May Jobs Report...Making America Great Again! (school, economic, election)

[moneill]

Originally Posted by McGowdog

Blah blah blah Bush blah blah blah Obama.

Bush had 9-11 to deal with, making many mistakes with the same Intelligence team that Obama had.

Bush and Obama both dealt with the onset and aftermath of the housing bubble.

Obama chose to go on the Make America Cow-down and Apologize to the World- Sabotage Tour.

You do know that was your PERCEPTION.
That many people didn't see Obama apologizing.

Globalization -- which is kind of what Trump is working towards now with North Korea -- is not such a bad thing.

It doesn't bother you how much Trump is kissing up to North Korea.......(it doesn't me -- it is what you have to do if you really want to have diplomacy).

[KayAnn246]

Originally Posted by ChristineVA

So now that Trump is president are we back to believing the data that the Bureau of Labor Statistics puts out? Because under Obama it was just a bunch of lies. I mean, I've always believed the data but about half of P&OC posters do not.

Unless they can provide proof and evidence that the data is falsified, why should we believe their opinion? We shouldn't believe their opinion because it would buy into their negative agenda about President Obama and the progress he achieved. Everyone is not that gullible.

[Listener2307]

Originally Posted by moneill

.....................In my neighborhood in suburban Atlanta, it was the diehard Republicans who lost their jobs and turned to the federal govt. for help when they needed it. And you know what -- I'm glad they had the help they needed to get back on their feet..................

If true - and I doubt that - how do you explain the fact that mostly Republicans lost their jobs? Didn't Democrats lose their jobs, too?


And how did they "turn to the federal government"? Isn't it much more accurate to say they "turned to the state" and "collected unemployment from the system they had paid into"?

[Ferd]

the thing that is interesting to me is that back in the Obama years, previous months numbers were consistently revised down.


now we have consistant upward revisions to previous months.


LOL.

[cttransplant85]

Going from 4.5% to 3.8% is more impressive than going from 10% to 4.5% coming out of a recession. Really hard to get that number down once you hit full employment.

[moneill]

I've said this so many times I'm starting to be concerned for myself (said jokingly -- don't be mean)...but

Back in 2014 Volvo, Mercedes both announced plans to put plants in South Carolina.

Both those plants -- adding a significant amount of jobs -- won't be up and running until summer of 2018.

Those expansions were not part of anything Trump did -- but he most definitely will be president when close to 10,000K jobs come to South Carolina.

They are still part of the recovery from the recession. They just are.

You can't argue that.

[Ferd]

I am without question and without reservation a Trump supporter. In fact I am (like Trump) willing to say outrageous things that make the left crazy (he is a consummate pro and I am a poor armature).... so no question of where my allegiances lie.


however as much as these are good numbers and better than those under Obama.... and clearly a result of Trumps deviation from the leftist lunacy that was economic policy before Trump, these numbers aren't all peaches in cream.


It looks to be improving but there is a lot of room for better. Labor participation is not changing.... its no longer in free fall, but its not improving as we need it to.


Discouraged worker numbers remain flat.


under employed workers remain flat.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by moneill

I've said this so many times I'm starting to be concerned for myself (said jokingly -- don't be mean)...but

Back in 2014 Volvo, Mercedes both announced plans to put plants in South Carolina.

Both those plants -- adding a significant amount of jobs -- won't be up and running until summer of 2018.

Those expansions were not part of anything Trump did -- but he most definitely will be president when close to 10,000K jobs come to South Carolina.

They are still part of the recovery from the recession. They just are.

You can't argue that.

Putting my cards on the table here.


I don't disagree with you.... however having to listen to 8 years of Obama and team blaming Bush for all that was wrong with the economy (even after years of Obama policy being in place), I am utterly happy to give Donald Trump credit for every single one of those 10k jobs of which you speak.

[moneill]

Originally Posted by Listener2307

If true - and I doubt that - how do you explain the fact that mostly Republicans lost their jobs? Didn't Democrats lose their jobs, too?


And how did they "turn to the federal government"? Isn't it much more accurate to say they "turned to the state" and "collected unemployment from the system they had paid into"?

I lived in a mostly Republican neighborhood. I didn't make that clear.

I didn't question them specifically on what kind of 'help' -- not my place to do so. They just talked about it.

These were people that never needed assistance -- weren't definitely 'welfare for life people'.

I was maybe wrongly assuming increased spending on social programs was a result of the extra burden put on our govt.

I know it wasn't the only cost issue -- there was the war as well.

And add to that the Bush cuts combined with severely reduce tax revenues -- made for a difficult budget to manage.+

And you can so tell I have no clue about social programs -- lol.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by JackF

Unemployment rate matches lowest point in half a century

The jobless rate inched down to 3.8% in May, another sign of the strong economy and tight labor market. That tied the lowest unemployment rate since 1969. Since then, the only other time unemployment was this low was in April 2000. The economy added 223,000 jobs, better than economists expected.

"The US economy has this incredible head of steam," said Josh Wright, chief economist at the software firm iCIMS.

In reality, there were 661,000 new jobs added.


In January, there 152,848,000 Americans employed. There are now 156,009,000 Americans working.



That's an increase of 3,161,000 jobs.

Originally Posted by middle-aged mom

92nd consecutive month of job gains.

Originally Posted by moneill

Amazing 92 months of job growth.

That claim can only be supported by using fictitious fantasy numbers.


In real numbers, the number of jobs typically decreases in September and December, so there's never more than 12 months of consecutive job growth.

Originally Posted by Metsfan53

any facts or sources here?

I'm not sure what point the poster was making, but the number of people seeking work decreased in April, but increased by 485,000 in May and at 161,765,000 it's the largest number of people seeking work so far this year.


If you applied for a job 6 weeks ago and are still unemployed, you're not counted as unemployed. You're only counted as unemployed if you applied for a job in the last 30 days. If you applied for a job in the last 6 weeks, you are counted statistically on the U-6.


The hiring process has changed a lot since 1994. A more accurate measure of unemployment would include people who applied for jobs in the last 90 days, since the hiring process for many jobs is now about 8-12 weeks instead of 2-3 weeks like it was in the early 1990s.


Many companies now involve supervision in management in the hiring process. and the hiring process has moved from one interview with the HR manager to an interview with the HR manager and subsequent interviews with managers and supervisors.


The low Labor Force Participation Rate means you have 8.5 Million to 10 Million fewer workers than you did in the past. I would suggest those are jobs that were permanently lost to economic expansion in Southeast Asia earlier in the Century.


It might not sound like a lot of workers, but the loss of those 8.5 Million to 10 Million workers is the reason Social Security loses money every month for the last 10 years. The FICA revenues collected aren't sufficient to pay 100% of benefits, so money is withdrawn from the Trust Fund. The Trust Fund has continued to increase, but only on accrued interest on the treasury securities and not by surplus revenues from FICA taxes.

Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer

So, does this mean that Mr. Trump is getting re-elected?

Depends on when the recession hits.


At 107 months, this is currently the second longest economic expansion in history. If the economy continues to expand, it would tie the record for the longest expansion in history at 120 months in July 2019 and break that record in August 2019.



Should the economy enter recession in 2020, it would pretty much guarantee the election of a Democrat as president.