs.

Thank you for the link to Mr. Blumer’s post I’ll check it out.

Zerohedge has some details too, but you’ve probably seen that.

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 12:19 PM

July jobs report: 209,000 jobs added, jobless rate 6.2%

link to the U6 table going back to 2000

http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp

workingclass artist on August 1, 2014 at 12:21 PM

U6 = Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force.

LA County U6 rating = 18.6 %
NYC U6 Rating = 14.7 %

State ranking as of April 2014 at this link:
http://www.bls.gov/lau/stalt14q1.htm

Report: 40 Companies Laying Off Workers in Cuomo’s New York

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/new-york-businesses-leaving-economy/2014/07/31/id/586138#ixzz399tEQTnJ
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

workingclass artist on August 1, 2014 at 12:27 PM

I’m throwing the BS flag on this status. Another source pegged the unemployment rate at/about 18%, factoring in:
1. People who’ve stopped looking for work.
2. People filling part-time positions (who couldn’t find anything else).
3. People who are under-employed (although I don’t know how that can accurately be measured).

Corky on August 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM

No see cause there’s a labor shortage…so we need Amnesty…and panic or something…AGW!!

*blech*

workingclass artist on August 1, 2014 at 12:30 PM

Like the CPI, if you add in what they don’t count, it’s a lot worse.

How many of these jobs added were babysitters for the illegals crossing our southern border?

meci on August 1, 2014 at 11:29 AM

You got it.

I’m throwing the BS flag on this status. Another source pegged the unemployment rate at/about 18%, factoring in:
1. People who’ve stopped looking for work.
2. People filling part-time positions (who couldn’t find anything else).
3. People who are under-employed (although I don’t know how that can accurately be measured).

Corky on August 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM

Actually, it’s more like 22% using working age people who don’t have a job, but it’s still Depression-level.

formwiz on August 1, 2014 at 12:32 PM

Liberals / Obama continue to tout the Unemployment Rate as being 6.2%, but, just like everything that comes out of his mouth and his WH, it’s a LIE!

Obama gets 6.2% by completely IGNORING the number of Americans who do not have a job because they have completely given up looking for jobs that do not exist / can’t be found. IN FACT, the TRUTH is that more Americans STOPPED looking for a job than there were jobs added during this period. THAT should be sending alarm bells ringing! Part of the problem has nothing to do with jobs but instead consists of the FACT that the avergage pay (& worth of money) has not stayed equal to / has not caught up with the (faster) rising cost of things (foods, goods, etc). This causes pain for Americans.

The fact that Obama is out bragging about a bogus 6.2% unemployment rate when more people have joined the ranks of those no longer looking for a job than there were jobs created and people can no longer afford as much as they have been able to, forced now to make serious choices/cuts, is INSULTING and PATHETIC!

easyt65 on August 1, 2014 at 12:49 PM

The US employment rate of 59.0% is still well below its prerecession level of 62.9%, a gap of nearly 10 million jobs.

And at the rate of ~200-250K new jobs a month being added we are never going to get back those lost 10 Million jobs, ever, we are just treading water. We are basically stuck until policies in DC change. We keep adding additional burden upon burdens on employers expecting something wonderful to happen.

Idiots.

Johnnyreb on August 1, 2014 at 12:51 PM

209,000 jobs added

…while more than 350,000 jobs were NEEDED just to maintain the status quo!!!

The unemployment numbers being trumpeted are completely phony: 6.2% is laughable…if the problem weren’t so serios.

Actually, it’s more like 22% using working age people who don’t have a job, but it’s still Depression-level.

formwiz on August 1, 2014 at 12:32 PM

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!

landlines on August 1, 2014 at 12:51 PM

Actually, it’s more like 22% using working age people who don’t have a job, but it’s still Depression-level.

formwiz on August 1, 2014 at 12:32 PM

More people are out of work now than ever before in our nation’s history.

If one looks at the actual counts from the depression, the country’s population (122,775,046) was 30 million larger than the number of people “no longer in the workforce” in 2014.

With 93 million no longer in the workforce and 25 million or so unemployed, underemployed, under utilized, marginally attached, we have almost as many people not working as the entire population of the country during the depression – 1930.

BUT imperious reader says the economy is just Boomin’ and VACAY!

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 12:55 PM

Oh and now we have conservatively 30 million illegals and over half a million “guest workers.”

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 12:57 PM

Actually, it’s more like 22% using working age people who don’t have a job, but it’s still Depression-level.

formwiz on August 1, 2014 at 12:32 PM

More people are out of work now than ever before in our nation’s history.

If one looks at the actual counts from the depression, the country’s population (122,775,046) was 30 million larger than the number of people “no longer in the workforce” in 2014.

With 93 million no longer in the workforce and 25 million or so unemployed, underemployed, under utilized, marginally attached, we have almost as many people not working as the entire population of the country during the depression – 1930.

BUT imperious reader says the economy is just Boomin’ and VACAY!

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 12:55 PM

Yep!

Holding the American Economy and American workers hostage for political gain.

workingclass artist on August 1, 2014 at 1:00 PM

Actually, it’s more like 22% using working age people who don’t have a job, but it’s still Depression-level.

formwiz on August 1, 2014 at 12:32 PM

I assume you have numbers to back that up. If not, don’t throw out figures that are as full of Bravo Sierra as the official U-3 rate.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 1:03 PM

The BLS is completely worthless. It’s become little more than a a window dressing org for corrupt administrations. Leave the statistcs to the private sector and disband it along with the DEA, DOE, TABC, IRS, FCC, EPA……………..

Red Creek on August 1, 2014 at 1:17 PM

The BLS is completely worthless. It’s become little more than a a window dressing org for corrupt administrations. Leave the statistcs to the private sector and disband it along with the DEA, DOE, TABC, IRS, FCC, EPA……………..

Red Creek on August 1, 2014 at 1:17 PM

The bad news – ADP is just as bad with the jobs numbers.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 1:21 PM

The US employment rate of 59.0% is still well below its prerecession level of 62.9%, a gap of nearly 10 million jobs.

The last month that Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency (December 2006), the employment rate was 63.4%

If we had 63.4% employment today, over 10.9 Million more people would be employed right now.

ITguy on August 1, 2014 at 1:35 PM

easyt65 on August 1, 2014 at 12:49 PM

It pays to actually look at the numbers before shouting what, at least for this month, is a lie. On a seasonally-adjusted basis, 329,000 more people either were working as of mid-July or looked for work between mid-June and mid-July than were either working as of mid-June or looked for work between mid-May and mid-June.

The not-so-good news – the majority of that increase came from those freshly looking for work, not from those who found jobs. That makes it more likely that what is a lie this month will once again be truth next month.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 1:37 PM

The last month that Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency (December 2006), the employment rate was 63.4%

If we had 63.4% employment today, over 10.9 Million more people would be employed right now.

ITguy on August 1, 2014 at 1:35 PM

More importantly, if we had a 63.4% employment-population ratio, we would have more than full employment.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Funny how I seem to remember that when Bush was president, we needed 340,000 to keep pace with population growth.

oscarwilde on August 1, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Different political metrics – the 340K job growth per month was to provide every new entrant to the civilian noninstitutional population with a job plus another 100K-120K…with nobody ever retiring. The 150K job growth per month is just to keep the labor force participation rate where it is.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 1:47 PM

I love it. When the unemployment rate goes up 0.1 percent, it’s considered “changed little” but if it went down 0.1 percent, then it’s a “drop in unemployment.”

With the flick of a few words, the media can spin sh*t into chocolate candy.

Walter L. Newton on August 1, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Yes, and note that even in the quote above they spin an increase as “changed little” but are very specific about a longer term drop:

Both the unemployment rate (6.2 percent) and the number of unemployed persons (9.7 million) changed little in July. Over the past 12 months, the unemployment rate and the number of unemployed persons have declined by 1.1 percentage points and 1.7 million, respectively.

ITguy on August 1, 2014 at 1:47 PM

More importantly, if we had a 63.4% employment-population ratio, we would have more than full employment.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Under Republican majorities 1/3/1993-1/3/2007, we went 144 consecutive months with employment never dropping below 62%.

Under Democrat majorities 1/3/2007-Present, we have now gone:
71 consecutive months (nearly six years!) with employment below 62%
67 consecutive months with employment below 61%
65 consecutive months with employment below 60%
59 consecutive months (nearly five years!) with employment at or below 59%!

ITguy on August 1, 2014 at 1:59 PM

So, guys and gals, can we call it a depression yet?

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 2:05 PM

Microsoft Announces 18,000 Layoffs – Cuts Staff by 14 Percent

…US Senator Jeff Sessions is irked that MSFT is firing thousands of staff yet continues to press for relaxed Visa rules: “That is a significant action. Indeed, Microsoft employs about 125,000 people, and they are laying off 18,000. The company laid off 5,000 in 2009. Yet their founder and former leader, Mr. Gates, says we have to have more and more people come into our country to take those kinds of jobs.”

slickwillie2001 on August 1, 2014 at 2:06 PM

And on an employment related topic, have you all been following the Market Basket Saga?

It’s big news up heah un New England.

and on Facebook.

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Hey, Ed!! You really should put an asterisk or quotation marks every time you report the employment numbers*, or “employment numbers”.

*Remember the metrics to calculate unemployment were conveniently changed by this Administration when they took power so now everything they say about employment is pretty much meaningless. Plus, the drastic downward revisions that all these numbers regularly receive is as certain as the sun rising in the East tomorrow morning.

Troy Rasmussen on August 1, 2014 at 2:09 PM

So, guys and gals, can we call it a depression yet?

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 2:05 PM

I think we can, considering the first 4 years of “recovery” have been worse than the first 4 years of recovery from the Great Depression.

The second half of the double-dip recession is a bit behind the Great Depression though.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 2:16 PM

So, guys and gals, can we call it a depression yet?

dogsoldier on August 1, 2014 at 2:05 PM

Why not, you guys are already making up your own stats…

Tlaloc on August 1, 2014 at 2:28 PM

“Fun” fact – every month since May 2009 has had a lower employment-population ratio (unadjusted) than the same month in 1979.

Welcome back Kotter Carter.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 2:33 PM

“Fun” fact – every month since May 2009 has had a lower employment-population ratio (unadjusted) than the same month in 1979.

Welcome back Kotter Carter.

Steve Eggleston on August 1, 2014 at 2:33 PM

The average Seasonally Adjusted Employment-Population Ratio during Jimmy Carter’s Presidency (January 1977- December 1980): 59.1%

The average Seasonally Adjusted Employment-Population Ratio during Barack Obama’s pResidency (January 2009- present): 58.7%.

Obama is officially worse than Carter.

ITguy on August 1, 2014 at 2:40 PM

Steve,

Another thing to think about when comparing the employment situation under Carter vs. Obama is that when Carter took office in January 1977, the Labor Force Participation Rate for Women was 47.6%. Just 20.5 years later, in July 1997, the Labor Force Participation Rate for Women was 60.0%. That’s a very substantial rise, and reflects a generational shift in the percentage of women choosing to participate in the work force.

Without any doubt, there are more women today who seek to participate in the work force than there were in 1977. If the economy were decent, a majority of those additional women should be able to find the work they desire.

My point is that even if Obama brought his average up to the same 59.1% average employment that Carter had, that would still mean a worse economy now (when more women want to participate in the work force) than it was in the late 70′s (when less women wanted to participate in the work force).

ITguy on August 1, 2014 at 2:56 PM