• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

May employment report: Economy adds 175K jobs

There is no unemployment list used in the BLS Labor Force Statistics. There is a household survey. No questions about benefits are asked and it doesn't make any difference if a person was ever eligible for benefits.

As for giving up. The UE rate is a measure of what percent of people who could be working are not. If a person is not trying to get a job, they could not be working because last I checked, employers don't hire people who haven't applied or in any way talked to them.

You missed the point. The jobs numbers are a mask of reality.
 
More people employed is a good thing. But its just routine now, as job creation hasnt caught up with the labor force yet. 8% unemployment is the new normal. The real problem is congress isnt doing anything about it yet. They havent balanced the budget, lowered taxes, or reduced govt interference in the economy. All of which would help the economy grow faster.
 
You missed the point. The jobs numbers are a mask of reality.

No, they're not. They're the reality of what they're supposed to measure. Complaining that they don't measure something they're not supposed to measure and/or don't show what they're not designed to or can't show is not "reality."
 
No, they're not. They're the reality of what they're supposed to measure. Complaining that they don't measure something they're not supposed to measure and/or don't show what they're not designed to or can't show is not "reality."

The problem is that some people are trying to use those numbers to represent something that they don't represent. There were 175,000 jobs created in May. Wow, 175,000 seems like a lot of jobs, doesn't it?
 
The problem is that some people are trying to use those numbers to represent something that they don't represent. There were 175,000 jobs created in May. Wow, 175,000 seems like a lot of jobs, doesn't it?

Net change of 175,000 jobs. 0.1% monthly change. Not great, but it does represent a growing economy (highest under Bush was 0.3% for comparison). The nature of the jobs is not the best, but it's unclear what the implications are.
 
Net change of 175,000 jobs. 0.1% monthly change. Not great, but it does represent a growing economy (highest under Bush was 0.3% for comparison). The nature of the jobs is not the best, but it's unclear what the implications are.

That's an understatement.

Manufacturing jobs keep vanishing - down 3 months in a row.

Goods producing jobs down 2 of the last 3 months.

And three of the highest individually listed areas of job growth over the last three months are retail trade, temp jobs and leisure and hospitality.

Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted


In other words, Americans aren't producing things - they are just buying things.

And considering the savings rate last month was the lowest since '07 (I believe) - they are going further and further into debt to buy these things.

The only questions to me are how far and when.


This is not a recovery...it's a Fed propped up, debt fuelled, house of cards.

And the minute the Fed ends the QE's and the artificially low interest rates...it's (imo) all going to collapse.
 
Last edited:
In other words, Americans aren't producing things - they are just buying things.

And considering the savings rate last month was the lowest since '07 (I believe) - they are going further and further into debt to buy these things.

Though I agree with the first portion of your post, what I've quoted above isn't necessarily true.

If the money isn't going into savings, and people are buying things, then chances are, that money is going to pay for those things.

Considering the 'interest' that's being paid on savings accounts (non-existent for all intense purposes) versus what the going interest rate is on credit cards (variable, mine is 14.99%) people would be foolish to 'save' rather than pay cash (or the equivalent thereof) for what they purchase.

But not everybody functions that way... they'll spend what they have, and still run up more debt.
 
As the unemployment numbers under Obama have been manipulated by the most egregious shifts in the Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) we have ever seen, this is all smoke-and-mirrors. Were Obama accountable for a more reasonable LFPR, such as just where it was when Stimulus was passed, real unemployment is still over 10%.

Meanwhile, food-stamp rolls have increased by over 50% in less than 5 years of Obama. And still going up. There's your real measure.
 
Though I agree with the first portion of your post, what I've quoted above isn't necessarily true.

If the money isn't going into savings, and people are buying things, then chances are, that money is going to pay for those things.

Considering the 'interest' that's being paid on savings accounts (non-existent for all intense purposes) versus what the going interest rate is on credit cards (variable, mine is 14.99%) people would be foolish to 'save' rather than pay cash (or the equivalent thereof) for what they purchase.

But not everybody functions that way... they'll spend what they have, and still run up more debt.

I am quite sure that was one of the things the Fed had in mind when they dropped rates to near nothing. ..force people to spend their savings (although that is killing seniors on fixed incomes who are trying to live off of heir savings).

But there are other places Americans could put their money. Gold/silver until recently did exceptionally well, stocks will probably continue to climb - more or less - for the time being (as long as the Fed keeps QE's going and increasing).

But simply spending your savings because the average consumer is getting squat from their savings accounts when the recovery is FAR from assured is foolish, IMO.

Unfirtunately, the government seems to be counting on Americans to continue to spend every penny they have, save nothing and go further and further into debt.
 
As the unemployment numbers under Obama have been manipulated by the most egregious shifts in the Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) we have ever seen, this is all smoke-and-mirrors. Were Obama accountable for a more reasonable LFPR, such as just where it was when Stimulus was passed, real unemployment is still over 10%.

Meanwhile, food-stamp rolls have increased by over 50% in less than 5 years of Obama. And still going up. There's your real measure.

Yup, food stamp usage should scream out that this 'recovery' is a joke.

But all Obama lovers (it seems) say about Food Stamps is how great Obama is to be providing the funds for the increase.

Hello?

The fact that the number of Americans who would/could starve without government assistance since Obama took is up over 40%(!?!) is a MAJOR failure...not a success.
 
Net change of 175,000 jobs. 0.1% monthly change. Not great, but it does represent a growing economy (highest under Bush was 0.3% for comparison). The nature of the jobs is not the best, but it's unclear what the implications are.

175k jobs a month is like trying to fill a swimming pool with a table spoon. we need to create 150k to 200k a month just to keep up with population growth. We have the lowest labor participation rate in the last 40 years. if we had the same labor participation rate as we did 5 years ago unemployment would be about 9%
 
175k jobs a month is like trying to fill a swimming pool with a table spoon. we need to create 150k to 200k a month just to keep up with population growth. We have the lowest labor participation rate in the last 40 years. if we had the same labor participation rate as we did 5 years ago unemployment would be about 9%

Yup, the only reason the U-3 rate is 7.6% and not 9.6%+ is because people are leaving the workforce - either through retirement or because they can't find work.

There is no way Obama deserves credit for the drop in the U-3...unless he wants to take credit for forcing people to give up looking for work.


And btw - I am neither a Dem or a Rep.
 
As the unemployment numbers under Obama have been manipulated by the most egregious shifts in the Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) we have ever seen, this is all smoke-and-mirrors.

How is a changing Labor Force Participation Rate "manipulation?" Describe the process that you think happens.
 
Yup, the only reason the U-3 rate is dropping is because people are leaving the workforce - either through retirement or because they can't find work.
Except the Labor Force has been increasing the last couple of years...in fact, that's why the rate went up in May...increase in both Employment and Unemployment.
 
May employment report: Economy adds 175K jobs - CBS News



A modest figure, but one that exceeded expectations by a slight amount. Also important to note is the loss of 14,000 positions at the federal level, reflecting budget cuts, and a sizable decline in manufacturing employment (8k). The full and official report can be found here:

Employment Situation Summary


Employment may have increased, but the types of jobs being created are pretty sucky.

"Occupations paying below-average wages accounted for more than half of last month’s U.S. payroll increase, a dynamic that may restrain consumer spending and the economic recovery." (Bulk of U.S. Payroll Gain in Jobs Paying Less-Than-Average Wages - Bloomberg)

Paul Craig Roberts has found that

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the jobs created are the usual lowly paidnon-exportable domestic service jobs–the jobs of a third world country.

  • Retail trade accounts for 27,700 of the jobs.
  • Wholesale trade accounts for 7,900 jobs.
  • Ambulatory health care services accounts for 15,300 of the jobs.
  • Waitresses and bartenders account for 38,100 of the jobs.
  • Local government accounts for 13,000 of the jobs.
  • Amusements, gambling, and recreation account for 12,500 of the jobs.
  • Temporary help services provided 25,600 jobs.
  • Business support services provided 4,300 jobs.
  • Services to buildings and dwellings provided 6,400 jobs.
  • Accounting and bookkeeping services provided 3,100 jobs.
  • Architectural and engineering services provided 4,900 jobs.
  • Computer systems design and related provided 6,000 jobs (most likely filled by H-1B work visas).
  • Management and technical consulting services provided 3,200 jobs.

Another Phony Jobs Report From A Government That Lies About Everything --Paul Craig Roberts - PaulCraigRoberts.org
 
Except the Labor Force has been increasing the last couple of years...in fact, that's why the rate went up in May...increase in both Employment and Unemployment.
Yeah, the rate went up. And what happened to the U-3? It went up too, despite enough jobs being created that it probably should have stayed at 7.5%.
That just shows how much higher the U-3 would be if all the discouraged workers that have left the work force since Obama took over were actually counted as part of the work force (which they should be, IMO).

During Obama's term(s), the LFPR (Labor Force Participation Rate) has been dropping like a stone.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data


As for the labor force going up? So what? All that means is the birth/immigration rate is still growing strong.

What matters is that the LFPR is shrinking because of retirement/discouraged workers (probably mostly the latter) which is making the U-3 look far better then it really is.
 
Last edited:
As long as MacDonalds and Walmart stay in business, there will be excellent jobs for everyone. This is a good illustration of why we need a minimum wage or manufacturing would have added quite a few $2 an hour jobs.

I have to ask: what is an excellent job?
 
How is a changing Labor Force Participation Rate "manipulation?" Describe the process that you think happens.

If you can't understand how a decrease in the LFPR will mask real unemployment, then you won't understand any further explanation, and I surely do not waste my time when Google can be your friend.

Except the Labor Force has been increasing the last couple of years...in fact, that's why the rate went up in May...increase in both Employment and Unemployment.

The LFPR has most certainly been decreasing since Obama took office. That it spiked up this past month does not a trend make.
 
I am quite sure that was one of the things the Fed had in mind when they dropped rates to near nothing. ..force people to spend their savings (although that is killing seniors on fixed incomes who are trying to live off of heir savings).

But there are other places Americans could put their money. Gold/silver until recently did exceptionally well, stocks will probably continue to climb - more or less - for the time being (as long as the Fed keeps QE's going and increasing).

But simply spending your savings because the average consumer is getting squat from their savings accounts when the recovery is FAR from assured is foolish, IMO.

Unfirtunately, the government seems to be counting on Americans to continue to spend every penny they have, save nothing and go further and further into debt.

Some, myself included, took their savings and paid off/paid down their mortgage or other debts. It wasn't quite what the Fed had in mind I'm sure. That is the best use of cash, if you have it, when you also have debt.

The investment in precious metals is not looking so rosy right now, but at least if you got in when it started rising, you should still have a profit margin of 10-20%. I have no faith in the stock market, which I consider to be artificially inflated by the powers that be, either through QE or being pumped and primed by the big players, which will burst the bubble with devastating effects.
 
Except the Labor Force has been increasing the last couple of years...in fact, that's why the rate went up in May...increase in both Employment and Unemployment.
you uniformed idiot. you are a prime example how ignorance of the American public is what got Obama reelected

May 31, 2013
63.40%

April 30, 2013
63.30%

March 31, 2013
63.30%

Feb. 28, 2013
63.50%

Jan. 31, 2013
63.60%

Dec. 31, 2012
63.60%

Nov. 30, 2012
63.60%

Oct. 31, 2012
63.80%

Sept. 30, 2012
63.60%

Aug. 31, 2012
63.50%

July 31, 2012
63.70%

June 30, 2012
63.80%

May 31, 2012
63.80%

April 30, 2012
63.60%

March 31, 2012
63.80%

Feb. 29, 2012
63.90%

Jan. 31, 2012
63.70%

Dec. 31, 2011
64.00%

Nov. 30, 2011
64.10%

Oct. 31, 2011
64.10%

Sept. 30, 2011
64.20%

Aug. 31, 2011
64.10%

July 31, 2011
64.00%

June 30, 2011
64.00%

May 31, 2011
64.20%

US Labor Force Participation Rate (Monthly, SA)
 
......... What matters is that the LFPR is shrinking because of retirement/discouraged workers (probably mostly the latter) which is making the U-3 look far better then it really is.

FYI, the BLS did a study in 2004, based completely on census data, that measured the projected impact of baby-boomer retirements on the labor force for the 10 year period 2005-2014. These are hard numbers as folks can't grow old but at a very set rate. ;)

During that time frame, the impact was going to be all of a 0.4% negative influence on the LFPR. Which means that for Obama's term so far. where we have seen a 2.3% drop in the LFPR, only 0.2% can be blamed on retirements. 2.1% is on Obama's economy.
 
Among conspiratorial crackpots perhaps. No evidence exists that suggests political gamesmanship or a shift in practices in accordance with Administration changes.

I don't know about that.

Jack Welch certainly didn't believe the administration's jobs numbers before the election either but remember the whole Jobs Saved or Created "statistic" the administration loved early on? That administration specific statistic had everyone employed half a dozen times over no matter how high unemployment rose!

I wouldn't say these jobs added/unemployment numbers are part of a government conspiracy though. Politicians have been manipulating them since their inception but there has always been a media pointing out just how foolish the politicians were - until now. For some reason the New York Times, etc. has forgotten people stop being counted after they've been out of work for too long.
 
Last edited:
you uniformed idiot. you are a prime example how ignorance of the American public is what got Obama reelected

May 31, 2013
63.40%

April 30, 2013
63.30%

March 31, 2013
63.30%

Feb. 28, 2013
63.50%

Jan. 31, 2013
63.60%

Dec. 31, 2012
63.60%

Nov. 30, 2012
63.60%

Oct. 31, 2012
63.80%

Sept. 30, 2012
63.60%

Aug. 31, 2012
63.50%

July 31, 2012
63.70%

June 30, 2012
63.80%

May 31, 2012
63.80%

April 30, 2012
63.60%

March 31, 2012
63.80%

Feb. 29, 2012
63.90%

Jan. 31, 2012
63.70%

Dec. 31, 2011
64.00%

Nov. 30, 2011
64.10%

Oct. 31, 2011
64.10%

Sept. 30, 2011
64.20%

Aug. 31, 2011
64.10%

July 31, 2011
64.00%

June 30, 2011
64.00%

May 31, 2011
64.20%

US Labor Force Participation Rate (Monthly, SA)

Hey now..you are right about the stats...but no need to be calling people 'idiots'.
 
Hey...you are right about the stats.

But no need to be calling people 'idiots'.

I call them as i see them. anyone to make such a false claim are either idiots or liars and they have no creditability, They need to be called out for it so others know not to believe anything they say
 
Back
Top Bottom