home

Good Jobs Number: 192K Jobs Gained, Unemployment At 8.9%

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Economy
Posted on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 07:56:13 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A good jobs report:

The nation’s employers added 192,000 jobs on net in February, after having added just 63,000 jobs the previous month, the Labor Department reported on Friday. [. . .] The unemployment rate ticked down to 8.9 percent, falling below 9 percent for the first time in nearly two years.

Of course, we've been down this road before, a few good job reports followed by mostly bad reports. And with "austerity" the watchword in Washington and in state capitols, my personal view is this will be remembered as a blip. But today, this is good news.

Speaking for me only

< Obama Pledges Expanded Information Sharing In Mexican Drug War | A Time To Kill . . . The "Recovery" >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Good Jobs Number: 192K Jobs Gained, Unemployment At 8.9% | 23 comments (23 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Sadly this isn't a good a jobs (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 08:31:34 AM EST
    report since we need to create 250,000 a month to even be keeping up the semblance of a recovery.  It is a better figure than last month, and that is now labeled a good jobs report.  And the BLS unemployment figure is mostly a specifically designed distortion of reality these days.

    Good? (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by TJBuff on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 11:00:36 AM EST
    In normal times good would be +250,000.  +192,000 might make "fair".

    This is NOT a jobs report (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Dadler on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 07:05:05 PM EST
    It is, as these "reports" ALWAYS are, an absolute lie, fabricated by the government to keep the American people believing in Santa Claus. This nation is in the process not of dying as much as committing slow but increasingly paced suicide.

    Nope (none / 0) (#1)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 08:28:41 AM EST
    Gallup says 10.3%

    And the previous Fed's numbers dropped because they didn't count those who were unemployed and who had quit looking.

    Many guess the effective rate is around 17%.

    Gasoline is near $3.50 and going up.

    The economy will go down, down, down.

    I consider the Gallup figures (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 08:33:07 AM EST
    on current unemployment at this time to be far more accurate than any unemployment figures the government is force feeding me.

    Parent
    If we were getting more than the (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 09:28:00 AM EST
    nominal unemployment numbers, people really would be in the streets with torches and pitchforks; besides, broadcasting the real numbers would get in the way of advancing this cut-cut-cut policy.

    Wonder how they're going to handle what happens after Austerity 2011 gets rolling?  Guess that will be just more impetus to crack on the old, the sick and the poor for feeding at the government trough...

    Parent

    Their job numbers would have been (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 09:32:12 AM EST
    a lot better except that we lost a bunch of state and municipal gov jobs.  This won't get better either this year, the problem is going to get worse.  If the Fed gov cuts we will be losing Federal jobs as well as state and local municipalities.  Who knows if they will ever see a jobs months like this one again this year, but they certainly won't if they begin Federal spending cuts.

    Parent
    And one thing really gets to me too (none / 0) (#6)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 09:34:00 AM EST
    That they had the big banks stress test to 11% unemployment recently.  Why would they do that?  Because they know exactly what is going to happen and apparently they are going to do it anyway.

    Parent
    Speaking of stress tests, (5.00 / 0) (#17)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 02:28:20 PM EST
    How hard will it be to pass them when the banks came up with the questions that - surprise! - are expected to produce the answers they want?

    This set of exams, announced in November, is Son of Stress Test 2009, a followup to tests the Fed conducted in the wake of the financial crisis.

    But something seems different this time around. It's almost as if the banks knew their results, even before the testing was complete.

    Since the end of last year, banks have been bragging about their rude health. Bank of America's chief executive, Brian T. Moynihan, suggested that the bank would raise its dividend above its current token amount. Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase's leader, did the same. Warren E. Buffett suggested in his shareholder letter that Wells Fargo was about to pass with flying colors.

    Of course, banks ought to have a good idea of the results. They came up with the questions -- and the answers.  The Fed gave the banks one economic assumption -- a recession -- to test their books against, but otherwise the measures were chosen by banks themselves. The Fed just vetted them. Seems like a low bar.

    How come everyone else gets to live in La-La Land, and I have to deal with reality?


    Parent

    You don't make enough money (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 02:30:59 PM EST


    Parent
    Yeah, I suspected as much. Sigh. (none / 0) (#19)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 02:40:18 PM EST
    Don't make enough money, don't know enough "important" people; no power, so who cares what happens to me, what my life is like, as long as those who have those powerful and comfortable lifestyles get to keep them?  I keep forgetting that WE work for THEM now...

    I probably should take the advice my dad always gave us when we were kids and feeling sorry for ourselves: just head on out to the back yard and eat worms.

    Ground's nice and soft, so I might find some nice, juicy, fat ones to take my mind off the state of things...and my husband likes to fish, so I can share some of my bounty.

    Finally, a win-win!


    Parent

    Gummy worms are better (none / 0) (#20)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 02:53:14 PM EST
    Especially the green ones.

    Parent
    It gets to me too.... (none / 0) (#12)
    by ruffian on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 12:23:25 PM EST
    they should be stress-testing the banks to at least 15% unemployment.

    Parent
    Then stress test... (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 01:29:47 PM EST
    the bank vault door in case it hits 25%.

    "A hungry mob is an angry mob..."

    Parent

    I need a stress test (none / 0) (#14)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 01:40:11 PM EST


    Parent
    Not me... (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 01:53:21 PM EST
    A certain prohibited home remedy for stress does wonders...is that something you might be interested in? (j/k)

    Parent
    Ha ha! (none / 0) (#16)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 01:59:11 PM EST


    Parent
    It also doesn't count (none / 0) (#22)
    by Zorba on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 08:08:18 PM EST
    part time workers who want to have full time jobs, nor the underemployed- those who are working full time but for far less money than previously.  

    Parent
    More (none / 0) (#7)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 09:51:24 AM EST
    From the BLS

    The number of unemployed persons (13.7 million) and the unemployment rate (8.9 percent) changed little in February. The labor force was about unchanged over the month. The jobless rate was down by 0.9 percentage point since November 2010.(See table A-1.)

    Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (8.7 percent), adult women (8.0 percent), teenagers (23.9 percent), whites (8.0 percent), blacks (15.3 percent), and Hispanics (11.6 percent) showed little or no change in February. The jobless rate for Asians was 6.8 percent, not seasonally adjusted. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

    The number of job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, at 8.3 million, continued to trend down in February and has fallen by 1.2 million over the past 12 months. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more)was 6.0 million and accounted for 43.9 percent of the unemployed. (See tables A-11 and A-12.)

    Both the civilian labor force participation rate, at 64.2 percent, and the employment-population ratio, at 58.4 percent, were unchanged in February. (See table A-1.)

    The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was essentially unchanged at 8.3 million in February. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)

    In February, 2.7 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, up from 2.5 million a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

    Among the marginally attached, there were 1.0 million discouraged workers in February, a decrease of 184,000 from a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.7 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in February had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)
    The "discouraged workers" must no longer (none / 0) (#8)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 10:41:49 AM EST
    be receiving unemployment benefits, because, if they were, they at least have to participate in applying on line as to Monster.com job opportunities.

    Parent
    When I claim unemployment in DC (none / 0) (#9)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 11:00:00 AM EST
    I just have to do job searches on the DC government's website - not Monster.com or any other national board.  I don't know if that gets counted or not.

    Parent
    You eventually run out of Monster.com (none / 0) (#11)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 12:03:59 PM EST
    options.

    Parent
    Better - Not So Fast (none / 0) (#23)
    by cal1942 on Sun Mar 06, 2011 at 12:26:35 PM EST
    Analysis of gains is not so encouraging or surprising.

    The diminishing middle class.

    Good Jobs Number: 192K Jobs Gained, Unemployment At 8.9% | 23 comments (23 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment