• 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!

US economy added 69K jobs in May, fewest in a year

Samhain

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
4,939
Reaction score
2,131
Location
Northern Ohio
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
US economy added 69K jobs in May, fewest in a year - Yahoo! Finance

WASHINGTON (AP) -- U.S. employers created 69,000 jobs in May, the fewest in a year, and the unemployment rate ticked up. The dismal jobs figures could fan fears that the economy is sputtering.

The Labor Department also says the economy created far fewer jobs in the previous two months than first thought. It revised those figures down to show 49,000 fewer jobs created. The unemployment rate rose to 8.2 percent from 8.1 percent in April, the first increase in 11 months.

Glad I re-organized my 401k earlier this week into less volatile options.
 
A couple things to note.

Weak employment numbers in combination with falling prices for all items less food and energy will likely push monetary authorities into another round of quantitative easing. The yield on the 10 year note is approaching the lows it hit in the days leading up to WWII, which is an indicator that money managers are bracing for rough times ahead. Economic slowdown in the Eurozone (Austerity!) does not bode well for manufactures on a global scale. There is evidence of a general contraction coming out of China, although there have been skeptics that point to the over-optimism that tends to flow from Beijing.

A recession will most likely emerge in the U.S. without monetary and fiscal stimulus in 2012.
 
A couple things to note.

Weak employment numbers in combination with falling prices for all items less food and energy will likely push monetary authorities into another round of quantitative easing. The yield on the 10 year note is approaching the lows it hit in the days leading up to WWII, which is an indicator that money managers are bracing for rough times ahead. Economic slowdown in the Eurozone (Austerity!) does not bode well for manufactures on a global scale. There is evidence of a general contraction coming out of China, although there have been skeptics that point to the over-optimism that tends to flow from Beijing.

A recession will most likely emerge in the U.S. without monetary and fiscal stimulus in 2012.

Except prices aren't falling. Let's get real, there will be no directed fiscal stimulus in 2012, and a recession in the US before year-end is highly unlikely. The only catalyst for such an event would be a dramatic event in Europe (e.g. banking/bond collapse in Spain) and would not hinge on whether more stimulus is passed in the United States. A sterilized QE3 has been expected for awhile, and there is little chance for an unsterilized QE in an election year while rates are low and prices are rising. The only real threat of recession is the fiscal cliff in 2013. Frankly, these job numbers are unsurprising as the affect of excessive seasonal adjustments are finally wearing off.
 
Last edited:
Except prices aren't falling. Let's get real, there will be no directed fiscal stimulus in 2012, and a recession in the US before year-end is highly unlikely. The only catalyst for such an event would be a dramatic event in Europe (e.g. banking/bond collapse in Spain) and would not hinge on whether more stimulus is passed in the United States. A sterilized QE3 has been expected for awhile, and there is little chance for an unsterilized QE in an election year while rates are low and prices are rising. The only real threat of recession is the fiscal cliff in 2013. Frankly, these job numbers are unsurprising as the affect of excessive seasonal adjustments are finally wearing off.

The CPI was flat in April which is to be expected as fuel prices continue to move lower. However, it will be interesting to see where prices for items less food and energy end up in mid June, when CPI numbers for May are released. Also, a sterilized QE is not QE by definition alone (sterilization keeps excess reserves constant).
 
Figuring at some point today it will be ‘Bush’s fault’…uh, wait one…:


“Problems in the job market were long in the making and will not be solved overnight”

The Employment Situation in May | The White House

That didn’t take long…:lamo
 
I don't think it is going to take a dramatic event to push us into another recession. I think continued marginal economic inpacts will be the catalyst for our next recession. There will be no big dot com blow up or asian financial crisis. It will be crippled recovery throughout the world.
 
But any good news about the economy and Bush's name is never mentioned.

Funny how that works.

Let's see how much fun you have defending the "victim of circumstance" argument. :)
 
Except prices aren't falling.

We're currently in a period of disinflation. Increases in prices are decelerating, as the U.S. economy and some major international economies are decelerating (some have moved back into recession). Certain prices have begun to fall e.g., commodities prices.

Let's get real, there will be no directed fiscal stimulus in 2012, and a recession in the US before year-end is highly unlikely. The only catalyst for such an event would be a dramatic event in Europe (e.g. banking/bond collapse in Spain) and would not hinge on whether more stimulus is passed in the United States. A sterilized QE3 has been expected for awhile, and there is little chance for an unsterilized QE in an election year while rates are low and prices are rising. The only real threat of recession is the fiscal cliff in 2013. Frankly, these job numbers are unsurprising as the affect of excessive seasonal adjustments are finally wearing off.

Averting the fiscal cliff will require renewal of significant portions of tax-side stimulus packages that were adopted in 2001 and 2003, among some other changes. Also, he didn't necessarily predict new rounds of fiscal and monetary policy stimulus. He suggested that a recession would "most likely emerge in the U.S." without such stimulus.

If I were to venture a guess, the Fed will not change its interest rates (repeatedly indicated by the Fed) and would probably try another "Operation Twist"-type arrangement rather than full-fledged quantitative easing if things remain on the current trajectory. Additional significant deterioration in Europe and the threat of spillovers/contagion would likely lead the Fed to take additional action that could include QE3, substantial swap agreements to assure liquidity in U.S. and international markets, temporary facilities, and other coordinated measures with the ECB and perhaps other international central banks. The recent notable deceleration in Chinese growth offers another possible macroeconomic shock, but developments in Europe appear to have the greatest possibility of triggering more aggressive monetary policy stimulus.


In terms of fiscal policy, 2012 campaign dynamics preclude any additional meaningful fiscal stimulus. I also expect that the U.S. will largely avoid the "fiscal cliff," but there will likely be no meaningful medium-term fiscal consolidation. Some smaller stimulative measures might be considered e.g., another renewal of the current reduced payroll tax rates, but those measures would likely be modest and relatively insignificant overall in macroeconomic terms.
 
Averting the fiscal cliff will require renewal of significant portions of tax-side stimulus packages that were adopted in 2001 and 2003, among some other changes. Also, he didn't necessarily predict new rounds of fiscal and monetary policy stimulus. He suggested that a recession would "most likely emerge in the U.S." without such stimulus.

Thank you Don, i would however like to expand on that point. Lame duck sessions are a byproduct of the political status quo, but we should not expect this mentality to take hold until after the election (at the very most, the weeks leading up to it). It is my opinion that a timely response is a critical component of any successful stimulus, and sadly i look to China to authorize public works projects and grants for both health care and education needs way before the U.S. enacts another tax cut.

If a fiscal response cannot be constructed and implemented adequately (meaning that we go into recession after tax cuts in 2013), perhaps it shouldn't be done at all? My faith in Washington D.C.'s ability to address the economy as it requires continues to reach new lows.
 
Are you implying that is good?
I think he was implying that things could be worse:

The 17-nation eurozone's unemployment rate reached the highest level since the creation of the common currency 13 years ago, climbing to 11% in April as employers slashed 110,000 jobs.

The unemployment rate in the broader 27-nation area that makes up the European Union rose to 10.3% in April, as employers trimmed 102,000 jobs from their payrolls. That was highest EU unemployment rate on records that go back to 2000.
Eurozone unemployment at record high 11% - Jun. 1, 2012
 
The "May" report we received here from the BLS on the first of June, which reflects conditions from the second week in April through the first week in May, and is thus mostly about April ..

.. Reflected an increase in the labor force itself by 635,000 people, meaning not that just more young people entered the work force than older people filed for retirement, but that, as reports are saying, some people, "hopeful" from all the hype of "recovery is happening", set their more justified discouragement aside and started actively looking for work again.

The very fact that they started actively looking for work again, a number of whom were apparently among the household survery conducted each month by the BLS, caused these people to be categorized as being part of the labor force, and thus, because they weren't working, unemployed.

That caused the unemployment rate to tick up a notch.

Imagine if all of these people, these "discouraged workers", as they're called, were rightly counted as being unemployed that they truely indeed are.

That's right: 13.5% unemployment rate when the accurate count of them is included.

But, sadly for these people, the jobs added in the previous two reporting periods was greatly overstated -- that's why they call it "hype" with regard to the recovery "hype" -- and that number was, as the reporting states, revised downward.

No, we are not that far from a critical mass downward economic spiral .. which is going to take a lot of very angry Americans down with it.

Without heroic action on the part of the executive and congress, especially as we now go into the summer doldrums, we can truly only rightly expect the horrific inevitable.
 
Its not backwards, we aren't losing jobs. Its just not keeping up.
 
We're currently in a period of disinflation. Increases in prices are decelerating, as the U.S. economy and some major international economies are decelerating (some have moved back into recession). Certain prices have begun to fall e.g., commodities prices.

The sell off in energy prices over the past month represent short-term volatility and can be considered a healthy correction from highs seen earlier in the year. A 2-month decline in commodity prices is hardly indicative of disinflation. The core measures of inflation watched by the Fed are not showing signs of disinflation as they did in the summer of 2010 when the last round of quantitative easing was passed. With the 10Y and 30Y achieving record lows today and inflation measures close to their long-term target, there is little justification for an unsterilized QE3 at this time.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fredgraph.png?g=7D5
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fredgraph.png?g=7Da

Averting the fiscal cliff will require renewal of significant portions of tax-side stimulus packages that were adopted in 2001 and 2003, among some other changes. Also, he didn't necessarily predict new rounds of fiscal and monetary policy stimulus. He suggested that a recession would "most likely emerge in the U.S." without such stimulus.

If I were to venture a guess, the Fed will not change its interest rates (repeatedly indicated by the Fed) and would probably try another "Operation Twist"-type arrangement rather than full-fledged quantitative easing if things remain on the current trajectory. Additional significant deterioration in Europe and the threat of spillovers/contagion would likely lead the Fed to take additional action that could include QE3, substantial swap agreements to assure liquidity in U.S. and international markets, temporary facilities, and other coordinated measures with the ECB and perhaps other international central banks. The recent notable deceleration in Chinese growth offers another possible macroeconomic shock, but developments in Europe appear to have the greatest possibility of triggering more aggressive monetary policy stimulus.

In terms of fiscal policy, 2012 campaign dynamics preclude any additional meaningful fiscal stimulus. I also expect that the U.S. will largely avoid the "fiscal cliff," but there will likely be no meaningful medium-term fiscal consolidation. Some smaller stimulative measures might be considered e.g., another renewal of the current reduced payroll tax rates, but those measures would likely be modest and relatively insignificant overall in macroeconomic terms.

What I said is that the onset of a recession in the US before the end of 2012 will not hinge on whether new fiscal stimulus is enacted, as no one expects it to happen. As I see it, the most important short-term headwind to US/Global growth is political and financial instability in the Eurozone. I have no doubt the Federal Reserve will continue to employ accommodative monetary policy in coordination with the ECB. However, I find the likelihood of an unsterilized QE in 2012 to be slim to none. The most likely policy action would be renewed purchases of MBS by the Federal Reserve with short-term repo operations to prevent a marked increase in reserves. Operation Twist surpassed has already surpassed it's duration target months before target, and the Federal Reserve is running low on short-term Treasury securities to sell. With rates long rates so low, additional curve flattening would do little to stimulate private credit expansion.

As for fiscal policy, I agree, there will likely be continued deadlock going into the November elections. Any measures passed to prevent the fiscal cliff at the end of the year will be short-term in nature as both parties await the outcomes of the election. As you said, the measures would be relatively insignificant and will not seriously affect short-term economic growth. That was my point. The US won't dip into recession this year simply because there is no new stimulus. The only new stimulus that is expected will be inconsequential. Global economic conditions such as the ones you mentioned will be the deciding factor for US growth in 2012.
 
Last edited:
The sell off in energy prices over the past month represent short-term volatility and can be considered a healthy correction from highs seen earlier in the year. A 2-month decline in commodity prices is hardly indicative of disinflation.

CPI is a lagging indicator. However, if one takes a look at the PPI, the 6-month moving average of the annualized change has generally been trending downward since December. At the same time, that moving average has just ticked lower for CPI. Inflation expectations also turned down and expectations can have an impact on future prices on account of adjusted behavior. Disinflation is not falling prices. Disinflation is decelerating price increases.
 
So the question isn't if we need a stimulus, it is when, and where?

Don mentioned little mini Stimulus packages such as the payroll tax an things of this nature, but I'm not so sure that this is working, frankly. So where do we "invest" in America, and why should we do it. It's not like we have some perfoming markets and some bad one's, it more like we have all of the markets (cept the indexes) in the US underperforming. We can't say, oh hell yeah, the housing market looks ok, no need to tamper there, or, the auot-industry needs a boost, we should dabble there.. It's ALL bad, not a single good or stand on your own market exists in the US right now, and THAT my friends is very scary, and no CPI, or any other measure is needed for me to be able to predict what's coming. Especially in an election year where notoriously poor economic decisions are made by government, one way or the other, as a matter of historical record.

I hate to say it, but against my beter judgement, I truly believe we need to completely take a real punch at global outsourcing, and if ANY stimulus is spent to any great degree, it should be directed fairly at states that wish to aggressively pursue bringing back jobs by way of manufacturing, or by industry, back into the US. The Fed's should pony up some easing by way of pledged proportional grants to the states that wish to go this route. I suspect all will have there hands out, but IMO, I don't see a way out of this mess anytime soon.


Tim-
 
CPI is a lagging indicator. However, if one takes a look at the PPI, the 6-month moving average of the annualized change has generally been trending downward since December. At the same time, that moving average has just ticked lower for CPI. Inflation expectations also turned down and expectations can have an impact on future prices on account of adjusted behavior. Disinflation is not falling prices. Disinflation is decelerating price increases.

I understand the definition of disinflation. Serious disinflation was occurring in 2010 which was the primary justification for QE2. The evidence of disinflation needed to justify a new round of unsterilized QE in June is simply not there. The recent flattening in the growth rate of official inflation measures is typical when inflation is above target. Of course, inflation expectations and disinflationary pressures should be monitored carefully, but the current data hardly justifies additional quantitative easing. Not to mention, there are certainly diminishing returns to continued rounds of unconventional monetary easing. The Federal Reserve is near capacity when it comes to long-term Treasury purchases, so in my eyes their most probable next step is for a more direct approach to stimulating housing prices.

Honestly, this is just my two cents. I respect the fact that both you and Kush are more qualified than I am on these matters. I just firmly believe that extraordinary policy measures require extraordinary circumstances. I dont' believe we should be putting a floor under every minor downtick in prices and growth. Personally, I think this summer will be wild one. If it's anything like the last two, I don't doubt that the Federal Reserve will act. Either way, it should make for an entertaining election season.
 
Considering we average over 350k births every month and 200k death, 69k is going backwards by a very large amount :(

Well... it is not as easy as that... far from it.. which is why even the so called experts that are not partisan hacks (both sides) are seriously looking into revising the "rule of thumb" most politicians and media have been using for years.. because it simply does not fit any more.

There are 4.1 million births a year in the US. Now not all these 4.1 million make it to adulthood, and not all are fit enough for jobs and not all, especially women, go out and get jobs once they hit 16-18 and work all their life. Homemakers are still a large part of the female population, and since females account for about half the 4.1 million growth.. then..

There is also 1 million new immigrants (legal) in the US and that is a falling number.

Then you have to start subtracting due to deaths. How many of the 2.4 million deaths a year are under 67?

Add to this the 4 to 5 million people who retire each year and leave the work force, and how many of these were homemakers?

Basically it is not an easy number to calculate since the parameters change constantly.
 
Back
Top Bottom