-
Farewell to the Spectator
December 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
Tentative Praise for Ryan's New Bipartisan Medicare Plan
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
-
The Day Ahead: Thursday, December 15
December 15, 2011 | 0 comments
-
Examiner for Romney, National Review Against Gingrich
December 14, 2011 | 39 comments
-
Paul Ryan to Introduce New Medicare Plan with Democrat Ron Wyden
December 14, 2011 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
This morning the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the monthly jobs numbers. The news is all bad.
Payroll employment decreased by 95,000, leaving the unemployment rate unchanged at 9.6 percent. The private sector's gain of 64,000 was wiped out by the loss of 159,000 government jobs, 77,000 of which were temporary Census jobs.
Make no mistake, those are terrible numbers.
In general, bad news on employment hurts the administration and the Democrats politically. But today's numbers won't shape the political landscape one way or another, as close as it is to the election. There was almost no jobs report imaginable that could have made people think better of the incumbents' economic stewardship.
The administration's spin is that this is the ninth month in a row that the private sector has added jobs. True, that is an indication that the economy is improving. But when 15 million workers are out of a job, the underemployment rate increases (to 17.1 percent from 16.7), and the unemployment rate has been above 9.5 percent for the longest period since the Great Depression, it's futile to argue that the private sector is growing robustly.
Similarly, the liberal, pro-government spending interpretation of the report is that the problem is Republican opposition to fiscal aid to the states, which are shedding government jobs. There's truth to this, but remember that states could simply cut employees' wages instead of firing them. Also, the state employee job losses are insignificant relative to the private sector job growth that would represent real recovery, that is, hundreds of thousands of jobs per month. But at least we no longer have to suffer claims that fiscal stimulus will "prime the pump" or "kick-start the economy."
View all comments (9) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Joseph Lawler
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/10/08/the-job-numbers
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
Special Feature
Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:
FLASHBACK TO: 1984
-
The Fairness Delusion
The speech our President should make.
-
Media Smears: One Man’s Experiences
A noted economist fires back.
-
Chuck Colson vs. The Fundamentalists
How political can you get?
-
The Reagan Doctrine
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
-
The Woman Problem
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Franklin| 10.8.10 @ 11:54AM
The "Bureau of Labor Statistics" ... isn't this a government organization? They probably used fuzzy math to make sure the unemployment percentage didn't rise. It still doesn't help the progressives, but if it had gone up it would have been worse for them. Gallop had it at 10% +. Could someone fact check the numbers to see if the numbers were cooked?
PattyMor| 10.8.10 @ 12:37PM
I too, no longer trust any information coming out
of the government. They lie, distort, and revise numbers to suit their purposes.
Tim*| 10.8.10 @ 12:38PM
These Bad U-3 & U-6 Unemployment Figures mean The Midterm Election Tsunami is coming .
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .
Rise Up !
JP| 10.8.10 @ 1:54PM
What has me worried right now is the price of commodities. Both Europe and Asia are not not reacting well to the talk coming out of the Fed. Bernecke, even at this late date, is still wanting to add more QE (Quantiative Easing -ie priint more money). Foreign markets have reacted by dumping dollars. Investors are flocking to safe habors -mainly god and commodities. The upward price pressure on stocks are generated mainly by cheap and plentiful money made available by earlier QE.
Yet, despite all of this new QE little in the way of jobs have been generated. This has Bernecke confused. It wasn't suppose to work this way. He didn't factor in the effects of Obama's fiscal and regulatory policies. These have made investors nervous and caused too much uncertainty. Two to three trillion dollars of Fortune 1000 cash remains on the sidelines. Or worse, it is heading overseas to friendlier business climates.
But, in the meantime, inflation is now a big worry. Look for energy and food to spike in the coming weeks and months. It will be 2008 all over again. And by the time Bernecke reacts it will be too late. Any uptick in interest rates will spell double trouble for 2011-2012.
Warrior| 10.8.10 @ 3:15PM
The liberal argument during for both Reagan and W's unemployment numbers were that the jobs created were on the lower end of the pay spectrum. They should have to explain what type of jobs were gained in the private sector. Before they all start glad handing once another, they should also realize that for the last 2 years they have been adjusting the job numbers to the negative after the initial reports numbers are adjusted, which gets no media air time at all.
gearjammer| 10.9.10 @ 4:38PM
People holding " go slow " sign and directing traffic as we do all this fab private sector work are the new private sector jobs. This is what they are bragging about. And, I guess there may be an uptick in cement and asphalt here and there, as well. This emaciated pencil necked geek of a president will never deliver a strong and robust economy or anything else.
Skeptical| 10.9.10 @ 6:43PM
I think a more realistic unemployment number is in the 15% to 20% range. Consider: in one year, 2009, the administration tells us the percentage of the population not covered by unemployment insurance increased by 10%. That indicates to me that a good number of that 10% lost their jobs. And again: the administration tells us that highway fatalities decreased by 10% in 2009. Their explanation is improved automotive safety standards, better policing, etc. But the fact is - there WERE no safety advances in 2009, no improved policing. Look at the rush hour traffic here and what you see is - there are a lot fewer cars on the road. Again, an indicator that the 10% decrease points to a 10% increase in unemployment in 2009 over 2008.
Oldefarte| 10.10.10 @ 10:13AM
The economic [and the unemployment] numbers will not improve until Obama/Democrats are defeated [or at least until their numbers can be reduced relative to non-radical political leaders]. Face facts, folks, we have been invaded and captured by a bunch of extremist, socialistic subversives that are intent upon destroying our CAPAITALISTIC COUNTRY. Our only solution lies in the 11/2/10 [and beyond] elections, and it is strictly my/your/our voting efforts which will repair the current damage done!!!!
jgo| 10.10.10 @ 1:34PM
Unemployment insurance benefit eligibility expiring has no effect on the unemployment rates. It's a totally separate set of data, with it's own "insured unemployment rate".
The unemployment rates are based on the monthly "Current Population Survey" "Household Survey" of 60K households. The pay-roll figures, average weekly hours worked, and average weekly pay are based on the monthly "Current Employment Statistics" "Establishment Survey" of 100K firms.
23 days to the general election on 2010-11-02.