Jon Mavrick, seasonal adjustments for January will show up in the January non farm payroll report on the first Friday after the end of the month. Was that a trick question?

Dante - KMart and Sears are laying off soon too ... closing all those stores. Next months numbers are going to be worse again. Don't be naive, this story leads every January.

Ed, to whom is your comment directed? It really is frustrating when some people on here insult someone else and don't take the time to let us all know who they're posting to.

And your grammar and spelling are ridiculous............dude. When you are insulting someone's intelligence, please try to be correct in your spelling and grammar and make an attempt to use language in an intelligent manner.

Thank you and have a nice day!! :)

More political hype. That's about the amount of people hired for the holiday season, and now they are being let go. Also jobs today are usually low paying and part time, not the kind of jobs that help the economy, but a job is a job.

Xina, right. And do they really think anyone is going to believe this nonsense? We also have a lot of troops recently returning home. If there has been any decrease in "unemployment", it is because people's benefits have run out and/or they have stopped looking for work. Any jobs "created" are minimum wage or fracking in ......... where is it? Idaho? North Dakota? Some horribly cold place.

Seasonal jobs that will end and send UE back up in a few weeks. Let's count the people who are underemployed or their UE ran out. I'm figuring around 18% is the truthful number.

And for those dems and repubs that point fingers? You are a big part of the problem. Both parties are at fault and the sooner people (voters) drop their party lines realize that both parties are doing nothing but screwing us in different ways the better off we'll be.

Xina, you just learned the word seasonal adjustment today. Please let this new knowledge settle before you try to understand that January numbers will be seasonally adjusted as well.

I know three people who lost their unemployment benefits in the last few months and now they are not counted as unemployed, but they are not working. Also I know another that took a job at Arby's and she used to be a school teacher.

All the job gains in December came from the private sector, where payrolls rose 212,000 -- the most in three months. Government employment contracted 12,000.

The same trend we've had for two years now: Strong private sector hiring held back by continuing cuts by state governments.

Wow...200,000 jobs created around christmas!!!....there's something that never happens. Democrat or Republican...you Obama lovers make me sick.

The true number is probably a couple hundred thousand jobs lost, if you were to include things like, Farming jobs. Hence why employment numbers are seasonably adjusted, to mitigate the impact of seasonal jobs.

The economy is recovering. One war has ended. Osama Bin Laden is dead. No wonder Republicans are POed. That's not anything like the country they handed off.

middle class,

I don't think getting unemployment payments affects whether or not someone is counted in the unemployment numbers. I believe this number is derived based on a variety of factors - including household surveys. So, the system is designed to account for people like your friends in the unemployment numbers if they are not working as long as they are still looking for work.

As to your friend at Arby's, that's a valid point. It's also why I think the unemployment number is fairly useless by itself. I think the "underemployment" number is much more meaningful - and I wish the news outlets would cover it more.

JonSmith. I'm just going to add to the record that the unemployment rate in December 2010 was 9.4%

Wondering where in the Constitution it says the government shall create jobs.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Fatcat,

I agree the economy is improving. Personally, I think Obama's policies have hindered this recovery, but I realize in something as complex as the US economy, it is difficult (impossible?) to ever state for certain which measures work and which didn't - especially since nobody every gets to fully implement any of their policies. (btw, I'm not a Republican - I'm an independent fiscal conservative/social liberal)

don't think getting unemployment payments affects whether or not someone is counted in the unemployment numbers

Correct; receiving unemployment benifits has no effect on unemployment numbers. As long as you are looking for a job, you are counted under U3 unemployment.

Ron you are entitled to forget what happened in 2009. Amnesia is your right.

Or perhaps you are part of the crowd that thinks we'd be better off without an auto industry or banking sector and somehow if we let ourselves keep spiraling, we'd be better off already. Is that your point?

After 2 years of Obama and all Dems, stimulus this, spending that, the unemployment rate went up. After one year of the Tea Party having some influence and put some type of focus on potential reduced spending at the federal level (i.e. no new Jobs Act Stimulus...remember that piece of crap that never got passed?), unemployment is creeping downward....coincidence, I think not. Now, if we can get all the Dems out, woohoo!!!

For those of you who are going to blame Bush for the first 2 years of Obama, oh puhleeze. We have 5% unemployment (i.e. full employment) under Bush until 2007 when the Dems took over and spending started getting stupid (and revenues to the federal gov't went down...the tax cuts increased revenues from 2003 to 2007...check it). And, for those of you that say the Repubs deserve NO credit because they blocked everything Obama tried to do, I say EXACTLY!!!

See reference above about NO STIMULUS and jobs come back because free market decides...$1 trillion stimulus...unemployment went up and my daughter owes an additional $10,000 in her taxes when she can work as a result....GO TEA PARTY!!!!!!

I know libs, facts are killers, aren't they. Want to see you explain this one away. Obama kept saying how we needed more stimulus....well, ever since it became apparent the feds weren't gong to stimulate the economy, it's slowly been gettting better. And when the Obama did "stimulate" the economy...what we get...more debt and more unemployment...

As they say at Wimbledon...Game, Set, Match....Tea Party...Vote anybody but the Dems and we might just get out of this mess and our kids will have a fighting chance to work for themselves and not the debt Obama and the Dems (and Bush to a lesser extent) created.

I agree the economy is improving. Personally, I think Obama's policies have hindered this recovery, but I realize in something as complex as the US economy, it is difficult (impossible?) to ever state for certain which measures work and which didn't - especially since nobody every gets to fully implement any of their policies. (btw, I'm not a Republican - I'm an independent fiscal conservative/social liberal)

1: I will say that Obama could have been a LOT more effective with how he spent money to solve the economic problem; focusing on business first, while keeping the situation from getting worse, prevented any significant recovery in the short term. Consumer spending drives everything, and with spending down, there was no mechansim for a sustained recovery. A Federal Work program would have been FAR more efficent then the stimulus...[then again, I doubt a Federal Work program would have gotten out of Congress...]

2: Keep in mind, as of January 2010, Democrats lost the ability to overcome a fillabuster. I note hiring slowed right AFTER this point...

3: Sorry to see you without a party; you belong to the pre-Regan Republicans, like me, who were abandoned in the 80's. Essentially, you're a blue-dog now.

Positive news for the US economy has the right wing crying in their tea.

After 2 years of Obama and all Dems, stimulus this, spending that, the unemployment rate went up. After one year of the Tea Party having some influence and put some type of focus on potential reduced spending at the federal level (i.e. no new Jobs Act Stimulus...remember that piece of crap that never got passed?), unemployment is creeping downward....coincidence, I think not. Now, if we can get all the Dems out, woohoo!!!

Unemployment is a trailing statistic. Here's proof:

January 2009: Jobs lost: -750k

January 2011: Jobs gained: ~275k

Thats a net turnaround of over 1 MILLION JOBS PER MONTH in just over two years. Problem is, it takes time to turn hiring from -750k a month to break even, hence why unemployment skyrocketed the first year under Obama. But the damage was done LONG before then.

So try understanding WHY unemployment went up before complaining about it, kay?

After 2 years of Obama and all Dems, stimulus this, spending that, the unemployment rate went up. After one year of the Tea Party having some influence and put some type of focus on potential reduced spending at the federal level (i.e. no new Jobs Act Stimulus...remember that piece of crap that never got passed?), unemployment is creeping downward....coincidence, I think not. Now, if we can get all the Dems out, woohoo!!!

Unemployment is a trailing statistic. Here's proof:

January 2009: Jobs lost: -750k

January 2011: Jobs gained: ~275k

Thats a net turnaround of over 1 MILLION JOBS PER MONTH in just over two years. Problem is, it takes time to turn hiring from -750k a month to break even, hence why unemployment skyrocketed the first year under Obama. But the damage was done LONG before then.

So try understanding WHY unemployment went up before complaining about it, kay?

gamerk2-

That was ONE MONTH!!! Employment had been full...only way you could do was go down. What I am saying that you choose to ignore is that the government spent money, and we got more unemployement. Gov't slow spending, and it slowly comes around. Bush wasn't great, spent too much coin...Dems and Obama got in there and it went NUTS....Clinton and the Repub Congress didn't spend a ton of money and it was pretty good times for all. ONce the spending started to skyrocket in 2007, it got bad, like you noted.

Now that the 1st stimulus is done, the 2nd stimulus didn't go through, QE2 is finished and all the government interaction seems to be stopping...Tea Party...things are turning around....coincidence, I think not...

Paul: Government acts take years to take effect. Stop being so naive.

Bad news for GOP candidates. Obama is going to be the benefactor of an economy on the upswing and recovery. By the elections unemployment may be in the 7% range. Congress is certainly going to get no credit for it, so we're looking at a November landslide victory for Obama.

yea !

..christmas time jobs !!!

(i wonder if the obama admin will report they were just for the christmas shopping season.....maybe obama will take credit for cristmas too )

That was ONE MONTH!!! Employment had been full...only way you could do was go down. What I am saying that you choose to ignore is that the government spent money, and we got more unemployement

Paul, you can't be THAT dense: Obama started with an economy that was loosing 750 THOUSAND jobs every month. Within a year, we were gaining jobs again. But 9 months of ever declining job losses caused unemployment to go up, because it takes time to go from -750k to break even; February 2009, we lost ~650k, the next month, 550k, etc. Job losses declined almost immediatly, but unemployment went up until we reached break even. [I note Regan had the same EXACT thing happen to him; job losses declined after he took office, but unemployment skyrockted, because its a trailing statistic]

Look at any graph of job hirings starting 2008 through 2011: You see that job losses per month PEAKED January 2009, and declined every single month afterward until we were in positive territory.

Ruken-

And the private sector takes months...start relying on the intelligent, movers and shakers in this economy, and not the beauracrats in DC, and watch things change. These was a saying when I was in grad school. Those that can do go into consulting or industry, those that can't will teach, and those that can't do either go work for the government. And, we are seeing that play out right now.

Not saying that all government workers are bad (and all private sector employees are great), but I've worked with plenty at the EPA and at the State level. And, they hinder progress and the implementation of new technologies that will protect our water supplies, not help it. And, that's my business.

By the elections unemployment may be in the 7% range

I very much doubt that; 200k jobs a month is NOT going to put a real dent in unemplyment, especially since a lower UE rate is going to cause more people to look for work, causing it to rise again. [Hence why UE is a horrible statistic; I track monthly hirings instead, as it gives a better overall economic picture].

I will say Obama crushes anyone besides Romney; as a northeastern Republican [AKA: Blue Dog Democrat], he puts a lot of the NE in play; he could win Michigan and Ohio easily, winning the election right there. As long as Romney does NOT adjust right, he wins.

The economy’s payrolls increased by 200,000 in December

I thought that the holiday hiring would have added more than 200,000 jobs? A friend of mine got a job with Bed Bath and Beyond for the holidays. They hired her and 24 others. Thankfully they will be keeping her on and not letting her go with the other 20 they are not keeping. Seems to me the media will slice and dice the numbers to get them just under 8% by the time election day arrives. I do know that the labor department is hiring right now. They have to add a bunch of auditors to make sure all the mom and pop businesses are ready to comply with the Obamacare mandates. Another line of work that seems to be safe is the IRS. I just got a notice that I've been selected for a "random" Compliance Research Examination.

I don't think that the economy is growing as they say. There is such a thing as part time seasonal for the rush companies expect at the end of the Christmas season. Plus on a more important note, the unemployment rate is going to drop off as people began to lose their benefits. they are going to have to take 2-3 part time fast food or department store jobs to try and keep above water as long as they can. But it will be futile way of life for most. There are just no half decent jobs out there like there used to be, and when one comes along you have to try to stand out like 700 other people for it. Good day and God bless.

Not saying that all government workers are bad (and all private sector employees are great), but I've worked with plenty at the EPA and at the State level. And, they hinder progress and the implementation of new technologies that will protect our water supplies, not help it. And, that's my business.

Government agencies have to validate any implementation they put into effect works without question AND is cost-effective, which leads to delays implementing state of the art technology. Thats exactly why we have a public sector.

And I note, find me a modern technology [NOT a product, but the technology behind it] that has not come from either DARPA or University [IE: Funded by government grants; Universites are really government sponsored R&D labs]. Every single technology you use was created on the government dime with your tax dollars, one way or another.

nd the private sector takes months

Not really; if there is demand for my product greater then the supply I can produce, I immediatly hire more people to produce more goods. The private sector is VERY sensitive to consumer demand.

I view the entire recession as a consumer spending problem: Consumer do not have money to spend, so the economy is basically at a standstill. As more workers slowly get re-hired, they increase spending ever so slightly, increasing demand and leading to more hiring. Hence why the stimulus, while it kept business from going under [saving hundreds of thousands of jobs], didn't do a thing in regards to actually improving the existing employment situation; it just kept the status quo. A federal work program that put money DIRECTLY in consumers hands would have been significantly more effective in the long run.

Gordonw, xina, etc. I would just like to see some sources of proof for your basis of argument.

I thought that the holiday hiring would have added more than 200,000 jobs?

A SEASONABLY ADJUSTED 200,000 jobs. Big difference.

I'd be impressed if it was any month but December. If more than 1/2 the people employed this past month are STILL employed by the end of January, I'll say it's a good sign. November and December always have job increases due to holiday hirings. Most of those will disappear soon. And I wonder how many fell off the rolls as having exhausted their benefits. The goverment doesn't account for them. 8.5% on the rolls amounts to realistically twice that or more actually unemployed.

Gamerk-

Do you actually work in the private sector? I do and we didn't hire, not because the demand isn't there, but because we can't predict how much a new employee will cost us. We can somewhat predict our top line revenues, but have no idea how much that person will cost us (nor what our tax rates will be), so we hold off and run our existing employees ragged. Is it because we are greedy? Nope, it's because we owe it to our current employees NOT to make stupid decisions and hire too many people that cost us too much money then we all are in trouble. So, it's safer and smarter to hold fort, be very, very selective as we move forward.

And, 90% of the job losses during the periods you were citing were in construction. And, why don't you tell me why that bubble burst? Oh yeah, greedy bankers...had nothing to do with greedy people wanting houses they couldn't afford, the government pushing it, and the regulators turning a blind eye. Yes, the financial world smoked a lot of people, but if it wasn't for the greed at the bottom of the totem pole and the government promoting and fanning that greed, it never would have happened.

Janine, please read the other comments carefully. First of all unemployment benefits have nothing to do with the 8.5% number. Second of all the unemployment rate is 8.3% before they adjusted it up for holiday hiring.

Let's see....

Obama's policies that he crammed through with control of all of the government did nothing to lower unemployment. In fact, unemployment increased to horrific levels. Obama policies == Epic Failure

As soon as the Republicans and Tea Party were able to stop the Dictator In Chief's take over of America, businesses started hiring and the unemployment levels are dropping. TEA Party & Republican Congress == Epic Successes.

Looks to me like the Republican Congress should be getting all the credit for the improvement. However, we all know the lib media and mindless Obama koolaide drinkers can't bring themselves to report or see the truth about that megalomanic in the White House.

Dante,

Ron you are entitled to forget what happened in 2009. Amnesia is your right.

Or perhaps you are part of the crowd that thinks we'd be better off without an auto industry or banking sector and somehow if we let ourselves keep spiraling, we'd be better off already. Is that your point?

Why the personal insult? I have a different opinion than you do - there is nothing wrong with that.

As to 2009, while I agree steps were needed, I disagree with how a number of things were handled. The US was never going to be "without an auto or banking sector". I would have preferred the government to step in and do an orderly wind-down of any bank that couldn't support itself - and ensuring the good banks had adequate access to funds to ensure liquidity in the market.

For the auto industry I would have preferred GM and Chrysler to go through the existing bankruptcy restructuring process - just like the airlines did in the 80's. Instead, special rules were put in place and preferred creditors did not receive their anticipated compensation - which will result in higher borrowing costs for all companies in the future.

Overall, what I think we did was, we rewarded bad management with taxpayer money. To make this even worse, we codified this practice in the financial reform bill. Now, companies know if they can achieve a certain size, they can make highly risky investments because the government will bail them out if they fail. All that's doing is setting us up for another crash.

These are some of the reasons I do not agree with Obama's economic decisions. (btw, I do largely agree with his social policies - just not his economic policies - and I'm split on his foreign policy)

JPSOTW: The fact you think government acts take effect immediately shows you are either ignorant, or we have a huge problem with our education system.

Obama's policies that he crammed through with control of all of the government did nothing to lower unemployment. In fact, unemployment increased to horrific levels. Obama policies == Epic Failure

Again, unemplyoment is a horrible statstic, because it lags behind job numbers:

January 2009: Jobs lost: -750k

January 2011: Jobs gained: 250k

How is that increase in monthly hiring an "epic failure"?

too bad most of those 200,000 jobs are temporary christmas season jobs. and no, the government has no way to know if those jobs are temporary or permanent so the claim of "seasonal adjustment" is total BS.

it happens every year- hiring frenzy that starts around the middle of october and about 80% of those get let go by the end of january or have their hours cut down to just a few a week until the employee gets frustrated and quits. a nice little tactic places like walmart use to keep from having to pay unemployment benefits to workers they let go.

Gamerk-

You and I finally agree on something...BTW, enjoy the debate, while I may disagree with your interpertation and other, you obviously have some brain cells, and I'm learning something...."a federal program that put money directly into consumers hands would have been much better"....agree, and the most direct way is a tax cut, right?

For that $1 trillion stimulus, I believe we could have suspended all income taxes for a little over a year and it would have "cost" the country the same amount of money...Now, that I would have liked to seen.

We don't need anymore federal programs...that's the problem. Over $1 trillion in deficits per year since Obama took over...yes, some due to poor tax revenues...and the top 1% income is only $600 billion...So, you tax them 100% and still in the hole....stop spedning, get money in consumers hands like you mention, and things will turn.

Well, gotta run to work...enjoyed it...

Paul

referring to 1:48

If you needed workers to get the job done and were going to lose a contract you'd hire. Not worrying "how much it will cost" becasue the uncertainties are a small part of the total you're going to have to pay. So please, stop using those excuses, they don't wash.

The greed from the financial sector was all from the top. If you are going to repeat the "Fanny and Freddie" myth, just do the numbers. They don't pan out. It was the greed of the "credit default swaps" and the other gamblers anonymous effects that pushed things over. And then after the bail out, the banks just refused to do what they promised and lent the money they were supposed to.

Fox News is not the only source of information you know. In fact Fox is not really a source of information, but fairy tales.

Ruken-

Obama implemented a nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill that failed. The fact that you don't know that Stimulus bills are designed to take effect immediately and cause an immediate spike in hiring shows how ignorant or uneducated you are.

gamerk2,

A SEASONABLY ADJUSTED 200,000 jobs. Big difference.

Please reference in the story where it says this is a seasonably adjusted number. I've read it twice and see no reference. I also read the labor department's report which does not indicate that this is a seasonably adjusted number. A majority of the gains were in transportation, warehousing, and retail sales 126,000. If that doesn't scream holiday hiring I don't know what does. After all, "Seasonably Adjusted just means that the data has been manipulated to favour the conclusion that the provider wants to see.

Gamerk2-

The increase in hiring is due to the stability caused by the rejection and stopping of Obama's dictatorial rulings by the Republicans and TEA party. Businesses hire when they see stabillity not increasingly onerous government intrusions and taxes.

You and I finally agree on something...BTW, enjoy the debate, while I may disagree with your interpertation and other, you obviously have some brain cells, and I'm learning something...."a federal program that put money directly into consumers hands would have been much better"....agree, and the most direct way is a tax cut, right?

If applied correctly. But keep in mind, a $500 check in the mail mid-may leads to a one-time increase in spending that is usually not sufficent to lead to permanant job hiring, unlike either increased wages or a government program that lowers cost to the consumer in some way. Though its this same logic why a Flat-tax like many are suggesting will never work [it taxes the wrong people; taxing the lower-middle class is fiscal idocy due to the effects on long-term consumer spending].

A tax cut is like a shotgun blast from long range; you hit a little of everything, but you don't necessarily do a lot of damage to the root cause of a program. A carefully designed and run government program, however, can be like a sniper round, directly targeting the problem.

As I view the problem as one of consumer spending, I view the solution as a Federal Work program for unemployed workers, gradually winding down as the economy improves. Reducing costs to small business is another [though again, without demand, no hiring].

@paul

I will say, its nice debating someone in a civil way for a change. Its a nice change from the usual we get on the internet.

I feel there might be a recovery but its not being felt at unemployment. The past 3 weeks, I have gone in to the unemployment 5 hour average wait. One day I got there at 830am and sat there for 8 hours for them to tell me that they are closing. I basically wasted 8 hours of job hunting and got nothing done. They have 1 person doing claims for upwards of 150 to 200 people.

Falls to 8.5%, has it not been 8.5% And as usual there will be a redo and historically it has changed upwards.

MossdogDa1

And when your beloved Jr & Co. were throwing the country to 2 wars and the Too Big To Fail, and the Mortgage Crisis you didn't say anything because he defended the "Christian Values" of the Good Ole USA????

What would you do differently in your enlightened vision of America? Please educate US that for the last 8 years being dealing with the bad choices of your "Messiah" from Crawford, Tx. Tell that to the 4,000 casualties of a war that he & Co invented just to make profit for Halliburton and Co and let soldiers go to war without the proper protection, and when they complain the only answer from the mother f*#$@@ of Rumsfeld was that they are soldiers, they don't suppose to complain????

How it will be different? Please?

I see some of you (Paul) have real issues with the truth and the hint of good news. On a different note and for those of you still talking about how the Recovery Act didn't work here are some independent facts (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/did-the-stimulus-work-a-review-of-the-nine-best-studies-on-the-subject/2011/08/16/gIQAThbibJ_blog.html):

If you ask the Obama administration, economists are virtually united in thinking the 2009 stimulus package worked. “I’m absolutely convinced, and the vast majority of economists are convinced, that the steps we took in the Recovery Act saved millions of people their jobs or created a whole bunch of jobs,” Obama declared at a press conference last month. Or, to quote NEC chair Gene Sperling from an interview a few weeks ago, “There is no question that the evidence is showing that the type of things the president did to help state and local governments really mattered, were really helpful in pulling us from the brink of depression to a recovery.”

But the stimulus’ critics allege that this evidence isn’t reliable. The studies the administration is relying on depend on models that “substitute assumptions for identification,” Harvard economist Robert Barro writes today in the Wall Street Journal. “To figure out the economic effects of transfers one needs ‘experiments,’” Barro writes, “in which the government changes transfer in an unusual way—while other factors stay the same—but these events are rare.”

The truth is, both studies of the type Barro prefers, and studies using models, which he criticizes, have been conducted to determine the effect of the stimulus on employment and output. Of the nine studies I’ve found, six find that the stimulus had a significant, positive effect on employment and growth, and three find that the effect was either quite small or impossible to detect.

Gamerk2-

The increase in hiring is due to the stability caused by the rejection and stopping of Obama's dictatorial rulings by the Republicans and TEA party. Businesses hire when they see stabillity not increasingly onerous government intrusions and taxes.

This proves my earlier point. You have absolutely no clue whatsoever.

As much as progressives (liberals) hate to see this post and will do whatever they can to keep others from seeing it, once again we have a weekly -- or near daily -- article showing that this is going exactly as the model predicts for the extension of the Bush tax cuts at the end of 2010. Please refer to my post here (#1.44 from August). This has been predictable since roughly mid-October of last year when it became obvious conservatives would make large gains in Congress. Hiring immediately grew as soon as it became apparent that taxes would not be raised, then the first wave of hiring leveled off. Once the new hires were comfortable with their new income source, they started spending. The economy grows.

This next step is proof that businesses feel better about their own situations and another round of hiring is commencing as well as having less rounds of lay-offs. All very predictable results of the extension of the Bush tax cuts. And this organic job growth will continue. That is unless the small businesses that are the engine of job growth are threatened with higher taxes again or Europe tanks because the European governments have been spending like we've been spendingg, only longer.

One should also note that this rise in economic indicators is well after the trillion dollars of failed boondoggle "stimulus" has been spent. We don't need more of that same kind of failed "stimulus" policy. We need more of the freed market success that we are experiencing now.

There are times to consider raising taxes and times not to consider raising taxes. When unemployment is above 6%, it is not a time to consider raising taxes...on anyone...especially job creators.

Who is counted as unemployed?

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.

gamerk2

Though its this same logic why a Flat-tax like many are suggesting will never work [it taxes the wrong people; taxing the lower-middle class is fiscal idocy due to the effects on long-term consumer spending].

It is not idiocy at all, all people getting monies should be subject to some taxation.

A true Flat Tax would ensure tax equality for all and stop the government from picking winners and losers through the use of the tax code. I know for fact that there are people that make in the $55 - 62,000 range that pay absolutly no Federal Income Tax, and that is wrong.

To do a Flat Tax correctly you have to eliminate all other forms of Federal Taxation that is directed at an individual, payroll taxes, excises taxes and the like. You also eliminate all deductions and credits with the exception of a single $15,050. That number is the minimum wage X 40hr work week X 52 weeks. Then you tax all monies recieved, wages, interest income, and capital gains, at 17%.

The poor get protected, but still have to pay alittle, the middle class would get a slight reduction, and the rich would pay more from the removal of all the tax shelters. Yes there would be a huge downside, there would be a huge number of IRS employees and accountants out of work overnight.

And this translates out to how many more people have fallen off the lists?

Mossdog, after that level of prejudice, false assumptions, and ignorance I'll assume that talking to you is meaningless? I wont make the mistake of assuming that you hold any level of competent or technical employment.

Lets see how this shakes out in Feb. & March once the seasonal jobs have cleared form the reports.

MattPfl,

For all of 2011, the economy added 1.6 million jobs, better than the 940,000 added in 2010.

Son, that is not millions of jobs added, to have have "millions" it would have to be more than 2 million. When government jobs start decreasing because of the cuts, and all of those millions of people who have run out of unemployment time, unemployment will go back up. He is not a savior---just someone who thinks that government should "think" for you. Quite being a taker and become a provider.

The presstitutes are at it again reporting on what they are ordered to report. Boy, they must think we are really stupid. Anyone with half a brain knows there is always a temporary employment spike in December for the holidays. The 8.5% unemployment rate is an outright lie for anybody gullible enough to believe it. If you really want to know the true unemployment rate do the research and look up how unemployment is calculated. The Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates six alternate measures of unemployment, U1 through U6, that measure different aspects of unemployment. Depending on your nationality unemployment ranges between 22 and 38 %. Some economists claim these numbers to be higher.

A recent MSNBC post sums up the state of our economy and unemployment. This was also featured on CNN, FOX, WSJ.

Last week the Census Department of the Federal Government reported that “50% of the nation’s population were living below the poverty line”.

Our nation’s wealth has been exhausted by war, banking and stock market fraud so that we could secure profits for the banksters, oil, and Military/Industrial cartels. We never saw a dime of it and never will because the 1% elite feel they have a Divine Right at our expense. You know their motto, privatize profits and socialize losses. They truly can’t squeeze much more from the peasantry but they will try.

The argument that wait until the elections in November and by voting for a Democrat or voting for a Republican is going to change things for the average American is pure folly and an illusion. Both parties are corrupt and have equally contributed to our economic depression. They both serve their masters, Wall Street and the Federal Reserve. Wall Street is Washington and Washington is Wall Street.

Ron-

No one can argue the $1 trillion stimulus didn't have a positive effect. I won't argue it. But, what I will argue is that even if you buy the 3.3 million jobs saved or created crap, that's nearly $300,000 per job, many of which were one year funding of teachers and state jobs. That my friend is very, very inefficient. A tax holiday for all income tax payers would have been a lot more effective. Incentive payments to businesses to make investments, not just give Solyndra $500 million, etc. would have been better. Gov't doesn't know enough to pick winners and losers.

Gamerk-

If you see this, my question about the federal program is that once it's run it's course, how do we get rid of it or reduce the size of it? Dept of Energy was designed to get us off foriegn oil, not so good. Dept of Education, which is paralleled at every State level as failed to improve our schools, the Corps of Engineers is spending $billions to fix the Everglades from the damange it did earlier when they essentially canaled it up?

The private sector is nice b/c once demand dries up, the company adjusts or goes out of business. That's why I don't like the government programs, can never make smaller or adjust. SS is an example. It was started as a simiple retirement augmentation plan or to keep seniors from poverty. A very noble cause that made sense at the time. Now, it takes care of so many people that the folks that are actully putting in money are getting back pennies on the dollar. Again, not saying the concept is bad, but the government, with really no oversight (i.e who watches the overseers?) really does us all a disservice....

Just listen to yourselves! ALL of you! It doesn't seem to matter which "side" you are on -- "con", "lib", "Obama Lover", "Obama Hater", "Bush lover", Bush Hater" ... you are (most of you) EXACTLY the problem this country is in!

You are SHEEPLE! Follow your little leaders and don't think for yourselves! "My side is right because (fill in the blank) said so and the rest of you are (fill in the blank, from bad language to worse)." Well I have news for you ... until you learn to WORK WITH EACH OTHER instead of just tearing each other apart .. this country will NEVER recover.

I can tell you there is one part of government that IS working -- and it's the fact that CONGRESS represents the people. Well, our dysfunctional Congress is certainly representing the majority of people in this thread this morning!

LittleOhRed,

Obama couldn't score in a house of prostitution or crack house. The man is a complete joke and even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while. Come to think of of it it was that ACORN that helped Obama win, well that and the fact that Abe Lincoln himself could have been running on the Republican ticket and lost.

This article clearly demonstrates just how desperate the Obama administration truly is if they are happy about job growth that is clearly linked to & "seasonal gains".Oh the article says that the report was adjusted to remove those gains which just goes to prove that only a few know just how bad off we really are since the numbers can be manipulated to show anything they want them to show. Has it never occurred to you that if the numbers have been adjusted to remove the seasonal gains, why wasn't this done in the past years Obama has been POTUS? Only one reason comes to mine. Those past years in question were not election years! How much would you like to bet that sometime after the election this year, that new figures are released showing the old ones were greatly inflated. That at best the Obama Administration says someone made a big mistake. More likely is the fact that either he will not say anything at all or by that time will have found a suitable scapegoat and if there is one thing Obama is good at it is passing the buck and ducking and dodging responsibility!

In this so called economic upturn not one long term, non seasonal job as been created by the plastic fantastic Obama Adminstration or any member of Congress. That said I will say this one simple fact: IT IS NOT THE JOB OF OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO CREATE JOBS. It is however, their job to create a job friendly climate where old business are not afraid to invest in America and employ more and more people as they do do so, where new businesses are not afraid to start up and are able to grow and employ more and more people as the do so. This is done with sensible and necessary regulations. It is done by doing what is best for this country as a nation of people and not to satisfy one relatively small group of people as is being done now. How many people would be employed if the Obama Administration got out of the way and ALL the land that has oil and natural gas on it in this nation were opened up for exploration and drilling? How many people would be employed if new refineries were built to handle the increase of crude oil? How much would all this really effect the price of oil related products in this country and how far would it go to reduce if not eliminate our dependence on foreign crude oil? Frankly I don't know and WE will never find out because a relatively small group of environmentalists (with Washington as their willing partners in crime) are preventing this from happening. This is but one small example of how our federal government is creating a non business friendly environment in this country. Even when they do something that might create new jobs with a new business, only those who already have millions of dollars already can afford to even think about starting up the business with any hopes of turning a real profit because of all the costly and unnecessary regulations placed on some industries. Another glarring example of federal government over regulation is in the area of securities and commodities. To start up a new company requires a very, very large cash bond. To work there requires clearance from a branch of the federal government that takes 4-6 months to get for each employee! One small company currently employs 160 people and would employ over 400 more but they are waiting for our federal government to give the official OK! It is all about CONTROL for the Obama Administration folks and this is a good example! If control were not such an important issue for them, then the regulations for employees working in this field would simply be spelled out clearly, the burden of making sure their employees were cleared/qualified would be on the companies and the federal government's role would be reduced to running random check to enforce the regulations not to deciding who and when they can hire!

Bottom line: I will be impressed and believe this country is seeing "REAL" job growth when I see the individual states report it collectively and not when anyone from the federal government in a election year reports it. Just as the Republicans will lie to make Obama look bad, the Democrats will lie to make him look good. So in the end we can not trust our federal government to be a factual source of information, especially in an election year!

Sven you read the BLS Report?

Funny you missed the numerous places where it is labeled Seasonally adjusted:

Table B.  Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age, seasonally adjusted

NOTE: Seasonally adjusted data have been revised to reflect updated seasonal adjustment factors.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

See last chart on page.

And if on the home page of the BLS.gov site you will see the Excel chart you can DL

It is clerkly labels as "Seasonally Adjusted"  It will give you the last 10 years numbers on a monthly basis, and you will see Dec at 8.5%

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

ANd this Web Page has the same numbers clerarly labeled Seasonally Adjusted

The HEADER FOR THE CHART READS:

Data extracted on: January 6, 2012 (10:46:50 AM)

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Series Id:           LNS14000000Seasonally AdjustedSeries title:        (Seas) Unemployment RateLabor force status:  Unemployment rateType of data:        Percent or rate

Hope that helps you!   Can you admit you were wrong?

To the carpers about Christmas Jobs, Many of those hired for such ONLY wanted a temp job to get some extra cash for the holidays  (I have no stats on that) but as the report also said the gains came from:

Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 200,000 in December, and the unemployment rate,
at 8.5 percent, continued to trend down, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
reported today. Job gains occurred in transportation and warehousing, retail trade,
manufacturing, health care, and mining.

SOUNDS LIKE A LOT MORE THAN JUST RETAIL JOBS TO ME!

SVEN,

They have to add a bunch of auditors to make sure all the mom and pop businesses are ready to comply with the Obamacare mandates

Companies with more than 50 employees are the ones that will need to comply, hardly "Mom & Pop"

PAUL -4412

Your stats of $ per job leave out some major points, much of the spending went for intrastucture, when you get a new road or bridge or building, that has value as well. A school being able to have enough teachers to educate the kids has a value that last forever. THe only way we can stay ahead is with an educated populace.

Also if you remember Bush sent out checks several times, borrowed for foreign countries for the money, but nothing seemed to happen from that. Of course it was popular to those that got checks. However in terms of that and the stimulus...you will never know how bad it would have become if that had not been done, how much further we would have fallen....I think it would have been much worse; it would certainly not have been better.

Some excellent posts here... on both sides. truth-verify, well analyzed.

Question to all... how can 8.5% unemployed be considered "low" in the first place? That is still a depression figure... a Great Depression figure. Those pointing out the usual holiday surge make sense. I had not thought of that.

Perhaps off the subject, but I tend to be curious and open the collapsed comments. It is a revelation. Everyone and most of them competently written, were on subject, and make good points. And collapsed!

Now, I wonder what happened to freedom to voice our opinions in this kind of discussion? It appeared to me... and I may be wrong... that the most comments collapsed had to have been done so by opponents... of course... but the opponents, disagreeing, were... goodness I find this hard to believe, but they appear to be liberals.

I found most of the posts well written and interesting. Not slammers. Not vulgar language. Nothing like that. Now liberals, I think, stand for freedom to express opinion... aka free speech (though that can be a simplistic label.) That they would collapse an opposing view????

Tell me I am wrong. I want to be!

How does Bush come into this over 3 years later? Also, Seasonal employment started in Oct/Nov. Not only for the xmas season but for tax season as well. People hired for tax season will last until April 18.

Hearts please note that the very fist post in their chain (#304 by Matt) is collapsed...and it contains no name calling, profanity or the like. It was clearly by a Democrat or a Liberal as you stated.

not a Dem, but all Americans should feel good about this news. Even if you do not support Obama, this is good news, period and we all should feel good about it. I also think if this is better than last years Dec numbers (they are) we all have to say that is a good trend.

Even though I will not vote for Obama, I will NOT ignore when things are done right- is this not how we earn the right to disagree with crediability (maybe this is not important when emotions and rage in the cultural/party norm)?

Only thing that bother me today from the report is how many that have been on unemployment for close to 2 years are falling off the unemployment numbers (contributing to the rate going down to 8.5%) is due to those unemployed taking jobs at a wage lower that when they lost their job- my question is unemployment benefits paying more that private/public sector jobs? Or does this suggest some were fine getting something for nothing?

have a good week.

Hearts, didn't you know that liberals are all about tolerance - unless you disagree with them.

way to go B.O. ....now clobber iran

Heartsquest - perhaps I've over looked something, but it appears to me that about as many liberal/progressive posts have been collapsed as conservative/teaparty posts have. Keep in mind, if is good for one side, it usually is just as good for the other, since no one does or wants to live by the golden rule anymore all we get is a bunch of "my side is better than yours". And anytime anyone posts a complaint about the upper 1% (who lie and did not use their tax cuts to create jobs, if they had we would not have been in this mess and McCain probably would have won at least one term), all the working class is accused of is class warefare. Well, guess what? It is class warfare, always has been, always will be and I am always on the side of the 99%, regardless of the political powers that are in control. Without the working middle class in this country you would not have a 40 hour work week, safe working conditions, benefits at most jobs, a cleaner environment (air, water, parks - yep, still needs work but we are getting there), or any kind of retirement or healthcare for the greatest generation this country has ever known. There are jobs, unfortunately we have raised a bunch of sissy kids who think they should all start their first job as the president/ceo/boss instead of learning the ropes and working their way up. Not much sympathy from me as I have worked all of my life, most often more than one job, doing anything legal and decent to survive. Don't hate anyone who is in the 1% but don't respect them either.

Ron, is it possible that perhaps saving GM and BoA would perhaps prevent a larger disaster and perhaps this isn't about "rewarding bad behavior" and more about not having our country plunge into the third world? We got financial reform a year later, and while not perfect, we needed to stop the bleeding and stanch the wound before we thought about getting on a high horse about not playing with scissors.

This isn't a moral argument. Right-sounding parental advice is really meaningless when it comes to 3 million livelihoods connected to GM. The CEO of GM was fired by Obama as the very first step. The company is profitable, larger than Toyota, and more sustainable. What exactly is the problem? How did that hinder recovery? How did the stress test hinder the economy? How did the stimulus hinder the economy?

The thing about the amnesia comment is that I remember exactly what the world was like on Bush's last day. Utter complete free fall. I remember that for a few months there a depression was not a theory, it was the actual state of things. I remember that 6 months later it was economic growth already and all the storms and worries of utter doom were tempered by a very proactive government that was doing almost everything that could be done to create stability.

I recognize that. I recognize the difference it made and the return of confidence. I realize that now, all we have left are naysayers who try hard to discredit a good jobs report. This is so many light years from fall of 2008, it is inconceivable to call Obama some kind of economic failure. No he isn't perfect. I disagree with many things, but he deserves more than a little credit for the drastic difference between January 2012 and January 2009.

U-3 is deceptive when you run out of benefits. Unless you are using a state or federal agency seeking employment, you are probably NOT counted on U-3. That means U-3 and U-6 are lower than the reality.

212,000 new jobs, yet those unemployed increased 70,000? Did I read that right? Apparently so, becuase U-6 INCREASED to 17.3%. U-6 is ai better indicator of the problem. Until it drops consitently, there is still a big problem.

DB, no you didn't read right. U-3 and U-6 are based on an extensive household survey, not on agency data or benefits. The U-6 number is 15.2%. The number of unemployed decreased by 226,000. 70,000 people dropped out of the labor pool (for various reasons including retirement and boomer aging). Since you seem to have missed the mark on your assessment on all fronts and always in a manner that made the data seem worse than it was, I can only suggest that you remove any bias when you try to read into the information.

LAMO this is the biggest joke I have ever heard .

lets see people can get unemployment ins. for at most 99 weeks in some states the government uses the number of people filling to judge the unemployment rate. once these people are no long able to get unemployment Ins. they are no longer counted, the jobs the were gained were part time holiday help and are soon gone where does this leave us? and why is it that not until it comes time to campaign for votes does the rate drop? hmmmm nothing changed in congress so what is the deal oh wait who is in-charge of reporting the numbers the government the same people that everyone is saying they dont trust.

Huh, I thought if we passed Obama's $1 Trillion stimulus package 3 years ago, unemployment was never going to go above 8.0%... I mean, $1 Trillion is only about as much as the costs of 10 year war in Afghanistan and the 8 year war in Iraq COMBINED...

Frankly True,

No I won't admit I'm wrong. You referenced the unemployment rate. I was referencing the 200,000 jobs said to have been created. The argument is that this number was said to have been seasonably adjusted. Not so. Seasonably adjusted the number of jobs created was 176,000. But that's not a big enough number. Needed to push it to 200K.

Yes, the economy is slowly improving. Painfully slow but it is happening ...

Main Street is paying down its private debt and slowly throwing off the financial parasites. Made in America is becoming a selling point again. Construction is making a slow come back - building rentals. Some real estate markets are experiencing construction booms. Tourism is slowly recovering. Automobile manufacturers based in the US are experiencing growth again. Farming has increased with a considerable uptick in new farmers and increased values for farm land. The US is experiencing a trade surplus for fuel products.

Ignore the political circus for a while yet. Continue to shop for Made in America, as much as possible. Pay cash, as much as possible - don't use credit and debit cards - don't feed the financial parasites. Support local businesses, as much as possible. Do as much banking, as possible, at community banks, savings and loans, and credit unions.

Main Street does not need to spend more or spend less to build on the improving trends. Main Street needs to become more aware of how their purchases affects someone's job - how the cost of their purchases feed non-productive financial parasites in our economy. The only sacrifice that Main Street needs to 'suffer' is a little inconvenience.

A little inconvenience is a very small sacrifice for helping our neighbors - helping our communities - helping our country.

Real Jobless Rate Is 11.4% With Realistic Labor Force Participation Rate

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/06/2012 10:23 -0500

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to grasp the fudging the BLS has been doing every month for years now in order to bring the unemployment rate lower: the BLS constantly lowers the labor force participation rate as more and more people "drop out" of the labor force for one reason or another. While there is some floating speculation that this is due to early retirement, this is completely counterfactual when one also considers the overall rise in the general civilian non institutional population. In order to back out this fudge we are redoing an analysis we did first back in August 2010, which shows what the real unemployment rate would be using a realistic labor force participation rate. To get that we used the average rate since 1980, or ever since the great moderation began. As it happens, this long-term average is 65.8% (chart 1). We then apply this participation rate to the civilian noninstitutional population to get what an "implied" labor force number is, and additionally calculate the implied unemployed using this more realistic labor force. We then show the difference between the reported and implied unemployed (chart 2). Finally, we calculate the jobless rate using this new implied data. It won't surprise anyone that as of December, the real implied unemployment rate was 11.4% (final chart) - basically where it has been ever since 2009 - and at 2.9% delta to reported, represents the widest divergence to reported data since the early 1980s. And because we know this will be the next question, extending this lunacy, America will officially have no unemployed, when the Labor Force Participation rate hits 58.5%, which should be just before the presidential election.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/real-jobless-rate-114-realistic-labor-force-participation-rate

Leroy,

SVEN,

They have to add a bunch of auditors to make sure all the mom and pop businesses are ready to comply with the Obamacare mandates

Companies with more than 50 employees are the ones that will need to comply, hardly "Mom & Pop"

Really? Even by conceding the number, 51+, which I won't. You really think that a Mom & Pop operation can't have 51 employees? What the labor department is doing is hiring auditors to go out to every company, regardless of size, and make sure they are complying with all federal guidelines if they offer benefits to their employees. Including wrap documents. The goal is to push as many employers to drop their employee benefit plans. Also all employee benefit plans, regardless of size, are subject to non-discrimination testing. Currently the penalties for failing the non-discrimination testing only applied to 51+ eligible employee groups. However, there is nothing in the law that states these penalties cannot be implemented at any time. Why do you think Nancy Pelosi got all those waivers for all the restaurants in her district? Because restaurants will be the hardest hit. Again with the goal of having the employer drop their benefit plans.

I personally appreciate anybody that is trying to do their homework by posting links, or data to give another perspective. At that point, we can choose to agree or disagree. These boards are full of posters that contribute very little to the conversation except to bash the other side or make huge sweeping statements that are factually untrue. What all of us should be trying to do is look at the data and try to figure out what is going on now and in the future if we really care at all about the future of the US.

I don't think the government is purposely trying to post inaccurate data, but it is their gathering system that is flawed.

I will say this again. During the Bush years, some were at what we consider full employment. 2007 for the most part saw low unemployment, record revenues. a low deficit, certainly compared to now, lowered tax rates for all, and still SOMETHING BIG was going on under the covers that nobody was paying attention to that was ready to add to the big crash. I am saying even though the numbers looked good, and consumers felt happy, there was massive deterioration going on.

It is still continuing because we are focused on data that tells only a partial story and is factually inaccurate and not helping address the structural failure. I always post asking people to look around their own surroundings to access how much better things are getting. I interviewed a few business people this month that said the following:

Dec for those NOT in retail was very slow. One manufacturer said the Dec was scheduled to be slow, but did a bit better. The reason Dec is difficult is because corporations are asked today to bring down year end inventories. So there is no adding product in Dec if they can help it.

It appears that some retailers did well while others not well at all. Most had to cut prices, and thus margins, and the EPS will be hurt by those price cuts. Locally I think business was good at the mall because our weather was extremely good as it was all over the country.

I went through the jobs created in Dec and of the 200,000 jobs created about half were attached to sectors seeing holiday related business.

42,000 jobs were for messengers.

28,000 were in the retail sector. Merchandise was 13,000, with accessories 11,000 as an example.

24,000 were in the food service industry such as bars and restaurants.

That is nearly half of the jobs created. None of these jobs are ones that were designed for a long-term future and they sure are not high paying jobs. Wait staff can be added and reduced at a moment's notice.

The other 100,000 jobs in manufacturing, health care, mining, transportation, construction have potential to be full-time long term jobs.

Svenolafson. You are incorrect (or lying). The 200k is the seasonally adjusted number but I guess everything is a conspiracy if you don't want it to be true.

Ron + numbers how's the weather in Florida ad that government drug means test for Medicaid recipients working for you... Just kidding Ron I believe you recognize ignorance regardless of affiliation. This response is about your earlier comment about the auto industry and banks and how the Dodd-Frank Act provides for their bailout if they fail.

I strongly suggest you review the legislation a little closer, as it is my understanding that the realization of the content of this new law (generally caused by people actually reading and comprehending) that resulted in the recent downgrades of America's and Europe's largest financial institutions.

That is when the Rating Agencies finally consumed the contents of the Dodd-Frank Act they realized the safety net had been removed as the bill prohibits the US from bailing out financial institutions. The law gives government the authority to sieze and wind down these institutions versus propping them up. So banks to big to fail will be allowed to fail in the future and the industry will be liable for the tab not the US citizenry.

I think the story was updated from when I first read it, now clearly states seasonally adjusted, with caveat:

Economists cautioned that some of the gains reflected temporary hiring for the holiday season. The government adjusts the figures to account for those seasonal factors, but doesn't always fully account for them.

To address a couple things (paraphrasing):

The media is Obama's lapdog, why are they always reporting this stuff?? - It's the economy, stupid. The economy is on everyone's mind, and has been for years. Why would they not report on economic numbers?

200K job is nothing--wake me when unemployment is at 5%.. - Agreed, these are still depressingly low numbers, but we are in positive territory. Why would anyone who is rooting for this country to succeed not be at least mildly glad that we are not still losing jobs every month?

Watch, Obama is totally going to take credit for this and act like the economy is fixed! - As he has regularly done with these types of indicators, the President expressed guardedly optimism.

To me the above complaints amount to Obama-haters that blamed him for the economy for the past couple years, and now realize they have to blame him with then is some light appearing at the end of the tunnel. When you play that game, it goes both ways. All that pettiness aside, it hurts to know there are so many people that can't make a living wage. I hope this is a trend that continues and accelerates, despite the election.

mattpfl

Millions of jobs were created last year

-----------------------------------

Sorry Matt but there weren't "millions" of jobs created last year. You obviously didn't read or comprehend the information in the article. There were 1.6 million, not enough to absorb all the new members of the labor pool. Nor does this help the 25 million people needing jobs. Is it a step in the right direction? Yes. However, with Europe going intorecession and China slowing down the American economy ca not grow strick by American consumption.

I work in manufacturing. I was laid off this week due to a sharp reduction in orders. When I filed my unemployment claim I looked at my job history and noticed I make the exact same hourly wage I made in 2006. Things are slowly getting better but much more needs to be done before we can say we've recover.

One thing this article did not state was how many Americans the government dropped from the labor pool in December to get their unemployment rate to go down again. If you have more people entering the labor pool than jobs created you MUST drop even more people from the labor pool than entered it otherwise the rate would not go down.

Where do they come up with these numbers. Obama said he created 2,000,000 last year. Where are they?? I still don't have one. Oh!!!!!! I know. These numbers comes out their BUTTS. What evidence or proof. Anyone can come up with a number. This Admin and Congress both Dems and Repubs are pukes.

BikeBoy- just because you have not found a job does not signify that jobs have not been created. Possibly your attitude, such as your rejection of empirical data, dismissing it eloquently as "coming out of their BUTTS" (your caps) might have something more to do with your joblessness that whether someone has handed one to you as of yet. At our company (small business, 15-20 employees in construction) we went through a rough patch in 09 where many of our competitors underbid us at near-cost levels, but surprisingly enough, our sales are now better than ever. As a matter of fact, I personally closed $400K worth of contracts this year, but was handed an additional $500K from contractors who had gone with someone cheaper originally, but then that person went out of business, and now they have gone with me. My end of the year bonus was a 15K check, and we've added 8 more employees to our team (currently looking for two more). The work is still there, you just have to not panic and keep your quality and work ethic high. This recession has been caused as much by psychological issues as economical ones.

Ferrosynthesis - if a company is facing a deadline they are not going to hire permanent employees,they will hire temporary contract employees to meet the deadline. This is what retailers do for the Christmas season.

For permanent employment, certainty is not a figment of anyones imagination and is very real. Business will never be without risk (uncertainty) because their products can be duds or studs based on their marketing assumptions. However, government dithering on fiscal policy and proposed new regulations can play havoc not only on long term growth plans but also on the consumers confidence level. The bottom line in business is to generate a profit not only to expand but also to recover from bad company decisions. The level of profit is determined by the costs to produce the product of which taxes and regulatory expenses add to the companies costs.

Seriously ferros, if the greed didn't come from the bottom as well, how did the top get greedy? Go out on the sidewalk, pick a bystander and tell them that they had to buy a home? A car? A flat screen?

Fanny and freddie not a contributer? How delusional! If the government didn't come in and tell fanny and freddy that the government would back any loans they made, do you really think that they would have generated the number of loans approved? Especially with the riskier borrowers?

Yes ferros please do the numbers, without a consumer the banks would have no basis to generate income. remember zero times any number is still zero.

It is obvious that you are business and economics challenged, why not start listening to the business news outlets that are more about global business and economics and less about political ideology.You may learn something.

Americans must wait for the real up in employment:

Look for the reports in January and February--this will give Americans a better judgement of job growth.

It's funny, they talked with one of the economists that does the seasonal adjustment this morning on the Today Show and he said they didn't really know how to figure this to be accurate, but they do the best they can with the info they get. He thought they could be right on or way off. So much for experts knowing all, they don't and we tend to take what they say as Gospel. I guess the future will tell as usual.

sorry goblueinga? OBOMBO is the bad new there's no way to spin it!

this psmnbc propaganda from the OBOMBO network! it's BS! you

know it but liberals can never admit there progressive agenda is

and always has been a failure in every country! look at Europe!

oh but OBOMBO and demos can do it better right? WRONG!

What happens EVERY December, (temporary) CHRISTMAS HIRINGS! Then what happens after the holidays, LAY OFFS!

Talk to the world in March, about how this administrations fiscal policies are working!

I hope Obama's policies do work.

But after 3 years of MORE DEBT, MORE ENTITLEMENTS, BAILOUT WALL STREET, BAIL OUT BANKERS from Obama, the only ones who have anything to show for this administrations decisions are the wealthy!

What IS HAPEENING is people have given up and are no longer in the government count as they have "run their course" with the government entitlement programs!

Don't have to wait for the Republicans to spread the bad news. Democrats are already doing that. Like some of the posters are saying. December is a "Seasonal Hire month" February always leads off with the real numbers. First off, all of you uneduated people need to know the Government can NOT do anything to FIX the economy. The economy is WE the People. If you need that explained think of it this way. A big wheel, with millions of spokes. the spokes are the hard working people, and the rim is the businesses those people spend thier money through and that keeps the economical wheel turning, When people work for hard earned money, then send it out of the country to their homeland, and their family, it weakens the wheel. when the spoke doesn't feed the rim, the wheel begins to fail. That is what is happing in our great country.

Sorry for triple post, msnbc wasn't working properly

...

By the way! The story stated that small buisiness was leading the return to jobs. And I can assure you that the Obama administration has not been of much help to small buisiness.

Again, no stimulus and limited govt interaction...go Tea Party, unemployment creeping down...Stimulus, gov't spending...unemployment up....Paul Krugman and Obama....philisophical morons....

@ dante2308

Here is a recent history lesson for you, something for all Obama fans to think about!

The following quote is from "the good ol days" Dated Feb 24th, 2001!

"Houston lost 40,300 jobs from December to January, mostly because employers let go workers hired for the holiday season.

Houston's unemployment ticked up to 3.6 percent for January, from 3.1 percent in December, according to figures released Friday by the Texas Workforce Commission."

Nothing has changed, but the numbers, which have gotten almost 3 times as high for unemployment in 2012!

Come the release of employment numbers in February or March of this year, for December and January, Ruh - Roh!

Keep drinking the Obama kool-aid, must taste good to you libs as you are blinded by this ideologue, as America goes down the drain!

By the way! The story stated that small buisiness was leading the return to jobs. And I can assure you that the Obama administration has not been of much help to small buisiness.

January 2009: Jobs lost: -750k

January 2011: Jobs gained: 250k

The facts argue against you. The private sector has added jobs 23 months in a row and counting. Its hte public sector thats stalling the recovery, because the states are [foolishly] trying to solve a budget problem during a recession [see Europe for an example of how well that works out].

Again, no stimulus and limited govt interaction...go Tea Party, unemployment creeping down...Stimulus, gov't spending...unemployment up....Paul Krugman and Obama....philisophical morons....

January 2009: Jobs lost: -750k

January 2011: Jobs gained: 250k

How do you explain those statistics, and why hiring has slowed since the TP took over the house? By any chance, can you find any two year period in US history where there was a net turnaround of over a MILLION jobs per month over a two year period?

Unemplyoment is a trailing statistic; you can't start with an economy thats loosing 750k jobs per month and NOT have unemployment go up. From January 2009 to January 2010, job losses DECLINED EVERY SINGLE MONTH. And I note, the economy stalled that summer, at the same exact time Democrats lost their ability to overcome a Senate fillabuster...

Gamerk-

I'm not going to argue your numbers, but at what cost? Hmmm? Again, we were at full employment in the mid 2000s, no where to go but down when the greed of people wanting houses they couldn't afford, your beloved government promoting it, and the house of cards it created came crashing down.

Your numbers actually support that once the Tea Party influenced some sort of fiscal restraint, albeit tiny, the numbers are getting better. What happened to Obamas second stimulus? We were doomed without it I thought...

Since the Dems have taking over Congress and held the purse strings in 2007, we have added over $5 trillion in debt. That is about $15,000 per person in this country, so for those of us who actually pay taxes, that's $30 to $35k on our heads. Stop the freakin spending and watch the economy turn.

I can go buy a huge TV, new car and some awesome golf clubs and for a few months, I'm on top of the world. But, when I actually start having to pay that back, it's not so much fun. But, as you Dems love, other people pay back your debt, so you really don't care.

Please stop being so naive. Think of what that $15,000 in everyone's pocket could have done fo the economy. A lot more then what Obama and the Dems did....

Enough with the "temporary holiday hiring explains it all nonsense"! The employment numbers reported are ALWAYS seasonally adjusted. Do you guys understand what the phrase "seasonally adjusted" means? No? Well, it means the government takes into account the fact that hiring goes WAY up in November/December because of part time holiday workers. So they ADJUST the reported number to take that into account. If they didn't ADJUST the final number, it would probably get reported as 1.5 million jobs. Then you'd have every right to complain about bogus numbers. The ADJUST the numbers at the beginning of the warmer months to account for the increase in the number of construction and farm jobs.

Mt Mike. You are comparing 2001 to 2011. That's curious because national unemployment was 4.2% (February 2001) on Bush's first month and then it rose to 8.3% by February 2009. Now it is 8.5%. I'm supposed to now conclude that Bush > Obama? For the record, in the entire 8 year reign of Bush, he never had unemployment as low as when he took office. Lets meet back in 6 months and we'll see if Obama gets down below 8.3 so he can start making a dent in the lost decade.

Dante-

You are so proving my point...balanced budget, limited spending in Clinton/Newt years (and repubs controlled the purse stings, not Clinton)...remember, the Era of Big Government is over? Well, we had some good years in the early 2000s even after 9-11. Tax cuts for ALL increased revenues. But, spending did increase and housing collapsed (again, caused primarily by Dem policies and slack gov't (who Dems put total faith in) oversight). After 2007 and 2009, spending went into stupid overdrive and unemployment has never been the same. Now that there MAY be some fiscal restraint shown...no Stimulus light, no QE3, Obamacare may be overturned, the unemployment rate is coming down. Not to hard to see....if of course, you work in the private sector. If you only want government jobs, go to Greece....oh yeah, they ain't hiring...

m not going to argue your numbers, but at what cost? Hmmm? Again, we were at full employment in the mid 2000s, no where to go but down when the greed of people wanting houses they couldn't afford, your beloved government promoting it, and the house of cards it created came crashing down.

A: Out of curiosity, isn't that the very BASIS of Capitalism?

B: I note, government didn't force the banks to do anything; they lowered the standards all on their own in the pursuit of profit. I could just as easily point to Republicans in congress lowing the capital requirements of banks as being a major factor of the market meltdown.

Your numbers actually support that once the Tea Party influenced some sort of fiscal restraint, albeit tiny, the numbers are getting better.

We were gaining over 250k jobs per month as of January 2011, before the TP went into Congress. We went back down below 100k during the governmetn shutdown nonsense scared the markets half to death, and now we are back where we were at the start of the year, before the TP nearly screwed up the works.

Since the Dems have taking over Congress and held the purse strings in 2007, we have added over $5 trillion in debt. That is about $15,000 per person in this country, so for those of us who actually pay taxes, that's $30 to $35k on our heads. Stop the freakin spending and watch the economy turn.

Just like Greece, Italy, France, Iceland and the rest of Europe is, right?

Economic rule Number 1: YOU DO NOT CUT SPENDING DURING A RECESSION FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER!

FDR fell into this trap in 1936, and the markets collapsed. Carter did the same in 78. Greece decided to tackle its debt before getting out of recession, and now its economy is a train wreck.

Laying off workers in order to balance a budget is economically coutner productive: You put more people on government assistance [increasing costs] while at the same time decreasing tax revenue [no income = no income taxes]. This is why you ALWAYS see states that lay off workers to balence the budget one year find a "larger then projected" budget gap the next year, usually due to "lower then expected tax revenue".

I'll say again: A federal work program would have put an end to the recession on the spot. None of this "lets give business money to promote hiring" nonsense we've been fed with for over 40 years now. Business hires only when there is demand for their goods. No demand, no hiring.

can go buy a huge TV, new car and some awesome golf clubs and for a few months, I'm on top of the world. But, when I actually start having to pay that back, it's not so much fun. But, as you Dems love, other people pay back your debt, so you really don't care.

There's a reason we're called tax and spend: Unlike Republicans, we actually come up with new revenue to cover increased government spending. Republicans do something even worse: Tax-cut and spend.

The debt to GDP ratio of the country was over 130% after WWII. It was down to 32% after Carter, despite not running a single surplus, due to rising GDP. Regan increased it back to over 60%, and bush brought it near 70%. Clintons "tax and spend" policy again reduced the debt back down to 60% or so, before Bush brought it back to over 80%.

Which put Obama in a bind: Kenysian economics is the proven way to end recession, but involes a lot of up front spending. I give credit to him for correctly addressing the recession before addressing the debt, unlike the rest of Europe [which now has to deal with both at the same time].

Man you people just absolutely cant stand having a black President can you?

No, I can't stand having a socialist President that violates the Constitution on a daily basis. Obama just happens to be half black.

No, I can't stand having a socialist President that violates the Constitution on a daily basis.

*Reads the Constituion*

Where does it say anything about the US having to have a Capitalistic economic system again? Can't seem to find it anywhere...

At the end of the day, the US has been Socalist since the first laws banning child labor went into effect. So stop complaining.

Some correct me if I am wrong but I thought there needed to be 275,000 - 325,000 jobs added every month just to keep up with new people entering the workforce. That is what needs to be created just to keep the unemployment numbers stagnant, now we add 200,000 new jobs and the rate drops 0.02%, I am sorry, but the numbers just do not add up.

Wizard: With the number of baby boomers retiring and about to retire, I doubt that is so.

Wizard,

It's because after a certain amount of time of being "unemployed" you actually get dropped from being included in the unemployment calculation. The true unemployment rate is probably closer to 18%. So if you had 500,000 unemployed for, let's say 2 years, and in those 2 years zero net jobs were gained the unemployment rate would decrease because those 500,000 are no longer being accounted for in the unemployment rate.

Righties need to get a grip. Things are heading in the right direction despite your attempts to block everything that Obama is doing.

GDP is up and jobless claims are down. Buying was up for Christmas so look for less layoffs.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm

http://www.bullandbearwise.com/InitialJoblessChart.asp

Too bad righties, Obama's getting re-elected.

*Reads the Constituion*

Where does it say anything about the US having to have a Capitalistic economic system again? Can't seem to find it anywhere...

That's not really the point, although I could argue that the constitution was founded on the principle of individual liberty and not collectivism. However, the point was, that I don't like Obama not because he's black, or half black, but because of his socialist policies and Obama's violations of the Constitution reach far beyond just his economic policies.

If these figures hold up in February, then I WILL believe it. I do hope it is true. I would like to see the country did out of the hole we are in.

Paul, the tax cuts didn't increase revenues and there was exactly one good year in the 2000's and that was the year 2000. Everything else was a recession or a set up for a bigger recession or a bigger recession.

No one took away the tax cuts, why were we in two recessions in 10 years? How did we go from surplus to deficit with all those tax cuts? Why the drop in revenue every single time a tax cut comes online?

Wrong Nancy

You are counted as unemployed as long as you are actively seeking employment. There is no time limit on that.

And the person (Lecourouge) who he (Matt) was referring to on 'not being able to stand having a Black Man as President Said:

Well I am not a Rep...but here is my spin on it. The government has control of the numbers and Mohammed Obama is the first Black Muslem president of the United Socialist States of America. These two entities will do whatever they can to make this person look good in the history books. Also Glob...I have been preaching to you Liberal zombies that the numbers will go down even farther just before election time. Until you and some of your Walking Dead start doing a little research on this you will finally realize that this man is inept, clown and a egomaniac relieing on his so-called Being Black to get what he wants.

Any decent person would recognize that and being a filthy racist rant...as I am sure you would agree. (You may have missed the post he was referring to, which is why all posts should contain the name of the person they are directed to or referring to if appropriate. That person does not even know how to spell Muslim. He is a filthy racist and does not deserve consideration. I only note this to clear that up for you

Eric....So true..they just can't take it...The tea party and GOBP tried to do everything they could to sabotage President Obama, because they just hate him no matter how much good he does, but he always come out on top...Hate only destroys you, not the other person...The bible states that "No weapon formed against you shall prosper"...so I say to President Obama, keep doing what you're doing because in the end God hears all and sees all and he has the final say on everything...Just like God used Esther in the bible to save the jews, God has put President Obama in this position for such a time as this to help the poor and middle class and you haters can't do a thing about it!!!!!!!!!!

This surge in employment was holiday hiring only. It is in no way evidence of a re surging job market. BTW- Gwenie, get off the kool-aid. Its is making you illiterate.

And in other news....

CINCINNATI, OH., (Indiana's NewsCenter)--- Macy's says it will close five Macy's and four Bloomingdale's stores that are underperforming.

The closing Macy's stores are in Topeka, Kan.; Laurel, Md.; Parma, Ohio; Antioch, Tenn.; and Texas City, Texas. The Bloomingdale's closures are in Atlanta; Oak Brook, Ill.; North Bethesda, Md.; and in the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minn.

Clearance sales will begin at the stores Sunday and run for 10 weeks.

More than 830 workers will be affected by the closings.

Sorry those of you that feel you know something. Many businesses in my area have hired permanent...not seasonal. Yes, some businesses are failing, but that has little to do with Obama. Bad business is bad business. Those that don't change to meet the needs of people of the newer generation won't survive. That is how it's always been. The story did say they accounted for Seasonal jobs and there are more being hired.

Your gloom and doom rhetoric is getting old when our economy is starting a slow recovery. You all act like you want the world to go in the toilet so you can say "I told you so". It reminds me of a person saying the world is going to end that happens to be in a city with an earthquake. lol No, the world isn't ending, but nature likes to play games with us. No, the economy isn't tanking, it's growing in a slow and steady process. Get over yourselves.

President Obama had a learning curve at the beginning of his career as president, but has shown that he has a handle on it and is running with it. If we can just vote out those that are blocking true growth in the name of anything but what the president wants.

because the states are [foolishly] trying to solve a budget problem during a recession [see Europe for an example of how well that works out].

States HAVE to balance their budgets. Unlike the Federal Government that can run in the red individual states MOST have a balanced budget. Europe is anexample of how Government control of everything is not sustainable. They are not trying to balance their budgets yet trying to bring the debt down to a level that doesn't make them bankrupt. If Europe didn't do these things their economy would sink, no one would buy any of their bonds and all the Banks would crash. America is well on its way to having to do the same thing. Look at debt to GDP and you will see America is getting closer and closer to the limit where no one trust you anymore and you can no longer borrow, and your economy will collapse.

Stop. Stop all of this garbage. Obama isn't the reason some firms are hiring. Neither is the GOP. Labor markets, like all markets, stabilize themselves absent government policy choices which alter them. If we do indeed have DC stalemate then the private sector will adapt and deal with that reality. We, as a people, focus on one of the least relevant numbers, the reported unemployment rate. All this number does is provide fodder for partisans to argue ridiculous points.

Focus instead, for pete's sake, on how many working-aged persons are employed, how many hours are worked on average, and what the average hourly income (net of taxes) is, because that is how to tell if our economy is growing, or how to tell if greater wealth is being created. The November report that liberals loved showed a decreased in the reported unemployment numbers, so liberals ate it up like the pablum it was. But it was based on over 300k people no longer being counted as unemployed-what a STUPID way to argue things are getting better.

This report shows greater private sector employment, with higher hourly pay and more hours worked per week. This is GOOD. It's not even close to enough, and it remains proof that our current economic policies continue to hamstring the economy, but it isn't a bad report. If you use this report to show that Obama is great, well fine, but you will forever be disappointed. Presidents simply don't make things better. They can help to get out of the way so things can become better. And they can make things worse, and in a hurry. Congress is the same.

Hi Deborah S.,

I'm sure you noticed since you seem so astute, but your conclusions are the polar opposite of those you oppose. No surprise there, right? But they think you are wrong, that this president has made things worse, not better, and so you rail against them. You think they are wrong, that this president has done wonders. Is it possible, given your claim that Mr. Obama's opponents block true growth, that Mr. Obama is not responsible at all for any of the growth you credit him for? I hate to bring logic into this debate with you, but you put it in writing and I'd like to read your thoughts.

To spell it out clearly...If Mr. Obama's plans for true growth (whatever you think that might be) were blocked, then how is Mr. Obama responsible for the true growth you credit him with?

Interesting take Rich-281385! For months we have heard Republicans are to blame for the bad economy but since the economy is now improving (slightly - maybe just another bump up before we fall down again) Obama is to be given credit?

Could Republicans point to the last election of them getting into Office as the turning point? When they started blocking Obamas bad policies and the economy started improving.

Excellent post Rich!

I was waiting to see if anyone caught Deborah in her twisted logic!

Great job!

How many people have dropped off the lists. These figures are a joke.

Hey Logic,

I'm just hoping that the Deborahs of our country can grasp the question, and can then honestly answer it. I do think gridlock, such as it is (which isn't complete) helps the business climate compared to the path Mr. Obama was following when he was largely unchecked. Which is not an endorsement of GOP governmental action to improve the economy--I fear that is how liberals would take it. Our economy is most dynamic, and most capable of adapting, and produces the most wealth, when voters demand less control of it from DC. Or even a state capital.

@goblueinga

It's not bad news. It's not news at all - it's a government agency releasing speculative numbers that will be revised several times before they move on to the next set of speculative numbers.

It's propaganda. TASS used to release numbers like this every month.

Well I wonder what the Obstructionist Republicans are going to say with the unemployment rate going lower! Ya know they say government can't create even one job. Next they say that President Obama and the Democrats are not creating enough jobs! Just which way is it? Seems they are trying to ride the "horse" frontwards and backwords! My guess is that they are just a bunch of horses Aazzes!

If the #s were true don't you think O'Bamma would be 'testing' this for reelection instead of the testing of "the two tier stradgy". BLAME AND LIE?

Hi scrambolo,

Our government, like all government's, can create no new NET jobs. Whatever dollars they use to hire, or cause private firms to hire, come from another use. So for every new job created by your saviors in DC, at least one job is lost elsewhere. But you think all is well because the media is able to show you the new person working that new job. You might believe magic is real too.

What our government can do is confine itself to those duties authorized to it by the constitution. Of course it never will. Not because it can't. It's because you don't want it to. You believe that something can be gained from nothing, and this is what government specializes in helping you believe. One way, and only one way, exists for new job creation. People must spend or invest their own money, and private firms will respond. Sorry for the bad news.

By the way, the Easter Bunny is not real either.

Go to George Carlin's Utube video of his spiel on "The American Dream" - and how this country is "owned" by a few privileged owners - he saw it coming. (language warning)

Jan 3, 2007 there was two more years left on W's term. Democrats took control of the Senate and the House. Unemployment was 4.6%, GDP 3.5, and the Dow was 12,600+.

Hey Cassandra,

I wouldn't give Carlin much credit for being a sage. He's as wrong as he is right anyhow, but my point is that Carlin sees people as they are. Most people over time, and regardless of political identity, will continue to demand free stuff. They get bought off, so to speak, but politicians willing to play this shell game with them. Take the housing mess we are STILL suffering through.

Americans wanted to pay less for mortgages than the market price, so they got the government to give deductions, or credits, to help lower the perceived real price. But this wasn't enough, so Americans wanted to be able to buy homes without money down. We got expanded Fannie and Freddie loan policies. Yay, we thought. But darn it, this wasn't enough either. We got auditing rules for banks so that if they didn't show the "proper" kind of lending they would be dealt with. Even THIS was not enough, can you believe it?

It's never enough. As soon as the voters get used to one level of free stuff they begin their envy for someone else's money all over again. And so the cycle repeated itself for years until it could no longer hide the fact it was all built on financial sand--borrowing from the future, our future heirs, so we could live better today. And when it all collapsed who was made whole? Every plan by the president to "help" homeowners has been a flop. But every plan to bail out the bankers has succeeded. And, yet, his voters still want more free stuff.

Carlin is no sage. He simply knows that people will always surrender liberty for security, even false security. Until one day it goes too far. Then we start again.

Newsflash to those who say President Obama is "half-black" and if that's the case, we're ALL HALF-BLACK!

THERE IS NO HALF-BLACK!

He is Black.

Hee heee!

wb52

And in other news....

CINCINNATI, OH., (Indiana's NewsCenter)--- Macy's says it will close five Macy's and four Bloomingdale's stores that are underperforming

Citing this example as evidence refuting the labor department stats is like looking at the weather, seeing that its -1F outside and concluding global warming is a hoax.

Because one company has had a disappointing quarter and has decided to close some stores, while not good news, does not speak to the condition of the economy as a whole. Similarly, there are local economies that may preform in a manner converse to most of the rest of the economy.

Lose the pessimistic attitude. Things are looking better. I think they will continue to improve- slowly at first but it should pick up momentum.

Liberals trying to protect ths black anti-American racist loser when the real unemployment rate is 15% according to his own agency

Gamerk2, actually your turnaround numbers and the conclusions you draw from them are easy to disprove...

Number one, our economy has not added 1 million jobs/month.

Number two, jobs lost/gained is a discrete number for each month and a cumulative number over time.

Number three, in case you missed obamas speech today on the latest numbers, he declared that we have added over 3 million jobs over the past 22 months, 12 of those months with a republican controlled house and a marginally democrat controlled senate. Wasn't it fascinating that GDP showed a decline in 2010 after the stimulas money was spent? and GDP was so impressive in 2011 as well, right?

Keynesian economics is the plan? America has a recession every 7 to 12 years, yet no politician or economist has been able to avoid them or come up with an effective recovery plan. Yet you say keynesian economics is the way to go. How droll...

I find it interesting that each and every Republican term going back to Eisenhower experienced two recessions and only Carter had a recession in a small part of his term of all the democratic terms since the 1950's.

Yet Republicans imply that Hoover economics are the way to go. How droll.

Hi Dante,

Despite my view that you have no idea what Hoover economics are, I do think you are factually wrong about the numbers of recessions and which party was in the WH when they began (or worsened). Clinton, for instance, left Bush 43 a recessionary economy. JFK was battling a recessionary economy when he supported tax rate cuts. Reagan had one recession but it could hardly be attributed to his fiscal policies when it was Paul Volcker's monetary policies which caused it. Ford had no recession but the leftovers he inherited from Nixon. I could go on.

But what I find most peculiar about you is that you would exclude going back even further. Perhaps the reason is that if we did we would find, at least according to his own Treasury Secretary, that FDR presided over a great economic decline, and then a very modest recovery. Not unlike today. It turns out, if you believed his money men at the time, that all the spending in the world by the government is little more than trying to hoist yourself up by the handles of the bucket you are standing in. Credit to Churchill, btw.

What I favor, before you mischaracterize me, is a pro-growth agenda which neither punishes, or rewards, economic activity in the private sector. How to do this? Rein in regulations, reform the legal system, release for development more of our natural resources, and conduct more trade agreements with friendly nations. What, exactly, do you favor?

Rich-281385,

Rich, your economic rants are just that, RANTS! The government has 'created' jobs. Who do think started the post office, FBI, CIA, Navy, Air Force. TVA, etc.? These agencies and depts. provide an econommic service to the public. The public sector benefits from these government created jobs. The government workers, benefit the private sector, by spending and investing in the private sector. Who do you think would purchase warplanes, ships, and arms if not for the orders received from the GOVERNMENT-- ANY GOVERNMENT? You need to learn and understand something about macro and micro economics before you comment on economics and government not creating jobs. Of course you can keep on spouting your partisan-economics and invalid economic principals, as I agree everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own FACTS!

It is seasonally adjusted. Again, I blame the schools for this comment and the subsequent up votes. We need education reform.

Isn't amazing how these politicians and media dweebs seem to think that the recession is over and the jobs are coming back because of Christmas.

OK, as I see the up votes continue to spiral up I will explain it for you. The numbers are adjusted to account for the seasonal effect of holiday hiring. It is adjusted so that things like that don't distort the numbers. Please, for the love of God, stop wallowing in ignorance.

You are right on all counts Dante. Unfortunately, ignorance is the foundation of the modern Republican Party, so they are more than happy with the status quo.

"(The data are not seasonally
adjusted.)"

Pulled that right out of the release from the Labor Department. Smooth.

@dante2308- haha; right on. While they are at it, perhaps they could cover the fact that the earth is not flat.

Chris, that's your own reading comprehension failure. They report the seasonal adjustment and non-adjusted data. If you read carefully, the adjusted number is 8.5% and the non-adjusted number is actually 8.3%. It may blow your mind but holiday firing already started and the hiring actually took place towards the end of November.

dante, it's not just ignorance, it's politics. Half of them know better and they are trying to delude the ones that are ignorant. I know it sucks, but that is the state of affairs now-a-days.

For 2008 at this same time, unemployment INCLUDING seasonal adjustment went UP by a full percent. So if Obama is bad, Bush must have REALLY sucked!

Ervin Cohen - "Obombo" At best you sound like a third grader. Shouldn't you be in school.

How about looking at the lengths of service for all the bastards in the Senate. Twenty year veteran does not consider himself rich, but is one of the hill millionaires. Start looking at the right people to blame for all the @!$%# that is going on in washington. All the stupid ass career politicians that have been in office for two plus terms. Want to start pissing and moaning about someone not doing their jobs start there.

Righties, "Sob, sob, the economy and jobs are getting better, sob, sob".

That is, unless you liberal elitists in Californina don't think Alabama is smart enough to education their own children.

Alabama's education system must be working wonders.

Is the American public that stupid to believe that the jobs are on a comeback??? IT was the Holiday Season and most of those hired have already been laid off....also the government gets it's numbers based on alot of the unemployment filings - etc. Fewer people are on unemployment because it RAN out on them. Thus they are not claiming....anyone can do anything with statistics and the government is a past master at manipulating numbers and telling us what we want to hear verses what the truth really is....

Get over yourself "Big Brother" and tell the damn truth......

Bob: Like the American public that don't understand the term seasonally adjusted?

If you are thinking the numbers are seasonally adjusted, you can go to the US Department of Labor website and get the reports on PDF. They have a version that is seasonally adjusted and a version that is not.

If you look at the reports that are not seasonally adjusted, you will see that it is those numbers to which this article is referring. Have a great day.

These numbers are not bad but the issues our economy faces are still huge and dangerous. Unemployment of 8.5% is bad, yes it is going down which is the right direction but we still have very high unemployment, falling wages, and rising costs. The debt levels are unsustainable and everyone knows it. It isn't just we have a bad economy so revenue is down, mandatory spending on things like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest are all going through the roof. Whether December and January are good or bad doesn't take away from the fact we are on a unsustainable path and the economy is riding on the edge of collapse.

October 3 2011

Take-home pay, adjusted for prices, fell 0.3 percent in August, the third decrease in five months, and personal income dropped for the first time in two years, the Commerce Department reported last week. The declines followed news from the Census Bureau that median household income in 2010 fell to $49,445, the lowest in more than a decade, and the poverty rate jumped to 15.1 percent, a 17-year high.

From the article:

"However, the payrolls count for October and November was revised to show 8,000 fewer jobs created than previously reported, taking some edge off the data."

And when they revise these numbers in February, I guarantee they're going to adjust them down. More Democrapic propoganda, brought to you by MSN.

agent214 - if you are so sure that MSN is giving you "democrapic propoganda" then why are you in here? You would probably be better served at FOX.

Hi Peg,

I think that comment was related to two simple facts that have been observed time and again. The first is that whatever the numbers that are released, they are subsequently (but when you are no longer paying much attention) revised lower. The second is that MSN is usually breathless in their reporting of the former, and can't seem to find the bandwidth to report the latter much.

For my part I think all of this arguing about these numbers is stupid. The unemployment rate is about as useless as possible as an indicator of our economic health. What would be better is a report on the percentage and raw number of how many working aged Americans are employed, along with the average hours worked, topped off with the average hourly pay net of taxes. That data set would tell you much more, like if our economy is expanding faster than our population is growing. Without some additional work by you after reading this particular article you'd never know our economy is still, three years after the technical end of the recession, unable to produce more jobs than needed just to cover population increases--forget the rehiring of all those laid off.

Yes, the numbers are seasonally adjusted but the numbers will probably be revised next month as they were for November, October, August and July. Of course the revision will be printed on the back page and no one will notice.

As far as education goes, you are right, Liberals have made a mess of things but it is not just the liberal mindset they want to teach our kids. They also want to make sure teachers are protected whether they are competent or not. Do yourselves a favor and watch Waiting for Superman, a documentary on our education "system".

Revisions have been better than the original prints for most of the recovery. Your implication is that they are lying to us. No they aren't.

As for education, I suppose you taught yourself how to read, write, and do math and our entire society would be better off without universal education and 99% literacy. Curious, what is this liberal mindset we are teaching our kids? What does that entail exactly?

Is it the existence of education itself that you are against or that it is available to children with modest means? Also, what does a conservative education teach?

So, I check back in and everything is collapsed. Has Tyler been at it again with his pseudo-intellectual mindset or is it "the community"????

Tyler, Sally...........please restore comments or it is not worth being on here any longer to read MSNBC's advertising.

I propose a mass exodus!!!!!!

Wake up, White People, as Daniel Carver from the Howard Stern show would say....And Wake Up Black People and Brown Peopled and all people!!!

"Wake up White people..."?

'nuff said.

Boris.......you are so very out of touch............Have you ever heard of Howard Stern? How old are you, sir? And what does " 'nuff said " mean? I'll tell you what, Boris...........if you are implying racism, come right out and say it. I think I'm well enough "known" around these parts that you'll have a few people down your throat real quick.

Do you make a past-time of alienating people in the RW, also? (that would be "real world" for a person of your era)

Dante seems to be the only person here making sense.

How is it that so many people can read comments like:

"The data surpassed economists’ expectations and mark a six-month stretch in which the economy generated 100,000 jobs or more in each month. That hasn't happened since April 2006."

and still infer that the economists were surprised that Christmas appeared on the calendar again this year.

As to those complaining that MSNBC is nothing but propaganda, the truth is that you reject objective reporting because it contradicts the malicious propaganda and falsehoods spoon-fed to you by drug-addicted college dropouts like Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck.

Do yourselves a favor and watch Waiting for Superman, a documentary on our education "system".

Better yet, do yourselves a favor and actually visit a school and talk to a teacher.

It isn't the teachers that are failing us, it's the parents and the media.

If the rethugs actually HELPED people instead of controlling and scaring them, there wouldn't be a rethug party.

Most of the time the government cannot create jobs, leave that job up to capitalism and the free market.

Thanks to the republicans for stopping more bills that interfere with the economy. And cost more putting us further into debt..

If the rethugs actually HELPED people instead of controlling and scaring them, there wouldn't be a rethug party.

I don't know about you but I don't need help from the Government. It's the Democrats that controll and scare people under the guise of help. Addicting someone to foodstamps and welfare isn't help, it's the opposite. Without the Democrats there wouldn't be a recipient class and it's the growth of the recipient class by the liberals and progressives that is killing the middle class.

Alan

Every time the "free market" has been tried it has failed. The big fish eat the little fish and then the rich dudes screw the workers and we get a communist revolution, which nobody wants. Pure capitalism works as well as pure socialism. What we need is an intelligent hybrid, but the obstructionist right wing today will torpedo that....until they get into power then they support their oligarchical socialism for the rich.

The free market is not free.

MF Global, in all likelyhood stealing customer funds, was that not a crime?

What about Sarbanes Oxly, no one is being prosecuted under that so far. That regulation has proven itself completely useless. How about prosecuting Congress then for making laws that are unprosecutable.

well alan-static :

• THE TAX-BREAK FOR THE RICH HAVE ONE DECADE UNTOUCHED : is it that the best the free market can do ? How many years more we have to wait ? Unemployment still around 9 percentage, after ten years there shouldn't be none.

LET KICK OUT ALL REPUBLICAN-OBSTRUCTIONISTS from office., without CONS-ervative in office the tax break for the rich will expire 8 )

Most of the time the government cannot create jobs, leave that job up to capitalism and the free market.

That philosophy is exactly what got us into this mess in the first place.

You all don't really believe the free market caused our housing crisis, do you? Was it the free market that gave out interest rate deductions? Was it the free market that re-regulated the mortgage industry so that lenders were "encouraged" to lend to riskier borrowers? Maybe it was the free market that prompted Fannie and Freddie to buy up risky paper on the secondary market so that the bubble could continue to inflate?

Bubbles DO happen with free markets, but they are ALWAYS smaller and with fewer negative consequences. When people risk their own money they tend to take better care of where it is at. Please, you leftists/anti-capitalists/anti-liberty types out there, assume this means the free market has no negative consequences. It often does. But it cannot create the kind of disaster our government, that means you who wanted these things, has put us through.

No, this wasn't the work of the free market or of capitalism. This was do-gooderism at its worst. Your desire, by that I mean you liberals who think you can perfect the world, to make banks lend to certain people, or to get something for nothing (like first time home buyer credits), or whatever, is what caused this problem. The laws of economics are ruthless, and honest. And you, my dear liberal friends, feel more than you think.

Hey ferrosynthesis,

I'm not sure what you think a free market is, but what it isn't is laissez-faire. We need a government to establish rules, like with contracts for instance, so that we are all playing by the same rules. You talk about needing an intelligent hybrid which I gather you mean to say would be somewhat socialistic, somewhat capitalistic. So I have a question for you.

When has government lending to private industry, or regulatory control if it, ever resulted in a net increase of those employed, or a net increase in wealth? This is a bit of a trick question I admit since we never can prove the course not taken. But I would like to see how it is you think about your government's ability to be smarter, more efficient and effective, than you, or of the collective actions of millions of individuals. Because if you are right, and I posit that you are completely wrong, it would make sense to have no private enterprise. We would all be wealthier without private markets.

I can cede the point that we need government in order to create rules we all live by, but picking winners and losers is, I'd say, a loser of an idea.

Barry, how can you call the republicans fear mongers when you have the democrat vice president calling republicans terrorists among others.

Pete, so what you're saying is that if Joe Biden refers to very real economic hostage taking by members of Congress as terrorism, Republicans never fear monger?

In many instances throughout the world, it is the gov't that creates some percentage of job growth. It is a mistake to think that the US would not create and provide jobs here and abroad. Whether or not such growth creates a significant percentile here in America is quite frankly difficult to fully acredit to anyone or any singular thing, and is more than difficult to ascertain exactly how much effect such jobs would have on economic growth, yet surely, infrastructure would be categorized as job growth in the private sector and not the public sector such as teachers, fire-persons, police and first responders. We need growth in both areas in order for the economy to blossom until fruition is apparent. I therefore submit, it is better to view the latest numbers in as bright a light as possible because our country now suffers from a lack of confidence. We should rally around these positive numbers and BELIEVE that our situation is improving rather than defaulting.

As a nation, we have digested enough negativity in the past few years to last two lifetimes so; we need to heal. To argue about a few percentages one way or the other can only serve to further divide us as a country and lead to the pleasure of our enemies abroad that we are NOT united in commonality. It makes us look weak on a world stage to be found continually bickering over self-defeating trifles! We have the power of the vote, so therefore let us vote in public for resolutions to the problems we mutually face, and in here; make our suggestions known to one another as to what we THINK might help our great nation to move forward. This is the United States of America; so let us likewise be and act UNITED in our cause!

Ironically, during the Bush presidency, nearly ALL of the jobs created in the US were government jobs, courtesy of the tremendous EXPANSION of big government by Republican politicians.

Now that we are hurting economically, those same Republican politicians are firing teachers and policemen, and putting them on unemployment instead of having them pay taxes, and worsening the government budget deficits that THEY THEMSELVES CREATED!

Bubbles DO happen with free markets, but they are ALWAYS smaller and with fewer negative consequences

You don't know what your talking about. 1929 was a free market bubble. Get back to us when you learn something about history.

When has government lending to private industry, or regulatory control if it, ever resulted in a net increase of those employed, or a net increase in wealth?

The Internet. Government funding & regulations created. You're using it right now.

Mark that was a nice short non political post that AMERICA is trending in a good direction.

Two non-partisan posts in a row! I almost feel like I am in the twilight zone.

God Bless America!

Like Eric Holder.

Marvin, you are blaming Eric Holder for the global economic crisis?

Alan: Unfortunately, they really didn't break any laws. What they did was shady, but not illegal. You can't prosecute someone for not breaking a law. That's why Obama is trying to get more regulations on the banks to stop this from happening again.

You mean like Barny Frank and some other democrats? Please do. While you are at it go after Frank Raines and the executives of Freedie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Patience is a virtue? Really. Tell that to my 2 kids that only have food to eat thanks to our local food pantry.

Well, at least you still have a computer and Internet.... :D

Have you tried growing some of your own food? It would also help your kids learn some responsibilities.

My kids and I are technically homeless and crashing at my sisters on her couch. My sister's house has internet, I occupy her house, therefore I have internet. Laptop, yep, I have one, I had it before I lost my job.

As far as growing my own food, I used to have a wonderful organic garden, garden's don't produce anything in the winter. We live north of Chicago. Thanks for the idea though.

Yes, patience is a virtue. While the journey is tough, it will always get better. I really do hope you find employment and that your two children will no longer have to wait at the food pantry for a meal. If history has taught us anything: recessions never last and recovery's take time.

I love people that claim they're starving but they can still afford a computer and internet access. Brilliant.

Maybe they should be actually looking for a job, and not posting comments on MSNBC.

OutofWorkQualityProfessional,

So who are you blaming for not having a job? Get a job washing dishes or something.. or are you still waiting for Obama to get you a job? just like all the other republicans on here.

Or are you waiting for a quality professional job??

I cant believe you people get on here and blame the everybody else for not having a job???

OutofWorkPro have you considered relocating? I did and found a job that pays more than I have made in a lifetime. I am separated from my family but I go home 2-3 times/month and the Mrs visits in between. Its actually helped our relationship (30+ years) a little as we have regular honey moons. I am just saying if you have exhausted possibilities in the local area consider relocating.

During times of great disparity or good times we will always be faced with choices. I chose not to be a victim of the economic recession.

Ruken and scissorhands,

Please stop demonstrating what idiots you both are. We already knew. You need to let the grownups talks for awhile.

alex cali,

Many employers won't hire well-educated unemployed professionals for "menial jobs" such as dishwashing. The employer knows it is just a holdover job until the employee can get a "real job" in their profession. The employer doesn't want to deal with the hassle of bringing somebody on, training them, then being left high and dry the moment things turn around.

Spoken like someone who wants to see America fail.

so sorry to hear that but that is typical. OBOMBO and demos don't care about the

hard worker who is the ones who need help and not the people who don't work

and keep living off the backs of you and me their entire lives cause the demos

and socialist continue to promise them things but give them crumbs and keep

them voting for them year after year but since they don't work they don't care!

your the one who earned the help when you need it and can't get it!

Yet you have enough money for that "necessity" called the internet. I call bull.

Child support AND SS survivor benefits? How can she be getting both if the father is dead? Why did she leave the Marines in 03? Maybe she should at least have stayed in the Reserves for some income. If she is a veteran, then she should still have VA benefits for HER healthcare and the kids should still be covered under Medicaid, even if there is "child support". Yes, that income MIGHT be too much for her to qualify for food stamps in her state (which she never releases), but it is amazing the people that I see in grocery lines using the card replacement for food stamps, then go out to their brand new vehicles.

My kids and I are technically homeless and crashing at my sisters on her couch. My sister's house has internet, I occupy her house, therefore I have internet. Laptop, yep, I have one, I had it before I lost my job.

Unless all your benefits add up to LESS than 9.00 an hr..(which is what I raised 3 kids on, paid all my bills and rent with and NEVER went to a food pantry) quit whining and change your circumstance. (Oh, I also had no insurance for me or my kids)

maybe she was dishonorably discharged and doesn't get anything?

AntiTrustProponent - I live North of Chicago. My state Illinois (in case you've never heard of Chicago).

My children have different fathers. Child support is received from my daughter's father, he is a Marine. My daughter has medical only because her dad is in the military.

My son's father died when he was 3. He receives survivor benefits. With the child support and the SS survivor benefits it adds up to about 1800 per month. Apparently that's too much. Have you ever been to the VA hospital for treatment? I have. They don't treat you, they give you drugs to mask any pain and tell you to go away. They do not investigate to see what the root cause is of your ailment.

I'm not looking for a handout. I have always worked hard for what I have and had. Wanna know where the 1800 a month goes? Car insurance, gas, cell phone bill, credit card bills and my car payment, yep, I said my car payment. Cancel your phone some may say, ummm but then how do I entertain calls for a job? Yea, not an option. Cancel my car insurance? Then I get tickets and fines for driving without insurance. Credit card bills, this is from debt I accrued prior to being homeless and jobless. Get rid of my car? Gotta have transportation to get to work (if I find a job), selling my car is not an option, I'll lose money, lots of money.

Received an honorable discharge in 03. I took advantage of the GI Bill and went to school. I have a degree. I have always worked. When I have a job I make 55,000+ per year.

You are included among the unemployed whether you are receiving unemployment benefits or not. This is misunderstood by many. I am sorry about your situation.

OutOfWork:

Cancel cell phone, bundle home phone with internet (which being broke you still somehow have access to).

Either way, I smell massive BS.

Outofwork-

Thank you for your service and apologies for the jacka$$es on here. She's actually right. The system is rigged against the poorer worker. There was a study in Missisippi I read about (I can't recall the source), where a single mom of 3 who made $62,000 had less disposable income b/c she had to pay for everything then a single mom of 3 who made $12,000. With all the freebies provided by the government, the $12k woman had more money for food, medicine, lunch money for kids, etc.

Know of others that took unemplyment check vs. a job b/c the unemployment paid more. Back when I was starting out, I took whatever job I could get then always looked for something more.

Good luck outofwork...

OutofWorkQualityProfessional

AntiTrustProponent - I live North of Chicago. My state Illinois (in case you've never heard of Chicago).

My children have different fathers. Child support is received from my daughter's father, he is a Marine. My daughter has medical only because her dad is in the military.

My son's father died when he was 3. He receives survivor benefits. With the child support and the SS survivor benefits it adds up to about 1800 per month. Apparently that's too much. Have you ever been to the VA hospital for treatment? I have. They don't treat you, they give you drugs to mask any pain and tell you to go away. They do not investigate to see what the root cause is of your ailment.

I'm not looking for a handout. I have always worked hard for what I have and had. Wanna know where the 1800 a month goes? Car insurance, gas, cell phone bill, credit card bills and my car payment, yep, I said my car payment. Cancel your phone some may say, ummm but then how do I entertain calls for a job? Yea, not an option. Cancel my car insurance? Then I get tickets and fines for driving without insurance. Credit card bills, this is from debt I accrued prior to being homeless and jobless. Get rid of my car? Gotta have transportation to get to work (if I find a job), selling my car is not an option, I'll lose money, lots of money.

Received an honorable discharge in 03. I took advantage of the GI Bill and went to school. I have a degree. I have always worked. When I have a job I make 55,000+ per year.

I think you are bum looking for an excuse to feel sorry for yourself. 1800 a month??? thats more than enough to take care of your family? and you still have to go the food pantry on 1800 a month?? you are a liar. you mist be driving a 2011 bmw? a 200$ cell phone bill and a 200$ insurance and youll still have enough left over.

Ruken

Maybe that smell is the massive amounts BS crap you post on here. Please, for the love of god, go get a life.

alex cali,

I think you are bum looking for an excuse to feel sorry for yourself. 1800 a month??? thats more than enough to take care of your family? and you still have to go the food pantry on 1800 a month?? you are a liar. you mist be driving a 2011 bmw? a 200$ cell phone bill and a 200$ insurance and youll still have enough left over.

I earn more than twice that and live paycheck to paycheck, with no credit card debt, no luxuries like cell phone cable TV etc, and an 8 year old Chevy. I also don't presume to know other people's situations. It depends on where you live. $1,800 a month is lavish for some parts of the corn belt and not enough for rent on a studio apartment in some cities. Get some perspective before you call folks liars.

Outofwork,

When your contract is up, consider a pay as you go plan. They are a lot cheaper for occasional use.

Obviously, most of the people who comment on this stuff are ones with a job. For those of us who are still looking are not impressed with what these idiots are trying to spin. Unemployment has declined only because most of the people hurt by this have already exhausted their benefits. Thus the numbers look falsely better.

Wake up people and face the real facts.

To Out of Work: FIRST of all...let me thank you for your service to our country as a veteran! We as a nation are not doing enough to help those, like you, that have served us and put yourself in harms way. Secondly, aren't there veteran's programs that can assist you? Did you have a specialty while serving in the Armed Forces? Also, please check with your local church or synagogue for any help they can provide. I wish you all the luck in finding employment and hope things improve for you and your family soon!

It is SEASONALLY ADJUSTED. Come on folks, stay in school.

IF you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you. Will we eventually come out of this slump? History says we will, but I wont get too excited on this one news article.

Hate to break it to you Post613, but having been someone who responded to this survey for my employer, they specifically ask if any of the jobs were seasonal so that they don't count them in the total.

If I believe that the numbers are seasonally adjusted, you have a bridge to sell me? Is this some kind of joke? Are you really saying that you don't believe in seasonal adjustment or that you can't understand it?

So doing absolutely nothing is what helps the economy? I think 2011 was the worst economic year we had since late '08 - mid'09. That doing nothing thing sure helped?

Wow is that a spin or what?

You guys just can't handle the truth!

How many people are going to say the same nonsense. The rates are seasonally adjusted as always. FAIL

Why not just say what total % of the population is employed including zombies.

The actual report includes every bit of information you could ask for. Try reading it.

The media should announce the participation rate as the way to measure the amount of people employed. It does not. The media instead announces the unemployment which is open to manipulation like seasonal adjustments, and taking out those who are not looking for work whatever that means.

Just announce the total % working. You are correct though dante. In the report is shows total % participating in the work force, which is currently 64.0%. It is trending down over the last year.

For 2008 at this same time, unemployment INCLUDING seasonal adjustment went UP by a full percent. So if Obama is bad, Bush must have REALLY sucked!

Bush and Obama, both pandering, spend at will politicians who take their orders from Wall Street and the banksters.

Alan, the participation rate will trend down due to boomer retiring no matter what so what's the point?

The total number of people employed is up a million since April and the unemployment rate INCLUDING the discouraged is down over 3%

Tom8896, If it was only due to Christmas then how do you explain February, March, April and September of last year when job creation was near or above 200,000 for each of those months. Cant wait to hear the RWNJ spin.

What is left out is that Standard of Living, measured in median income, is also at a three year low.

That's really the key number. What's the point of 100% employment if everyone is making 15k a year working for minimum wage?

toodles.

The Employment Situation

Here it is.....

Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 200,000 in December, and the unemployment rate, at 8.5 percent, continued to trend down, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in transportation and warehousing, retail trade, manufacturing, health care, and mining.

Uh huh. Let's see what we actually have in here.

Heh the annualized doesn't look so bad eh? But look at the blue dashed line -- that's not so good. And we need to dig into that and figure out what's up, because I don't like that trend at all.

Ok, so the actual number of employed people went down. Hmmmmm.

"Not in labor force" went down slightly as a trend (that is, the slope decreased), but increased numerically.

How about the employment rate -- the most-important number in there, since it controls the taxing capacity of the government.

That's not good -- it's down a touch and has flat-lined now for basically two years.

Here's the problem with this report -- the non-institutional working-age population went from 240.441 million to 240.584, a gain of 143,000 people of working age. But the number of employed people went down from 141.070 million to 140.681 -- a loss of 389,000. Adding the two, which is the correct way to look at it, the economy on a population-adjusted basis lost 532,000 jobs.

Charts did not come through Here's the link to the original article by a guy who actual can do math.

http://market-ticker.denninger.net/

bullet,

Yeah, they tend to always leave out the fact you have to add upwards of 150k jobs a month just to keep up with population growth. That's one of those other 'opps! Did I forget that?' (urkel voice) from the grand Department of Labor Statistics.

Market ticker rules.

Obama alone allowed it to get so bad in the first place. While concentrating on his healthcare reform, that is increasing costs astronomically, he failed to work on jobs in the first place. Jobs should of been his #1 priority from the start.

Obama passed massive tax cuts and stimulus in February of 2009. He saved the auto industry in April 2009. He restored confidence in the banks from March to May 2009. He passed credit reform in May 2009. He launched a new export initiative in January 2010. He passed healthcare reform in May 2010.

Gavin, please tell me how the healthcare reform has increased healthcare costs dramitically as it hasn't started yet. Yes, some businesses have seen how costs would be affected in the future, but it hasn't started yet.

Obama is going to be able to claim (and rightfully so) that he alone pushed this economy forward without any help at all from the GOP

How? He hasn't done anything! Extend the Bush Tax Cuts, perhaps, but what has HE done that has "pushed this economy forward"? I believe the growth we've seen is mostly the result of natural recovery. Obama does not (nor anyone else, for that matter) have a magic wand that makes the economy better. I'll give credit where credit is due, but Obama has done nothing.

kg

Obama passed massive tax cuts and stimulus in February of 2009. He saved the auto industry in April 2009. He restored confidence in the banks from March to May 2009. He passed credit reform in May 2009. He launched a new export initiative in January 2010

Nothing? No. Sorry. You don't get to rewrite history.

Obama passed massive tax cuts and stimulus in February of 2009.

So tax cuts DO work? All I've heard from the rabid left for years is the utter failure of tax cuts to create jobs or help the economy. Huh.

He saved the auto industry in April 2009.

Speculative. Next.

He restored confidence in the banks from March to May 2009.

Again, speculation. Next.

He passed credit reform in May 2009.

Restrictions on credit card companies. Did little or nothing to help the economy.

He launched a new export initiative in January 2010.

A noble goal, but fruitless. There are very real reasons why we don't manufacture things in this country anymore, and Obama's executive order to "develop plans" to increase exports will amount to nothing. I've heard no talk about repealing FTA's. Oil drives the trade deficit, and Democrat administrations are notoriously anti domestic oil.

He passed healthcare reform in May 2010.

Time will reveal that this disasterous excuse for healthcare reform is good for patients, but bad for the economy and taxpayers.

Nothing? No. Sorry. You don't get to rewrite history

There's no history to rewrite. Obama's economic scorecard is natural recovery: 1, Obama: zero.

They'll have the BS they've been spewing here, anyone other than a hardcore Rep would know that these things are BS.

They'll claim:
"Its DESPITE Obama."
"Its all the HOUSES responsibility" (despite claiming that when the numbers were bad it was Obama's fault and they are only a small little house that can't do anything)
"Its the Bush Tax Cuts" (Funny they were telling us they are Obama's now until they claim they are doing good)

and any other number of absurdities

and stimulus in February of 2009

I forgot to add that while the stimulus was a temporary shot in the arm, in the grand scheme of things, a complete failure to create any real growth.

kg14051, how objective.

Exports are up 30% since he launched his initiative and the US has retaken it's place as the global leader in exports exceeding China and Germany for about a years now.

GM exists, is profitable, and is the largest automaker in the world. Obama is directly responsible for that.

The turn around in the financial markets happened the day the Treasury released the new policy and the stress test restored faith in the banking institutions as a whole.

The stimulus directly resulted in employment in almost every single neighborhood including my own. They are still building stimulus projects here. The middle class tax cuts kept retail demand up and food on the table.

If you are some kind of pro-tax cut person, then you'd cheer the extension of the Bush tax cuts as well. In sum, it would seem Obama did EVERYTHING economists would recommend. As for credit cards, if you didn't realize we fell apart due to a credit bubble, not restrictive lending. Sensible lending would prevent further financial market turmoil, which you might have noticed, isn't a problem anymore.

Furthermore college is more affordable, less people are going bankrupt due to lack of health care coverage, the stock market has been on a tear (up until the irresponsible almost-default) and all of that gives people more to spend and contribute to an economy that has been growing since June 2009.

As for manufacturing: that sector has grown the most in the last two and a half years as our trade deficit has decreased and our exports have grown. Manufacturing employment has risen by almost a million in the last two years alone.

Exports increasing has to do more with the dollar being devalued. It makes our goods cheaper to other countries when the dollar is weak. It also hinders our purchasing power with the dollar of foreign goods.

KG, I'll give you some credit...you are right, a lot of this is self-correcting economy. BUT, I'm speaking in terms of politics...and the fact of the matter is, Obama has been begging...pleading....pushing Congress to move on jobs and is seen as doing everything he can to help the economy forward, where the GOP have the image of doing nothing and sitting on their hands.

If things continue to improve....politicall speaking, guess who is sitting looking pretty and who is looking not so pretty

Well our dollar is stronger than in 2008 and hasn't trended net downward since 2007. Exports are actually up because of a series of trade deals, a new export bank, economic recovery, and the auto manufacturers making a come back. Also, wages have grown in formerly cheap markets.

In addition to what Dante provided you Kilogram (Kg) I also offer the following:

The U.S. Census Bureau recently unveiled the Research Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), a more dynamic method of assessing poverty that shows, yet again, the dire circumstances of numerous Americans in the wake of the recession. The new measure shows higher levels of poverty – 49 million people, or 16 percent of the population under the SPM, versus 46.6 million, or 15.2 percent under the official poverty threshold – and a far greater proportion of people living at very modest means. According to the SPM, nearly half the United States lives within 200 percent of the poverty line.

The new measure is also useful because it examines poverty levels after government policy (e.g., food stamps, child care subsidies, etc.). In effect, it shows the ability of the government to mitigate the incidence of poverty. The figure (http://www.epi.org/publication/poverty-measure-highlights-dire-circumstances/); shows what the poverty rate would be under the SPM, in the absence of certain government programs. It should be noted that on top of these targeted government programs, non means-tested cash transfers—such as Social Security and unemployment insurance—also have an enormous role in alleviating poverty. A previous Census Bureau analysis estimated that 23.5 million people would fall into poverty without Social Security and unemployment insurance. Data on their effects under the SPM is not yet available.

Guess what Kilo; who has been stumping for the middle class since he took office....drum roll please.... It doesn't really matter if you really believe the lideology you have chosen over the facts staring you in the face, you are still effectively on the wrong side of history.

So now it is February? I thought it was January. Make up your tiny little mind.

Yes and Liberals should know by now that when we lost the jobs, it was only because we didn't cut taxes on the wealthy enough. If only they had just a little bit more money and less regulation we wouldn't have had a financial collapse. Jesus would have rewarded the free market.

When will the right wingers see that it is the stimulus that did it.

How many jobs do hedge fund managers create?

Get real!

Yeah Guns...and the cow (TeaPubs) jumped over the moon. Any more daytime stories?

How much more proof do Liberals need? It's obvious the extension of the Bush tax cuts are working to create more jobs.

You pretty much answered your own question when you said this:

analysts were predicting 350,000 jobs

The average prediction was 155,000. If you're going to make something up, say a trillion. Then ask where the other 999,999,800,000 jobs are. It sounds bigger.

Nobody wants the US to fail. Those that disagree with the president simply believe that their political philosophy will help the US succeed better than his. These types of divisive comments and attitudes is what is causing the problem. Saying repubs want the US to fail because they don't like Obama is like saying that Dems wanted the US to fail because they didn't like Bush. We are all Americans and in we are all on the same team here. It's about time we started acting like it and stopped all this boys club partisan BULL SH1T.

Clap, Clap.

No we don't want the US to or the president to fail. What I wonder is what makes the President responsible for creatign jobs? And why does he have to spend our way into bankruptcy to make his job creation agenda happen?

He can't create jobs unless he spends federal money to buy goods and services or fund "programs". He is not responsible and therefore, the sheep that think this is good for Obama should take note. He is not responsible nor should credit be given. If the Congress is truly the obstructionists that you liberals claim, there has been nothing go through Congress and signed by the president that has contributed to the supposed rise.

I guess that's why the right is seems so upset by these numbers. I want to hear some more about how the stimulous has failed, in spite of what most economists say.

Good thing the republicans stopped the socialist agenda of progressives. It is finally paying dividends.. The downside is Obama will take the credit.

Gavin, how exactly did the republicans create jobs? Explain. Also I'd point out that we created over a million jobs before they took over Congress and downgraded our credit rating.

dante2308 - huh? Created a million jobs from 2007 to 2011? Really? Where.

No Talk, I'm not talking about the Bush administration's loss of 10 million jobs or so, I'm talking about 2010. The GOP Congress has not done a single thing to make markets more relaxed or businesses more confident. 6 months ago, we were on the artificial precipice of total credit collapse.

If we go by the stock market, which is the best gauge of investor and corporate sentiment we'll see that the markets DOUBLED before the GOP took office and then sputtered since. Of course with Bush, we saw an insane collapse but I forget, we aren't allowed to talk about Bush anymore. Now we're going to pretend that Republicans know how to govern and run an economy.

So you are saying that 2010 saw a 1 million job increase. Seems to me the unemployment rate in 2010 was in the range of 9.5 low to 9.9 high. In 2009 (Still Dem controlled Congress as was 2007 through 2010) it went from 7.8 in January to close the year at 9.9 with a peak in October of 10.0. Help me here please. I am having a hard time following the logic. Thanks.

Xina,

I agree with what you said but there is a very solid fact here. Those that want people in government to fail are in fact rooting for the US to fail. They may not realize it because they have partisan blinders on.

it is really simple. congress created creative finance thru its expansion of the reinvestment act. that created a building and finance bubble. Wall street took advantage and began a game of hot potato with sliced up mortages sold in pieces with nearly no paper trail at very low risk ratings. Congress, both sides of the isle recieved campaign contributions as did other politicians. Corruption at all levels has become the norm and the IRS and regulatory government agencies are far from immune, and actually encourage it thru loopholes and crony, favoritism. Wake up, when corruption and name calling are the norm then it is only those eliteist either on the money end or legislative end win. The real enemy is corruption at all levels. When a government continues to pass laws and then chooses which law to enforce don't you think maybe something is wrong. It is either legal or not, no gray area. So before the bigots and progressive liberals, conservatives at all levels, right, middle, or left begin to blame others we all need to push back at corruption that we have allowed to grow at our personal gain and now detriment is truly to blame, we each need to come together at this, the true enemy.

Talk, I'm sorry you can't comprehend. Unemployment dropped from 9.9% in Dec 2009 to 9.4% in Dec 2010. Perhaps you can detail how Democrats caused a rise in unemployment and the measures that Republicans have taken in the last year that resulted in job growth.

If Democrats were in total control during the Bush administration and are solely responsible for everything, then how exactly are they less in control now that the GOP has exactly one chamber? Wouldn't it follow that having the White House and the veto makes Democrats more powerful now? Instead of just assigning blame to "the other party" by virtue of existing, perhaps you can take the mental time and energy to correlate the actual cause of the recession to a specific group of policies.

Seasonally Adjusted - Can you tell me what that term means?

Ruken,

It means "read after 3 eggnogs."

FAIL. Xina FAILS.

It's BS Dante, this makes news every single year. Thoes who forget history.... go back and read some of the headlines from a year ago. Nothing would make me happier than full employment and I dont give a flying expletive who is in the WH or Congress.

What part of "seasonal adjusted" don't you understand? Let me try to explain what it means. The numbers reported take into account seasonal hiring, which means seasonal hires are not counted. Do you get it yet? You would think you would get it by now, but of course, you really don't want any good economic news do you?

Payroll reports make news every single month. November it dropped from 9.0 to 8.6. I don't know what you are calling BS. If you are calling the report itself BS, then I'd point out that the private ADP data is even better.

Total employed April to Dec in thousands:

139,628   139,808   139,385   139,450   139,754   140,107   140,297   140,614   140,790

If that is too complex to read, we have added over a million people to the payrolls since April.

Hey scissorbrains, for 2008 at this same time, unemployment INCLUDING seasonal adjustment went UP by a full percent. So if Obama is bad, Bush must have REALLY sucked!

All you so called experts can talk about Obama's job growths stats and how he has single handedly saved the US economy, but in my neighborhood about half of my skilled and educated neighbor households have given up looking and are not receiving unemployment benefits.

Take that Obama. In my neighborhood, you failed but won't admit it. Your out!

So half your neighborhood gave up?

There's plenty of fast food jobs for them to go to. Of course I bet even they think they're too good for that.

Take that Obama. In my neighborhood, you failed but won't admit it. Your out!

It's actually you're*. If many members of your neighborhood make that mistake, it might explain a few things.

Obama won't lose his job, because the average intelligence level of the current GOP candidates (and the majority of their supporters) is quite low.

Hope you're day sucks

Actually here it would be applicable to use your. In what grade did we learn contractions again? Thanks for proving my point, twice.

Temporary retail jobs have already ended, bozo. These paid off posters trying to make good news seem bad are getting old.

It must really hurt the teatards that these numbers are the best since 2006, when Party Boy was still mangling the English language.

Temporary retail jobs have already ended.

Eh....not all of them. When I worked seasonal at Target back in 2003-2004 it didn't end until the middle/later half of January.

Ruken, why the need for the asterisk next to your correction for “you’re”? Use spell and grammar check if you are unable to follow the rules of writing. I also noticed that you refer to neighbors as “members”. YOU’RE an idiot; presumably an idiot with no friends…I mean members.

Ruken, why the need for the asterisk next to your correction for "you're"?

Emphasis.

I also noticed that you refer to neighbors as "members".

Last I checked neighbors were members of the neighborhood. I heard literacy is a good thing.

Retarder-up and toobaked.. chill pills.

Justice Fleeting said:

Thanks for the grammer lesson Ruken.

You are obviously a MSN planted posting rube. Hope you're day sucks and you and Obama lose you're job, for good.

God, I hate liberal asses that fart arrogance out their crapper.

Gee I think you would be a wonderful dining partner. So pleasant, no personal attacks, can we meet at the local bowling alley...seems like your kind of class of place.

How is that for arrogant!

MSNBC can keep polishing the Administrations turd all day, but it's still a turd. Up tick in warehouse and transportation, might be holiday related. Do you think record on line sales/returns and the continued manipulation of how the unemployed are counted may have contributed. Wait until the defense cuts start hitting. 8,700 DOD jobs, 2,750 Boeing, Sears closing 100 stores and the thousands of military personnel who risked life and limb serving this country in its time of need, only to be discard like used rubbers. If only we treated our Politicians like we do our soldiers (cut wages, cut benifits, reduce retirement benifits and downsizing of unneeded personnel). Sorry if I don't share in the optimizism, but reality keeps getting in my eyes. Trading moderate wage jobs for low paying ones only continues the destruction of the middle class and is hardly a recipe for success. I hope and pray I am wrong, but early indicators don't look promising.

justice fleeting, What a moron!

Obama won't lose his job, because the average intelligence level of the current GOP candidates (and the majority of their supporters) is quite low.

Agreed but only because the Obama koolaide drinking constituency of welfare puppies, deadbeats, illegal aliens, union thugs, underachieving class envy whiners, and mindless minions is even lower.