Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The United States added just 20,000 jobs in February, way below expectations of a 180,000 gain, and a sign that the job market might be beginning to cool.
The unemployment rate fell slightly to 3.8 percent, the Labor Department reported Friday.
Economists did not immediately panic as hiring has been strong in recent months and they do not see one disappointing number as a signal of an imminent recession. But the lackluster February figure comes as growth is slowing. Economic growth abroad has weakened, and the partial government shutdown and ongoing trade tensions appear to be weighing on consumer spending.
Hiring was slow in every industry except health care and white-collar businesses. Construction lost 31,000 jobs and leisure and hospitality, which is normally a driver of growth, was unchanged. Some experts say this could be the result of brutal weather in February, including a deep freeze in much of the Midwest. https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...=.5f65118a24a8
"Chinese exports plunged 21% in February from a year earlier, according to Chinese government data released Friday. It was the weakest monthly performance since February 2016 and far worse than economists had predicted. The tariffs imposed last year by the US government on about $250 billion of Chinese products are taking a toll."
This is worrisome -- if the Chinese catch the flu so will we. Our economy and their economy are somewhat co-dependent.
I remember Reagan stating that cutting taxes for the rich would have a trickle down effect. Didn't work then, didn't work this time. Interestingly, employment rates go up during Democratic presidents and go down during republican presidents. Check it out.
I apologize for starting this thread here. I had intended to put it in P&OC and I thought that I had closed this window without posting it here. I have no way to undo it, but I am sorry for any confusion.
I remember Reagan stating that cutting taxes for the rich would have a trickle down effect. Didn't work then, didn't work this time. Interestingly, employment rates go up during Democratic presidents and go down during republican presidents. Check it out.
I am a lifelong Democrat but the reality is that presidents have far less control over the economy than many imagine. Presidential economic records are highly dependent on the dumb luck of where the nation is in the economic cycle. And the White House has no control over the demographic and technological forces that influence the economy.
Don't get me wrong...I think supply side economics is bad policy. But outlandish claims or assertions should die on the vine, especially in the age of Trump.
Last edited by Astral_Weeks; 03-08-2019 at 11:20 PM..
As one of my Econ professors used to say "one month does not make a trend" in most economic data series. You need to look at quarterly data at a minimum.
Cleary this was a bad month but the reviews I read pointed to the govt shut down and bad weather as contributing to the poor monthly performance. Wage growth was a positive in this report. So take it with a grain of salt for now....
I remember Reagan stating that cutting taxes for the rich would have a trickle down effect. Didn't work then, didn't work this time. Interestingly, employment rates go up during Democratic presidents and go down during republican presidents. Check it out.
That’s not at all correct. High taxes hamper growth and reducing what was one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world has a positive economic impact. It does trickle down to everyone because companies have more money to spend and invest. It’s basic math. If you taxed at 100% there would be no business, so the lower the taxes the more businesses keep for reinvestment and retention of valuable employees.
That’s not at all correct. High taxes hamper growth and reducing what was one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world has a positive economic impact. It does trickle down to everyone because companies have more money to spend and invest. It’s basic math. If you taxed at 100% there would be no business, so the lower the taxes the more businesses keep for reinvestment and retention of valuable employees.
Looks like somebody's been drinking the kool aid! Of course, our corporate income tax rate was nowhere near 100 percent.
The statutory corp. tax rate in the US was 35 percent before the TCJA. After accounting for tax breaks and loopholes, U.S. corporate rates were well below the 35 percent top statutory rate.
I am all for "responsible" tax reform which simplifies the code, closes loopholes and is PAID for...not borrowing from the future.
In the big picture the TCJA will make rich people better off at the expense of lower-income households and future generations. The tax bill was simply the “wrong thing” at the “wrong time” because it was an attempt to deliver fiscal stimulus when the economy was already strong.
“The time to repair a roof is when the sun is shining.” - JFK
I apologize for starting this thread here. I had intended to put it in P&OC and I thought that I had closed this window without posting it here. I have no way to undo it, but I am sorry for any confusion.
Ask a Mod to move it. They will.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
