Jobless Rate Falls to 7.8%, Lowest Since January 2009 (and it's not because of people leaving the wo - Polidicks

[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/06/business/economy/us-added-114000-jobs-in-september-rate-drops-to-7-8.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0"][QUOTE= The New York Times]The nation’s unemployment rate dropped below 8 percent in September to its lowest rate since President Obama took office, the Labor Department said Friday. [/QUOTE][/URL][QUOTE=The New York Times][URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/06/business/economy/us-added-114000-jobs-in-september-rate-drops-to-7-8.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0"] While employers added only a modest 114,000 jobs last month, [/URL][URL="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm"]the jobless rate declined to 7.8 percent[/URL] from 8.1 percent, even though more people entered the labor force. [B]Adding to the positive news, job gains were revised upward by 40,000 for July (to 181,000) and by 46,000 for August (to 142,000), which had been considered a disappointing month, casting a slightly rosier hue on the summer slowdown. [/B] The private sector, which has been adding jobs since March 2010, grew by 104,000 workers in September. Governments, where cuts have been a drag on the recovery, added 10,000 jobs. Manufacturing, one of the bright spots that Mr. Obama has showcased throughout the re-election campaign, fell 16,000 jobs after losing a revised 22,000 in August, and construction jobs grew by 5,000. The number of temporary jobs, usually considered a harbinger of future growth, fell 2,000. Coming a month before the presidential election, the jobs report offered ammunition for both sides as the candidates vie to convince voters that each is better equipped to steer the economy. Mr. Obama can point to the 24th straight month of overall job growth after a severe financial crisis and a drop below the stubborn 8 percent jobless rate that has dogged his presidency. Republicans can — and did on Friday — continue to criticize the slow pace of improvement. Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential challenger, took particular issue with any positive interpretation of the report. “This is not what a real recovery looks like,” he said in a statement. “We created fewer jobs in September than in August, and fewer jobs in August than in July, and we’ve lost over 600,000 manufacturing jobs since President Obama took office.” Kevin Brady, a Republican from Texas and vice chairman of the joint economic committee: “The decline in the unemployment rate was driven primarily by an increase of 582,000 in the number of workers employed involuntarily in part-time jobs. These workers need and want full-time jobs.” “If not for all the people who have simply dropped out of the labor force, the real unemployment rate would be closer to 11 percent,” Mr. Romney said in his statement. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Republican of Virginia, conceded that numbers were an improvement but added, “it simply isn’t good enough.” A jobless rate of 7.8 percent “should not be cause for celebration.” Consumers and businesses, too, seem to have divergent views of the economic situation.[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/business/economy/consumer-confidence-reached-7-month-high-in-september.html"]Consumers have shown increasing confidence[/URL] as stocks rise and home prices stabilize. Business leaders have been hanging back, though, more focused on global economic slowing and domestic concerns. They say they are uncertain what the election will mean for the business climate and are waiting in part for a resolution of the so-called fiscal cliff, a host of tax increases and budget cuts that will be triggered at the end of the year if Congress fails to act. Harry Kazazian, the chief executive officer of Exxel Outdoors, a maker of camping equipment in Alabama, said the election, the fiscal cliff and rapidly shifting regulations had put him in a cautious mood. With sales on the rise, Exxel has restarted a capital investment plan that it suspended three years ago, but is doing so slowly. “We’re moving forward, but we’re doing it in steps rather than being much more aggressive and putting ourselves out there,” Mr. Kazazian said. “I wouldn’t be surprised if things start turning the other way, meaning down.” But at a Walmart in Atlanta, shoppers were loosening the reins a bit, buying what they described as small indulgences like scented candle oil and seasonal beer. Linda Avery, 50, a food service manager, said her income had not changed but her daughter had moved out of the house, reducing her food and utility expenses. Michael Peacock, 43, said that although his house was in foreclosure, his chosen field, online marketing, was improving to the point where he could even turn down some jobs that were outside his specialty. “I can see people shopping,” Ms. Avery said, surveying the store. “You just feel like things are getting a little better.” [/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/06/business/economy/us-added-114000-jobs-in-september-rate-drops-to-7-8.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0"]Source[/URL] Given that this is actually due to people finding jobs, and not due to people leaving the work force (it actually grew in size), this is rather good news for the Obama campaign. Obviously the overall numbers are still pretty abysmal, but this is still going to help him in the long run. Perhaps even more good news, [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/jack-welch-obama-jobs-report-numbers-romney-2012-10"]Republicans are already calling this report a lie.[/URL]

Clearly this is zombie reagan doing his miracle work

And in the next debate, I hope Obama opens with: "Hey, Romney, see this shit? Fuck you!" and then flips him off.

Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but I don't think that this is anything worth getting super happy over. It's good that it's better, but I think 7.8 is still sort of terrible.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;37921175]Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but I don't think that this is anything worth getting super happy over. It's good that it's better, but I think 7.8 is still sort of terrible.[/QUOTE] It's an improvement. When shit is this bad, be happy with even the slightest improvement you get.

We're still in the top half, going by unemployment rates. Just like everything else except military spending. But then again, if you go by amount of money per GDP, Saudi Arabia spends twice as much as us, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Jordon, and a list of 10 others, spend more than us Isn't 7.8% about what the rate was when Obama first took office? And shit was on a vertical decline at that point, too. So good job, USA

and yet i still see that goddamn commercial showing a "totally accurate graph" with the job rate in a vertical fall, and it starts at 10%. I mean, what does lying do for anyone here, you're in a position to fucking run the most powerful country on earth, I'd rather know exactly what the fuck you're gonna do instead of attacking the other guy and flat out lying.

[QUOTE=MightyMax;37921335] I mean, what does lying do for anyone here, you're in a position to fucking run the most powerful country on earth, [b]I'd rather know exactly what the fuck you're gonna do[/b] instead of attacking the other guy and flat out lying.[/QUOTE] You're in a minority in that buddy, which is why I hate politics and why allowing anyone to vote is a bad fucking idea. "I like this guy! He said something that sounded like a good thing (but meant nothing!)! I'M GONNA VOTE FOR HIM!"

[QUOTE=evilweazel;37921175]Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but I don't think that this is anything worth getting super happy over. It's good that it's better, but I think 7.8 is still sort of terrible.[/QUOTE] I think the jobless rate in the UK fallen much less than that when the figures were last revealed.

Hopefully this should give Obama a boost after that abysmal debate on Wednesday

I generally believe statistics when they're gathered by government agencies, but it does seem [I]awfully[/I] convenient that these numbers are being posted now. I'm not saying they're intentionally crooked, but the methods by which Americans gather unemployment data are uneven. [url]http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/10/americas-jobs-report[/url] The note at the end sort of explains why 'unemployment' counts for different things.

Fox News front page [img]http://a57.foxnews.com/www.foxnews.com/images/root_images/0/0/JOBLESSRATE_20121005_111755.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=smurfy;37923597]Fox News front page [img]http://a57.foxnews.com/www.foxnews.com/images/root_images/0/0/JOBLESSRATE_20121005_111755.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] fuck sakes stop lieing obama we know the REAL number is 100%

Wer r th jobs [editline]5th October 2012[/editline] I can't find them

I'm going to have to agree with Fox on this one. 7.8 from 8.1? I don't buy that. How did the rate even get that low? Surely the amount of people employed added can't be the sole reason. The fact that this report came out 2 days after Obama's first debate also makes this report fishy. It's like it was timed to pick Obama up after that verbal beat down Romney gave him Wednesday. since we have a VP debate and 2 more Presidential Debates coming up, we'll see how long this number holds up.

[QUOTE=Glaber;37925381]I'm going to have to agree with Fox on this one. 7.8 from 8.1? I don't buy that. How did the rate even get that low? Surly the amount of people employed added can't be the sole reason. The fact that this report came out 2 days after Obama's first debate also makes this report fishy. It's like it was timed to pick Obama up after that verbal beat down Romney gave him Wednesday. since we have a VP debate and 2 more Presidential Debates coming up, we'll see how long this number holds up.[/QUOTE] So you'll more readily believe, without any evidence apart from "this sounds fishy", in a vast government conspiracy involving the untold number of people required to perpetuate a false unemployment rate than you are to believe a 0.3% drop? Please, please, please, I beg you, go take a long walk through a park or something and think this through without listening to anything any news channel has to say about it. [editline]5th October 2012[/editline] Go buy a snow cone or a hot dog and then, while eating it on some bench near the woods in the clear, outdoor air, ask yourself if what you currently believe [i]makes any sense[/i].

Well, this certainly is a ray of optimism amidst the twisting grim dark fog of the current economic climate. 7.8% is still an abhorrently-huge number of unemployed folks, a big number of folks whose skills aren't being utilised in the engine of progress and whatnot, but if it's the lowest it's been since the crash, then that brings about hope for an eventual rekindling of the economy.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;37925705]So you'll more readily believe, without any evidence apart from "this sounds fishy", in a vast government conspiracy involving the untold number of people required to perpetuate a false unemployment rate than you are to believe a 0.3% drop? Please, please, please, I beg you, go take a long walk through a park or something and think this through without listening to anything any news channel has to say about it. [editline]5th October 2012[/editline] Go buy a snow cone or a hot dog and then, while eating it on some bench near the woods in the clear, outdoor air, ask yourself if what you currently believe [i]makes any sense[/i].[/QUOTE] Considering the location I live in, YES. It does make sense. In my area, there are empty lots in strip malls that were never occupied. a local Block Buster closed down and nothing came in to replace it. Ace Hardware moved to where a drug store use to be, but no-one moved in to Ace's old location. Going into the nearby city of Pontiac, businesses have closed down and left, and an entire mall died, places Like Chuck E. Cheese are replaced with schools and the local Kids R Us remains abandoned. Not to mention that there are houses around the area that are meant to be torn down or are simply abandoned. So yes, when I see Pontiac the way it is plus the outside surrounding area, I find it hard to believe we have enough Job growth to affect the Unemployment rate by that much. Maybe 0.05 percent at best, but not a whole 0.3.

[QUOTE=Glaber;37926504]Considering the location I live in, YES. It does make sense. In my area, there are empty lots in strip malls that were never occupied. Going into the nearby city, businesses have closed down and left, and an entire mall died, places Like Chuck E. Cheese are replaced with schools and the local Kids R Us remains abandoned. Not to mention that there are houses around the area that are meant to be torn down or are simply abandoned. So yes, when I see Pontiac the way it is plus the outside surrounding area, I find it hard to believe we have enough Job growth to affect the Unemployment rate by that much. Maybe 0.05 percent at best, but not a whole 0.3.[/QUOTE] This is nationwide, not your upper middle class neighbourhood. [QUOTE=Glaber;37926504]a local Block Buster closed down and nothing came in to replace it.[/QUOTE] Consider why this might be. CONSIDER THIS BLOCKBUSTERS IS GOING BUST? Try to think why.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;37926544]This is nationwide, not your upper middle class neighbourhood.[/QUOTE] You don't think I know that? you would think that something that affects the Nation would also affect Pontiac [QUOTE=Sobotnik;37926544] Consider why this might be. CONSIDER THIS BLOCKBUSTERS IS GOING BUST? Try to think why.[/QUOTE] Ah but here's the key thing you didn't take note of. Nothing came in to replace Block Buster. Their lot is still empty.

[QUOTE=Glaber;37926781]You don't think I know that? you would think that something that affects the Nation would also affect Pontiac[/QUOTE] Some areas are doing worse than others, but you should clearly think that if the nation overall is improving, that means there are plenty of other areas which are IMPROVING? [QUOTE=Glaber;37926781]Ah but here's the key thing you didn't take note of. Nothing came in to replace Block Buster. Their lot is still empty.[/QUOTE] Because there's a recession that's going on? Also small businesses aren't returning whenever Romney or Obama come into power.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;37926846]Because there's a recession that's going on? Also small businesses aren't returning whenever Romney or Obama come into power.[/QUOTE] HOLD IT! Wasn't the recession declared officially over? [url]http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2010/09/20/recession-over.html[/url] [url]http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/20/news/economy/recession_over/index.htm[/url] Are you sure you want to continue to claim we're in one now?

[QUOTE=Glaber;37926880]HOLD IT! Wasn't the recession declared officially over? [url]http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2010/09/20/recession-over.html[/url] [url]http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/20/news/economy/recession_over/index.htm[/url] Are you sure you want to continue to claim we're in one now?[/QUOTE] I was saying that to illustrate that the economy isn't in the best of shape for the moment. Some places outside of America are shockingly in bad shape at the moment now too. [quote]Some areas are doing worse than others, but you should clearly think that if the nation overall is improving, that means there are plenty of other areas which are IMPROVING?[/quote] answer pls Please note, as a European I think Romney is insane, and Obama is a bit better.

You would think that areas are improving yes. But the rate of improvement would not yield the necessary numbers to get the 7.8 unemployment numbers. that's not saying that they aren't happening at all, but rather that they're slower than claimed. Please also note, I've watched Romney's and Obama's debate on Wednsday all the way through and Obama appeared to be the incoherent one. (MSNBC was even upset with him.)

The unemployment rate is definitely 7.8%, for better or for worse. If anybody does not agree, then they should leave.

obama enters office it rises, obama is about to leave office it falls!

[QUOTE=Glaber;37927184]You would think that areas are improving yes. But the rate of improvement would not yield the necessary numbers to get the 7.8 unemployment numbers. [/QUOTE] cite your evidence that reliably contradicts the figure of 7.8 and i might start believing you

[QUOTE=smurfy;37923597]Fox News front page [img]http://a57.foxnews.com/www.foxnews.com/images/root_images/0/0/JOBLESSRATE_20121005_111755.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] THE NUMBERS MASON WHAT DO THEY MEAN

[QUOTE=Glaber;37925381]I'm going to have to agree with Fox on this one. 7.8 from 8.1? I don't buy that. How did the rate even get that low? Surly the amount of people employed added can't be the sole reason. The fact that this report came out 2 days after Obama's first debate also makes this report fishy. It's like it was timed to pick Obama up after that verbal beat down Romney gave him Wednesday. since we have a VP debate and 2 more Presidential Debates coming up, we'll see how long this number holds up.[/QUOTE] Lol get a load of this guy. Im tired of hearing "I DONT SEE ANY JOBS NEAR ME SO ITS OBVIOUSLY NOT IMPROVING" you are aware that the rate is country wide, not state wide.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;37927306]cite your evidence that reliably contradicts the figure of 7.8 and i might start believing you[/QUOTE] [quote=James Pethokoukis][URL="http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/10/the-sickly-stagnant-september-jobs-report/"]I posted a bit of this earlier[/URL], but here is the entire, eye-opening note from economists John Ryding and Conrad DeQuadros of RDQ Economics: [QUOTE] This report is a tale of two labor markets. The establishment survey (payrolls) painted a picture of moderately growing employment over the last three months but at a marginally slower pace than over the last year. [B]At this pace of job creation, the unemployment rate should be barely drifting lower given underlying demographic trends. [/B] In contrast, the household survey painted a picture of a sharply falling unemployment rate—down 1.2% points over the last 12 months. [B]Such a rapid decline in the unemployment rate would be consistent with 4%–5% real economic growth[/B] historically but much of the decline is accounted for by people dropping out of the labor force (over the last year the employment-population ratio has risen to only 58.7% from 58.4%). [B]We believe part of the drop in the unemployment rate over the last two months is a statistical quirk (the household data show an increase in employment of 873,000 in September, which is completely implausible and likely a result of sampling volatility).[/B] Moreover, declining labor force participation over the last year (resulting in 1.1 million people disappearing from the labor force) accounts for much of the rest of the decline. With this report, the ISMs, and vehicle sales, the September economy is off to a better-than-expected start but nowhere near as good as suggested by the decline in the unemployment rate.[/QUOTE] Of course, the economy is not growing 4-5%, not even half that. This a jobs recovery built on part-time jobs, falling wages, and disappeared discouraged workers. As JPMorgan’s econ team noted: “The one asterisk to the good news from the household survey was the apparent low-quality composition of the jobs created, as there was a surge in people working part-time for economic reasons, a development which left the widely-followed U-6 broad measure of underemployment unchanged at 14.7%.”[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/10/economist-unemployment-drop-implausible-a-statistical-quirk/[/url]