• 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!

Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

Helix

Helix

Administrator
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
91,888
Reaction score
90,764
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. economy added a fairly solid number of new jobs in March as employers reverted to their average pace of hiring after the unusually harsh winter weather.The Labor Department said Friday that the economy created a net 192,000 new jobs last month, just about as many as in February and the average for all of last year. Economists had forecast job growth of about 200,000 for last month.




Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7% - latimes.com
Click to expand...

monthly jobs report. rage or rejoice.
 
Don't know why anyone would rage; more jobs is a good thing.
 
Your Star said:
Don't know why anyone would rage; more jobs is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Wages dropped, indicating these are primarily low wage and part time jobs. It's like the economy is settling into 6.7% unemployment.
 
Good job everyone.
 
Your Star said:
Don't know why anyone would rage; more jobs is a good thing.
Click to expand...

teamsports. when your side has the presidency, economic reports are lauded or explained away. when out of power, every job report, good or bad, is horrible. good job reports are a conspiracy to cover up the weakness of the real economy.

it switches back and forth. i post these threads as an experiment to see how individuals react now as a comparison point to how they will react to similar job reports once their side is out of power / back in power. should be fascinating.
 
Helix said:
monthly jobs report. rage or rejoice.
Click to expand...

One would assume that, if the unemployment rate is unchanged that the economy lost about 192000 jobs as well?
 
fmw said:
One would assume that, if the unemployment rate is unchanged that the economy lost about 192000 jobs as well?
Click to expand...

no, i assume the unemployment rate stayed the same because more people began looking for work again.

How the Government Measures Unemployment

The unemployment rate was unchanged at 6.7 percent. But a half-million Americans started looking for work last month, and most of them found jobs. The increase in job-seekers is a sign that they were more optimistic about their prospects.

Steady, Not Spectacular: US Jobs up 192K in March - ABC News
Click to expand...
 
fmw said:
One would assume that, if the unemployment rate is unchanged that the economy lost about 192000 jobs as well?
Click to expand...
No, the economy was +192,000 jobs. When you take all the jobs which were added and remove the ones which were subtracted, you're left with 192,000.

The reason for the unemployment rate not changing is generally due to a change in the number of people in the labor force (in this case, more people in the labor force).
 
AJiveMan said:
Bad news, I'm guessing Obama won't be reelected. :lol:
Click to expand...


no need for a reelection. Obama, Bush, and Hillary Clinton will cross the Potomac and form a new triumvirate. when this happens, every job report will become good and bad at the same time, resulting in division by zero and the space time continuum shrinking back to pre-big bang size and density. then everything will begin again.

max out your credit cards.
 
Slyfox696 said:
No, the economy was +192,000 jobs. When you take all the jobs which were added and remove the ones which were subtracted, you're left with 192,000.

The reason for the unemployment rate not changing is generally due to a change in the number of people in the labor force (in this case, more people in the labor force).
Click to expand...

Well then, other than my normal disbelief in whatever the government says, I'll view it as good news. Happy to know it.
 
jmotivator said:
Wages dropped, indicating these are primarily low wage and part time jobs. It's like the economy is settling into 6.7% unemployment.
Click to expand...

Yup.

Average pay went down, manufacturing went down (slightly) and the largest area of growth outside of 'leisure and hospitality' was 'temporary help services'.

Trillions of dollars pouring in from the Fed/government and record low interest rates and this is all it produces - other then propping up the stock markets (which benefits almost exclusively the rich).
 
Helix said:
no need for a reelection. Obama, Bush, and Hillary Clinton will cross the Potomac and form a new triumvirate. when this happens, every job report will become good and bad at the same time, resulting in division by zero and the space time continuum shrinking back to pre-big bang size and density. then everything will begin again.

max out your credit cards.
Click to expand...
:lamo
 
DA60 said:
Yup.

Average pay went down, manufacturing went down (slightly) and the largest area of growth outside of 'leisure and hospitality' was 'temporary help services'.

Trillions of dollars pouring in from the Fed/government and record low interest rates and this is all it produces - other then propping up the stock markets (which benefits almost exclusively the rich).
Click to expand...

That is the other point that people need to understand. This is the economy on life support. These numbers we see today are not sustainable numbers. At some point the interest rates will rise above 0.25% and the fire hose spraying cash at banks will need to be turned off. That is when we find out what kind of economy we actually have.
 
Eric7216 said:
Mixed bag, isn't it? I noticed that the number working part time for economic reasons had a increase of 225,000 in March. Not sure if that means that we actually had a loss in full time employment.

Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Click to expand...

not sure; could be. there's this :

Some other labor market indicators were also positive. The average workweek rose to 34.5 hours from 34.3 hours amid the better weather. Average hourly earnings dipped one cent, however, to $24.30.
Click to expand...

and then this :

A broader measure of joblessness that includes part-time employees who prefer full-time jobs and those who've given up looking for work, as well as the unemployed — ticked up to 12.7% from 12.6%.
Click to expand...

Employers add 192,000 jobs in March
 
jmotivator said:
Wages dropped, indicating these are primarily low wage and part time jobs.
Click to expand...
By one cent, yes. This would also be only the second time hourly wages have dropped in the past year.
 
As I understand things, most of the jobs added over the last few years have been lower-income than those that were lost.

So while it is a positive that there are more jobs, I don't think you could say that the economy has recovered to it's previous point.

Well, the Stock market is kinda doing it's own thing, all the time, somehow...
 
The Mark said:
As I understand things, most of the jobs added over the last few years have been lower-income than those that were lost.
Click to expand...
Which is not surprising because there is a larger talent pool than before. When there are multiple people eager to fill one job, you can afford to pay that position less because someone really needs the job and will take less. When the potential employee pool shrinks, then the position becomes harder to fill and wages/benefits go up to entice people to the position.

Our country needs to focus on finding ways to get people jobs, to incentivize hiring in the country. The problem with this is there's always another election coming around and the last thing one party wants to do is pass legislation which will allow the other party to take credit for getting someone a job and better wages/salary.
 
Slyfox696 said:
Which is not surprising because there is a larger talent pool than before. When there are multiple people eager to fill one job, you can afford to pay that position less because someone really needs the job and will take less. When the potential employee pool shrinks, then the position becomes harder to fill and wages/benefits go up to entice people to the position.

Our country needs to focus on finding ways to get people jobs, to incentivize hiring in the country. The problem with this is there's always another election coming around and the last thing one party wants to do is pass legislation which will allow the other party to take credit for getting someone a job and better wages/salary.
Click to expand...
I actually meant that the new jobs were much lower income than the old jobs - not that the old jobs were filled with lower-paid new-hires. That the old higher-pay jobs are gone, and these new jobs are more entry-level in nature.

Which makes sense, really. I just don't think you can compare job numbers without taking into account the wages paid for that job and the hours worked.

A 40 hr/week manufacturing job that pays 20$/hr (more?) with health care and retirement benefits cannot compared favorably to a 30 hr/week (or less) job that pays min wage.

Edit: But I'm sure in some cases your described scenario applies.
 
a351 said:
By one cent, yes. This would also be only the second time hourly wages have dropped in the past year.
Click to expand...

It's a drop, and we have been adding low wage jobs for a while now. The 1 cent drop shows that we aren't improving the quality of jobs that are being created.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom