US economy adds 227,000 jobs in January – Plus, Trump thinks US Unemployement is at 42%
27 replies, posted
[QUOTE]The US added 227,000 new jobs in January, the last month of the Obama presidency and the first of Donald Trump’s, the Department of Labor announced on Friday.
The closely watched figure was the best since last June and comes after Trump won the election promising jobs growth and pushing US companies to employ American citizens, threatening to tax imports of goods made outside US borders.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Trump was a harsh critic of the government’s monthly job’s report during the election campaign. He claimed that 5% unemployment was “one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.” In August 2015, Trump told Time magazine that the real unemployment rate was 42%, at the time the Labor Department reading was 5.1%.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/feb/03/us-jobs-report-january-economy-obama-trump?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard[/url]
On one hand, Its always great to help people get jobs and i'm glad to hear unemployment continues to drop, but on the other hand if Trump believes the unemployment rate is far higher than it actually is I'm not sure how he will be able to approach this in a realistic way...where do you all think he got this statistic from?
[editline]3rd February 2017[/editline]
Here's similar/related article (if anyone is interested) about the rise in job creation but it speaks more broadly about some of the other things Trump has done and possible issues like inflation and lack of wage growth:
[url]http://wapo.st/2kAjP2U[/url]
[QUOTE]Average•hourly earnings rose only•2.5 percent in January from•with the year prior,•slower than the 2.8 percent growth seen in December. That surprised some analysts, who had expected minimum-wage increases that went into effect•in nineteen states in January•to push up worker pay.
Given•a strong labor market but relatively tepid wages gains and inflation, the Federal Reserve is closely watching to see whether it should•continue gradually tightening•monetary policy this year.[/QUOTE]
Why does he think that over a hundred million people aren't employed?
[QUOTE]In August 2015, Trump told Time magazine that the real unemployment rate was 42%[/QUOTE]
For context, Greece, which is in complete shit financially, has a ~24% unemployment rate. Looks like his numbers might be a little off
[QUOTE=Cyberdan;51771249]For context, Greece, which is in complete shit financially, has a ~24% unemployment rate. Looks like his numbers might be a little off[/QUOTE]
Wasn't the great depression somewhere like ~25% as well? Trump is such a fucking imbecile he just throws out random shit that makes him look smart.
Thanks Obama.
[QUOTE=OutLawed Blade;51771279]Wasn't the great depression somewhere like ~25% as well? Trump is such a fucking imbecile he just throws out random shit that makes him look smart.[/QUOTE]
We've never come close to 42% in modern times.
There was right after ww1 where it reached 38% but that was a pretty special case since the war just ended, millions came home, and the government cut spending and the economy was transforming from a war to peace time economy. It was also relatively short and was followed by a massive boom.
To be nice to Trump though. There is more to the story than just looking at the unemployment rate. For one, if people give up looking for work, they are counted as leaving the labor force entirely and thus stop counting as unemployed. And you've also gotta consider what jobs are being added, since a bunch of part time work that hardly puts food on the table isn't really great either. Neither of these problems remotely make things as dire as Trump put it though.
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;51771227]Why does he think that over a hundred million people aren't employed?[/QUOTE]
Well when I googled it I found this politifact article that seems to suggesr it might have come from Ronald Reagans budget director. Not sure what to make of it.
[QUOTE]We asked the Trump campaign for a source of the 42 percent figure, but they didn’t respond. The Fact Checker, however, traced it back to a column by David Stockman, who served as President Ronald Reagan’s budget director.
Stockman calculated that there are currently 210 million Americans between the ages of 16 and 68 -- what he calls a "plausible measure of the potential workforce." If you assume that each of those people is able to hold down a full-time job, he wrote, they would offer a total of 420 billion potential working hours. However, during 2014, Stockman noted, only 240 billion working hours were actually recorded by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-unemployment-rate-may-be-42-perc/[/url]
[QUOTE=Cyberdan;51771249]For context, Greece, which is in complete shit financially, has a ~24% unemployment rate. Looks like his numbers might be a little off[/QUOTE]
the unemployment rate is 100% if you dont account for all the people who have jobs
[QUOTE=papaya;51771643]the unemployment rate is 100% if you dont account for all the people who have jobs[/QUOTE]
Actually, not all people who are unemployed are unemployed if they exit the job market :smug:
[quote]Trump was a harsh critic of the government’s monthly job’s report during the election campaign. He claimed that 5% unemployment was “one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.” In August 2015, Trump told Time magazine that the real unemployment rate was 42%, at the time the Labor Department reading was 5.1%.[/quote]
42%? The hell is the this guy's dealer?
[quote][URL="http://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/articles/2012/01/09/65-and-older-population-soars"]People age 65 and older now make up 13% of the total population[/URL][/quote]
[quote][URL="http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/07/13/aging-america-percentage-of-children-in-u-s-population-hits-record-low/"]Currently, people younger than age 18 take up 24% of the entire U.S. population[/URL][/quote]
5% + 13% + 24% = 42%
[B]lmfao he's counting children and retired people.[/B]
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51771708]42%? The hell is the this guy's dealer?
5% + 13% + 24% = 42%
[B]lmfao he's counting children and retired people.[/B][/QUOTE]
Well, he is going to need a lot of manpower for the wall.
Clearly these jobs are because trump makes everyone so confident in the economy!
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51771708]42%? The hell is the this guy's dealer?
5% + 13% + 24% = 42%
[B]lmfao he's counting children and retired people.[/B][/QUOTE]
We need to get rid of burdensome regulations like child labor laws! They are the worst deal ever!
[QUOTE=Tigster;51771918]We need to get rid of burdensome regulations like child labor laws! They are the worst deal ever![/QUOTE]
a literal NANNY state
its OK because trump always thinks his own employment rate is much higher. "i saved 1 bazillion jobs in indiana" vs less than 400
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51771708]
[B]lmfao he's counting children and retired people.[/B][/QUOTE]
Labor potential the Republicans would love to tap into.
Not even being facetious, they've talked about rolling back child labor laws in recent years. Wisconsin and Maine in particular iirc
Isn't the Underemployment number in the US around 42% though?
[QUOTE=Senscith;51772069]Isn't the Underemployment number in the US around 42% though?[/QUOTE]
Quick google search says 14%
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51772072]Quick google search says 14%[/QUOTE]
And underemployment isn't the same thing as unemployment either way. Definitely something that needs to be addressed, of course.
There is quite a high level of hardcore unemployment / those that have been unemployed for so long, or aren't looking that they aren't counted in the participation rate, and thus are not considered in the unemployment rate. But I doubt with even those included they would be reaching levels of 42%...
Maybe the Labor Participation Rate factors into this?
[IMG]https://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/latest_numbers_LNS11300000_2007_2017_all_period_M01_data.gif[/IMG]
LPR is the amount of (non-institutionalized) adult Americans either employed or actively looking for a job, whereas unemployment simply doesn't count adults not looking for employment.
[IMG]https://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/latest_numbers_LNS14000000_2007_2017_all_period_M01_data.gif[/IMG]
[QUOTE=DogGunn;51772100]There is quite a high level of hardcore unemployment / those that have been unemployed for so long, or aren't looking that they aren't counted in the participation rate, and thus are not considered in the unemployment rate. But I doubt with even those included they would be reaching levels of 42%...[/QUOTE]
It's a hard number to figure out too. Because you could exit the work force for many reasons.
[URL]http://www.epi.org/publication/missing-workers/[/URL]
Here's one estimation, it's really not too much. Some relatively high numbers I've found put it at 5 million... and that gets us to about 8%. Quite a far cry from anywhere near 42%
its pretty clever
by stating that the bar is at 42% unemployment, regardless what happens he can just state "see, the jobless rate is at 18% after 2 years, i lowered it by 24%! Great!"
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51771708]42%? The hell is the this guy's dealer?
5% + 13% + 24% = 42%
[B]lmfao he's counting children and retired people.[/B][/QUOTE]
This combined with coal laws being repealed makes me think that Donny thinks that the 00's were when America was great.
The 1900's.
[IMG]http://i.amz.mshcdn.com/bbgJyo3mNwiLfAFMJzuq5lUJ944=/http%3A%2F%2Fa.amz.mshcdn.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F10%2Fchildminers-14.jpg[/IMG]
Look how happy they are!
One of them is even smiling.
Nah it builds character!
Doesn't stunt growth at all I swear!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.