Skip to main content

View Diary: Abbreviated Pundit Round-up: The debate, the jobs numbers, and the polls (224 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  contradicted what? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MadEye

    the only factual thing you've said is more jobs would be better. On that, we agree.

    Everything else is handwaving and 'these numbers are terrible because they are not as good as I want'.  

    All numbers need context. here's more:

    The truly upbeat part came in the data revisions. As it turns out, those lackluster months of July and August were better than we thought [good news] . The agency now says that the U.S. economy added 181,000 jobs in July, rather than 141,000 [good news]. And it says that the economy added 142,000 jobs in August, rather than a mere 96,000 [good news]. To be clear, this is still a middling recovery. At this pace, it will take more than a decade to return to full employment [bad news]. But at least the economy wasn’t slowing down dramatically over the summer, as originally reported [terrific news].

    BLS also publishes the household survey, which asks individuals about their work situation. This is used to calculate the official unemployment rate. And the household numbers were exceptionally strong this month, showing 873,000 more employed Americans in September than in July [fantastic news]. That’s a massive boost, and explains why the unemployment rate plunged to 7.8 percent.

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

    by Greg Dworkin on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 06:59:39 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Oh come on, Greg. You're better than that. (0+ / 0-)

      I've done a hell of a lot more than wave hands and you damned well know it.

      I have brought up specific points from the numbers, specifically:

      1.  Increase in new jobs is overwhelmingly workers who either

      a) accepted part-time work because their full-time jobs were no longer available or no longer full-time (that's about 200,000. )

      b) or were unemployed/out of the labor force and accept part-time work because they despaired of finding full-time work -- that's another 370,000 or so.

      2.  That the job increase (unadjusted) is not enough to keep up with population growth, and that another large adjustment in the range of 80-100K would mean full employment in about 50 years

      3.  The actual number of full-time jobs FELL in the September (unadjusted) numbers -- It didn't go up.

      4. I'll admit to not mentioning the 200K increase in self-employed people.  I don't know how to read that because self-employment is by choice for some and not for others.  In my line of work, there are an awful lot of people who are self-employed because they lost their jobs. We're able to pick up contracts here and there, sometimes for decent pay, but always without benefits and the ability to plan for the future.

      LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

      by dinotrac on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 07:14:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  which is why Obamacare (re no bennies) (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        One Opinion

        in any case see above comment. Good and bad news is labeled. There's no question part time is not as good as fulltime but increase in jobs compared to July is good, not terrible as you claim. The real drop in unemployment is good, not bad and we are right to look on it as such.

        Hey, I'm all for better paying jobs and more of 'em.  But, again, context. Compare to 4 years ago, 800K jobs lost per month. We are also right to credit Obama with staving off worse.

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 07:27:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  An increase in jobs is always good. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Greg Dworkin

          But even the optimistic reports (what is that, about 150K per month on average?) are far below what we need to reach full employment any time int he next ten or twenty years.

          You are welcome to credit Obama for staving off worse.  I would expect no less from you or this site -- it is a proudly partisan Democratic place.

          You can even point to big improvements shortly after he took office (but starting well before he could affect anything).

          And the truth is: the economy has bottomed out and is heading in the right direction, even if it is doing so at a painfully slow pace.

          A further truth: For all either of us knows, that pace could turn blistering tomorrow, leaving everybody to complain over expensive drinks in tony bars about the good old days when there was time to relax.

          LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

          by dinotrac on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 07:39:11 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  let's regain some perspective here (0+ / 0-)

        I am not the poll analysis whiz that you guys are.

        but...

        http://youtu.be/...

        "I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she (Christina Taylor-Greene) imagined it." President Obama

        by guavaboy on Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 11:24:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site