US unemployment hits lowest rate in four years on strong April jobs figures

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 03, 2013 5:50 PM GMT
    Very encouraging, not only for the US economy, but for other Western countries who are considering relaxing their austerity measures.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/may/03/us-unemployment-rate-april-jobs
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 03, 2013 7:26 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidVery encouraging, not only for the US economy, but for other Western countries who are considering relaxing their austerity measures.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/may/03/us-unemployment-rate-april-jobs


    This is probably the most heartening number:
    The number of long-term unemployed – those jobless for 27 weeks or more – declined by 258,000 to 4.4 million and their share of the unemployed declined by 2.2 percentage points to 37.4%. Over the past 12 months, the number of long-term unemployed has decreased by 687,000, and their share has declined by 3.1 points.


    That said, the analysis will come in the coming days as to where they've gone and whether or not they actually got employed or just left the job market. It's funny to read the weird attempt to minimize the growth towards the end of the article though - which effectively shows what a bust the fears over sequester - making the exact opposite point you've attempted to make when you say "but for other Western countries who are considering relaxing their austerity measures."

    In fact, there's a good argument here that there should be across the board budget cuts in the next round of budget talks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 2:27 AM GMT
    And on cue:
    http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/forget-the-unemployment-rate-the-alarming-stat-is-the-number-of-missing-workers-20130503

    The federal government’s latest snapshot of the unemployment rate offered few bright spots Friday. The economy added 165,000 jobs in April—slightly better than March’s revised number of 138,000 jobs. Unemployment went down one-tenth of a percentage point to 7.5 percent; and health care, retail trade, and the food-services industry added positions.

    The glaring caveat to this jobs report is the huge number of Americans who remain out of the workforce. Called the "labor force participation rate" in wonkspeak, that number held steady in April at 63.3 percent—the lowest level since 1979.

    The economic blogosphere erupted this week with a debate over why that number has been so low and why so many people have dropped out since the start of the Great Recession. Was the decrease a symptom of the weak job market, or just a sign of baby boomers starting to retire en masse?


    And just a reminder:
    obamaunemploymentfail0413.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 12:14 PM GMT
    An increase in the number of discouraged workers is only a minor factor in the decline in the LFPR. In 2012 there were 909,000 discouraged workers, about 420,000 more than normal relative to the size of the population. Returning these “workers" back into the labor force would only boost the participation rate by 0.17pp, to 63.8 percent (the unemployment rate would increase by 0.25pp, to 8.1 percent).

    http://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-labor-force-participation-rate-falls-2013-4

    Watch the right squirming for the next three and a half years, as the economy continues to strengthen.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 12:17 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidAn increase in the number of discouraged workers is only a minor factor in the decline in the LFPR. In 2012 there were 909,000 discouraged workers, about 420,000 more than normal relative to the size of the population. Returning these “workers" back into the labor force would only boost the participation rate by 0.17pp, to 63.8 percent (the unemployment rate would increase by 0.25pp, to 8.1 percent).

    http://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-labor-force-participation-rate-falls-2013-4

    Watch the right squirming for the next three and a half years, as the economy continues to strengthen.


    There's no doubt that the economy is now strengthening - what's curious is that it has taken this long. And there won't be any squirming on the right so long as we have graphs like this:

    obamaunemploymentfail0413.jpg

    Further, just watch as Obamacare gets implemented. That will be Obama and the Democrats' legacy. I'm sure you'll claim it is a good thing even as even Democrats are pointing out that it is a "train-wreck" when it comes to implementation. But we'll see and I hope you'll watch.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 12:46 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Further, just watch as Obamacare gets implemented. That will be Obama and the Democrats' legacy.


    Doubtless Obamacare will have a bumpy start, but universal healthcare can never be a bad thing. One thing's for sure, the US can only improve upon its generally poor (and expensive) performance in healthcare provision.

    060511krugman1-blog480.jpg
    http://www.commonwealthfund.org/News/News-Releases/2010/Jun/US-Ranks-Last-Among-Seven-Countries.aspx
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 1:08 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 said
    Further, just watch as Obamacare gets implemented. That will be Obama and the Democrats' legacy.


    Doubtless Obamacare will have a bumpy start, but universal healthcare can never be a bad thing. One thing's for sure, the US can only improve upon its generally poor (and expensive) performance in healthcare provision.

    060511krugman1-blog480.jpg
    http://www.commonwealthfund.org/News/News-Releases/2010/Jun/US-Ranks-Last-Among-Seven-Countries.aspx


    And as the major study on healthcare and insurance points out, not only are there negligible results but besides this, when it comes to the US, Obamacare has some really negative "unintended" consequences. You seem to think that having healthcare and insurance have a binary result - but even your own link shows it clearly doesn't. It's not only possible but quite probable that after Obamacare's implementation, the US would remain #7 by their standards.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 1:37 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    And as the major study on healthcare and insurance points out, not only are there negligible results but besides this, when it comes to the US, Obamacare has some really negative "unintended" consequences. You seem to think that having healthcare and insurance have a binary result - but even your own link shows it clearly doesn't. It's not only possible but quite probable that after Obamacare's implementation, the US would remain #7 by their standards.


    There is nothing 'negligible' about a US patient having to pay around twice as much for a similar standard of healthcare as someone in another industrialized country. Clearly, even those who can afford health care in the US are being forced to overpay for it.

    "On measures of efficiency, the U.S ranked last due to low marks when it comes to spending on administrative costs, use of information technology, re-hospitalization, and duplicative medical testing. Nineteen percent of U.S. adults with chronic conditions reported they visited an emergency department for a condition that could have been treated by a regular doctor, had one been available, more than three times the rate of patients in Germany or the Netherlands (6%)."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 1:39 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 said
    And as the major study on healthcare and insurance points out, not only are there negligible results but besides this, when it comes to the US, Obamacare has some really negative "unintended" consequences. You seem to think that having healthcare and insurance have a binary result - but even your own link shows it clearly doesn't. It's not only possible but quite probable that after Obamacare's implementation, the US would remain #7 by their standards.


    There is nothing 'negligible' about a US patient having to pay around twice as much for a similar standard of healthcare as someone in another industrialized country. Clearly, even those who can afford health care in the US are being forced to overpay for it.


    I don't disagree - but this doesn't mean that health outcomes will get better - which is counterintuitive. Further, the negative effects of the legislation will and is already starting to have a negative impact on job growth.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 6:48 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidFurther, the negative effects of the legislation will and is already starting to have a negative impact on job growth.


    A lack of access to health care can also have a negative impact on economic growth. Take, for example, China, where the lack of healthcare and welfare provision means a lot of people squirrel away their cash, in fear of the unknown costs of future care. The consequent lack of consumer spending makes the Chinese economy over-reliant on investment and exports.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2013 10:17 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    riddler78 saidFurther, the negative effects of the legislation will and is already starting to have a negative impact on job growth.


    A lack of access to health care can also have a negative impact on economic growth. Take, for example, China, where the lack of healthcare and welfare provision means a lot of people squirrel away their cash, in fear of the unknown costs of future care. The consequent lack of consumer spending makes the Chinese economy over-reliant on investment and exports.


    A lack of access to health care can have a negative impact on economic growth. Unfortunately Obamacare does nothing to address this - and may in fact make things considerably worse in addition to impacting economic growth more directly.

    With respect to China, they have a lot larger problems than healthcare - like their financial services sector that is basically a black hole of corruption. The oddity is that China's financial services sector is in part a cause of these same issue of savings and consumption. You can't get good insurance products either healthcare or life though that's been changing in a limited way. What holds China back however is not their lack of a government run healthcare network.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2013 12:15 AM GMT
    Meanwhile, another sign of the economic recovery:

    US housing perks up, but too few homes for sale
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10778088
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2013 12:55 AM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidMeanwhile, another sign of the economic recovery:

    US housing perks up, but too few homes for sale
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10778088


    You pointed out earlier the issues with government intervention or lack thereof. And yet, you are so willing to believe real estate despite its numerous interventions is free of such manipulations:
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-04/las-vegas-housing-8-single-family-homes-vacant-yet-new-construction-permits-50

    I will say that I hope you're right... My business depends in part from the construction industry - but we have taken a fairly cautious stance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2013 2:26 AM GMT
    It would explain why we have seen so little of CuriousJockAZ lately.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    May 05, 2013 3:18 AM GMT
    YAY OBAMA!!!icon_biggrin.gif