Skip to main content

Another 263,000 jobs were lost in September, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced this morning, far above the consensus of experts. Last month, the revised figures show, there were 201,000 jobs lost. The unemployment rate rose from 9.7% to 9.8%.

Click for a larger version of this Calculated Risk chart of job losses in the 11 post-World War II recessions.
The latest figures reversed what had been a steady downward trend in job losses since spring. In the 21 months since the downturn began, there has been a net loss of 7.6 million jobs. Currently 15.1 million Americans are officially out of work. Another 11.4 million are unemployed because their unsuccessful search for a job has discouraged them, or they are underemployed because they want full-time work and can only obtain part-time hours.

The consensus of experts surveyed by Bloomberg last Friday had put the expected loss at 170,000. But after the privately compiled ADP National Employment Report released Wednesday contained higher than expected job losses for September, the 84 experts tweaked their estimates, which ranged from 100,000 to 260,000. That boosted  their consensus – the median of all their estimates – to 175,000. This still fell far short of the BLS figures.

The once-all-but-ignored alternative measure of unemployment and underemployed – U6 – rose from 16.8% to 17%. That figure includes jobless Americans who have become discouraged and those working part-time but desire full-time jobs, a total of 26.5 million. Without the government’s economic stimulus, which was fiercely opposed by Republicans, the situation would be far worse. But the latest figures give more credibility to those economists and other observers who have long questioned whether the stimulus as currently constituted can sustain a recovery.

In another much-watched statistic showing weakness in the labor market, the average workweek for production and nonsupervisory workers fell back to 33 hours, a record low.

The number of long-term unemployed - workers who have gone jobless for 27 weeks or more rose - by 450,000 to 5.4 million. In September, 35.6 percent of unemployed persons had been jobless for 27 weeks or more.

The official unemployment rate for whites was 9.0 percent for September, for blacks 15.4 percent, for Hispanics 12.7 percent, and for Asians 7.4 percent. The rate for women of all races was 7.8 percent, for men 10.3%. Count in the discouraged and the underemployed, and those breakdowns are far worse, too.

Most economists and other expert observers believe that the quarter just ended and the quarter that we have just begun will show growth, perhaps in the 3% to 4% range. In the past that’s usually meant a rise in hiring. But in recovery periods following the previous two recessions, there’s been a disconnect: an extremely weak labor market. Those recessions were comparatively mild. What we’ve seen since December 2007 is the weakest employment market since the Great Depression. And it’s not likely to go away without additional stimulus no matter what the deficit hawks in both parties have to say.

Chances are that unemployment will continue to rise to 10% or beyond by year’s end and well into 2010. This is in great part because companies currently are utilizing their production capacities at very low levels. Even if their delivery orders increase, they can get more productivity from current employees. All this could easily mean structurally high unemployment for a long time – that is, several years – because employers have seen no need to hire as many new workers.

If this, plus other observations about spending resistance among consumers and debt overhang pan out, the United States could be in for its third consecutive oxymoronic "jobless recovery." That might mean higher GDP and higher profits but long-lasting pain for poor and middle-class Americans already suffering the longest economic downturn since you-know-when. As New Deal Democrat pointed out regarding the disappointing ISM report at the bonddad blog Thursday, there are other statistics contributing to worries that we may be in for a repeat of the unemployment troubles that followed the two previous recessions in 1990-91 and 2001. The downward shift in ISM numbers could be a one-month fluke, or not.

Advance Realty and Rutgers produced an issue paper last month, America’s New Post-Recession Employment Arithmetic. Lots of charts and graphs, a summary of the present and predictions of the future:

• The combination of a weak economic expansion sandwiched between two recessions (2001, and 2007–2009) produced what will be a lost employment decade. As of August 2009, the nation had 1.3 million (1,256,000) fewer private sector jobs than in December 1999. This is the first time since the Great Depression of the 1930s that America will have an absolute loss of jobs over the course of a decade.

• To put this new millennium experience into perspective, during the final two decades of the twentieth century, the nation gained a total of 35.5 million private-sector jobs. During the current decade, America appears destined to lose more than 1.7 million private-sector jobs.

• Because of the severity of the 2007–2009 recession employment losses (–7.0 million private-sector jobs as of August 2009), the United States faces a significant employment deficit as it confronts the realities of a post-recession future.


• The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects the nation’s labor force to grow by approximately 1.3 million persons per year between 2006 and 2016. Therefore, the nation has to add 1.3 million total jobs per year— consisting of private-sector and government payroll employment as well as contract (nonpayroll) employment—simply to accommodate a growing labor force [as consequence of population growth].

• This 1.3 million annual increase in the labor force means that in terms of private-sector payroll employment, the nation has to create an estimated 920,000 jobs per year.  Adding this to the actual private-sector job losses accumulated during the 20 months (to date) of recession equates to an August 2009 employment deficit of 8.6 million jobs. Given conservative estimates of further employment declines (even if the recession ends in the third quarter of 2009) and the continued increase in the labor force, the nation’s employment deficit could approach 9.4 million private-sector jobs by December 2009.

• Erasing this deficit will require substantial and sustained employment growth. Even if the nation could add 2.15 million private-sector jobs per year starting in January 2010, it would need to maintain this pace for more than 7 straight years (7.63 years), or until August 2017, to eliminate the jobs deficit! This is approximately 50 percent greater than the length of the average post–World War II expansion (58 months).

Of course, the study doesn’t deal with the real job deficit. All those discouraged and part-time workers. The stagnant wages. The dwindling benefits. Nor, of course, is there any mention of the perniciousness of the long-term upward transfer of wealth. Nor, most important of all, how to generate a sustainable global economy within a sustainable environment that isn’t bludgeoned by reckless overconsumption.

But, under the study’s limited definition, the job deficit could be eliminated somewhat sooner than it suggests. While one must look askance at the quality of some of the 20.6 million private sector jobs created during Bill Clinton’s two terms  – which covered four-fifths of the longest economic expansion in U.S. history – there were 2.57 million jobs created in each of the years he was in office. If that could be replicated, the narrowly defined job deficit could be overcome in a mere five years, that is, by January 2015. Just in the time for the next recession.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:15 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Too bad one of those jobs (19+ / 0-)

    wasn't Harry Reid's

    "we must make the rescue of the environment the central organizing principle for civilization" - Al Gore

    by racerx on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:18:49 AM PDT

    •  And Max Baucus's and Kent Conrad's (15+ / 0-)

      Dems running in 2010 on health care "reform" that includes mandates but no PO w/ U3 still >9% is a very dicey proposition.  We can afford to continue the ongoing disaster in Iraq and get mired even deeper in Afghanistan, but we can't afford a Stim program that will truly address the extent of the crisis.  What's wrong w/ this picture?

      Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

      by RFK Lives on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:31:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A stimulus program that spends further on . . . (8+ / 0-)

        Doomed systems such as highways and suburbs is worse than nothing.  It sinks us further in debt and ties us more firmly to ways of life that have no future.

        It's less than 8 months ago, but many forget the disappointment of thinking people when stimulus money was funneled to "shovel ready" programs like highway construction and to tax cuts at the expense of transformational programs like energy alternatives, nuclear power production, rail, and retrofitting.

        This was meant as a "compromise" in the name of "realism"  I drove by one of these shovel ready road projects in Cobb County, GA last week.  It improved the road between one suburban cluster and another.  Sure it is "creating jobs" for the six months that it will be active, but then what?

        What is the plan to build on this?  Is the idea to support more suburban speculation?  How can that possibly work with the high rates of vacancies that are already there.

        When you jump out of the headlines and travel in America you begin to realize the depths of our predicament.  What are the people who live out in the suburbs supposed to do with their lives?  Where will they work?  What will they sell?  Who will buy it?  Where will the money come from?

        If you don't stop lying about me, I'm going to have to start telling the truth about you. Barack Obama

        by dbratl on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:55:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Great comment (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          On LI all the shovel ready projects are still shovel ready, and the roads are imbarrassing, at least your seeing improvement elsewhere. They even stopped mowing the grass along our roads to "save tax payer funds" its sad  really.

      •  when do greenbacks backed by beijing lose value (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        in the world?

        we're not deficit spending to build the new world, we're digging a hole so the boys at exxon, halliburton, goldman and aig can keep living large.

        at some point maybe people don't want greenbacks backed by the full faith of the chinese gov't?


        Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous

        by seabos84 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:35:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I'd like to know why... (11+ / 0-)

    ...they keep lying by not including those who stopped looking because they've lost hope.  From all the articles out on this, we must be talking about an immense number.

    So old I remember when NASA was just two drunk guys and a case of dynamite.

    by dov12348 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:20:59 AM PDT

    •  THat is included in U6 (8+ / 0-)

      which stands at 17% right now.  The number is probably closer to 20% in reality.  This was avoidable had they nationalized the banks from the beginning and followed Sweden instead of Japan.  Of course the Republicans would have scuttled that effort with screams of "Socialism".  Oh wait, they are doing that anyway?  

      Obamas statement on Japan vs Sweden which indicates he knew what we were in for.

      ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

      by Kristina40 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:32:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  because it makes sense (0+ / 0-)

      If you're not looking for work, why should you be considered part of the workforce?

      Characterizing the methodology as "lying" is a gross error.

      •  Oh jesus (30+ / 0-)

        No it doesn't.  How about characterizing it as you need a job, rather than you are looking for one because you have any hope in hell of finding one.  17% of Americans need a job and can't get one.  Claiming that people who have stopped looking aren't unemployed is stuttering horseshit and you fucking know it.  Here are possible scenarios for you to contemplate as you absorb the dead solid fact that you are wrong:

        In the 1980's, Mr. Smith was unemployed and counted as unemployed because he lived in Detroit, and there was more than one auto factory for him to look for work at.  In the 2000's, Smith still lives in Detroit and is no longer looking for work because all of the auto factories are fucking gone.  Is he still unemployed?  You bet he is.

        In the 1990's Mrs. Jones was employed at a textile factory in the Northeast.  When she was unemployed then she was still looking for a job because there were other textile factories.  In the 2000's with the near-complete removal of the entire textile industry from the United States, Mrs. Jones is still unemployed but not looking for a job because there are no textile factories, she's 45 years old, and has no money with which to learn new skills.  Is Mrs. Jones unemployed?  You fucking bet she is.

        In the 1990's Mr. Johnson was a computer programmer at a major software firm.  When unemployment struck, Mr. Johnson looked for work at other software firms until he found another job.  In the 2000's, Mr. Johnson was laid off again after training his replacement from Bangalore, and has not looked for a job since then because the entire skill-set that he knows has been outsourced to India and China and wherever else.  Since he doesn't have the money to acquire a certification on another programming language, Mr. Johnson has stopped looking for work and lives with his parents again.  Is Mr. Johnson still unemployed?  You motherfucking bet he is.

        Pretending a situation doesn't exist doesn't make the situation go away, and the working class of America is not fucking fooled by this Pollyanna horseshit.  We are suffering from 17% unemployment and we have been suffering from a weak-ass job market since pretty much the day George W. Bush took office.

        Every time I see Alan Grayson, he's tearing some freaked-out bureaucrat a new asshole in the middle of some empty conference room in the Capitol somewhere

        by slippytoad on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:58:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Lovely. And here I thought the economy was (4+ / 0-)


    I wonder what the newly unemployed think about that?

  •  I suppose I should be grateful (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    averageyoungman, JesseCW

    for both of my part-time underemployment positions after my one-year plus of unemployment not carried in the statistics.

  •  So I guess the silver lining is: (5+ / 0-)

    This will all be the Republicans' problem soon.

    •  Tax cuts and less government (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jim J, averageyoungman, sherlyle, BYw

      Yes, it will be their problem soon solved by tax cuts, less government and freedom! Sometimes you wonder if McCain should have inherited this mess but then we wouldn't have Iran agreeing to inspections...

    •  Question is: how soon? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      2010? 2012?

      And knowing he was gambling in any case, why didn't Obama take the risk with the higher reward?

      Which, for me, begs the question - if this continues, and with it in conjunction we get weak health care "reform," weak financial regulation, indecisive action in the middle east, the biggest banks in history, no justice on torture...what kind of legacy of "change" will this leave? How damaged could the Democratic party end up? Shudder to think.

      Slap happy is a platform.

      by averageyoungman on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 08:20:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The holiday shopping season will bail us out? (4+ / 0-)


  •  Already diaried (6+ / 0-)

    here.  Just kidding MB.

    It was a terrible report for a month that should have shown some bounce.  Now we have to pray that Christmas improves.

  •  Still employed: Wall Street pirates (14+ / 0-)

    You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

    by Cartoon Peril on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:26:14 AM PDT

  •  Particularly dire time for new graduates (18+ / 0-)

    I just graduated from law school, and am days from getting my bar exam results.  I'm not too worried about the bar exam;  I feel comfortable that I did well.  

    Normally I'd have a pretty good shot at a job of some sort in law.  I graduated with honors, have a long term career in technology to help me in areas like e-discovery or patent law, etc.  I have clerkship work, etc, on my résumé.

    But my prospects are very dire.  And what sucks particularly for a father of 3 with a mortgage is that there is no unemployment check for me.  Instead there is a pile of student loan debt, and a jobless "recovery."

    But its not just me.  There are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people graduating from college/university/etc. that will be in exactly my boat.  No unemployment check.  No jobs.  Massive debt.

    I'll do OK;  I have a wife that's working, and family that can help.  But I feel for those without a safety net.  But even a safety net can only hold so much weight, so things could get a lot worse for me and others before they get better.

    I could go on for hours about the rising cost of higher ed, deceptive employment statistics from universities, the lack of job creation by the stimulus, etc.  But my point is simple:  its not just people LOSING jobs.  People who are underemployed count, and the official statistic should not ignore them.

    •  I wish you luck in find employment, trust me (3+ / 0-)

      I know the feelings of frustration regarding the situation.

    •  Take up bankruptcy law (6+ / 0-)

      they're doing great right now.

      ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

      by Kristina40 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:33:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sad truth: Law school graduates are not ready... (16+ / 0-)

        ... to "take up" much of anything without an apprenticeship.

        Unlike medical school graduates, who step into a residency as part of their educational plan, law school graduates are just thrust out into the marketplace to fight tooth and nail to get an apprenticeship at a firm or with a solo.  As you can imagine, these apprenticeships are noexistant at the moment, particularly with an injection of experienced, laid-off lawyers into the job market.

        If I did want to go solo in bankruptcy, I'd be gambling my entire career on the real possibility of malpractice.   A person can go through law school and never learn motion practice, never learn the inside of a courtroom, never pick up the skills that any paralegal would have.  I took (at my own initiative) a trial advocacy course, and my clerkship introduced me to motion practice.  But I sure don't feel comfortable risking my 3 years and $100k investment so that I can learn the ropes.  Maybe that's paranoid, but I'd feel safer just going back to part time tech work and remaining part of the U6 statistic... hidden away from the official unemployment rate like a good patriotic American.

        The other reality is that jumping into a solo practice requires capital.  And you can imagine how eager banks are to lend to a newly minted lawyer, even with a reasonable business plan.  Lots of risk there.  

        Thanks for the suggestion though -- I realize you were just trying to help.  It is frustrating, though, when people think that a person graduates from law school ready to practice law.  I've had to explain this to the shocked look of many relatives...

        •  Exactly what my friend, a 1980 law grad, (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Data Pimp, BYw

          has always told me--that fresh from law school, he was no lawyer. He's done very well, though; landed an apprenticeship at the firm that litigated SCUS Miranda vs Arizona case.

          When an old man dies, a library burns down. --African proverb

          by Wom Bat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:24:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Just for the record, starting a solo law practice (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          does not require anywhere near as much capital as you seem to think. When I started my solo law practice, I was more than 60K in debt (including debt I married into) and I started from home. I already had a computer and a printer. My total capital expense was $900 for a copier.  (And of course I had to pay for office supplies, law books, etc.)  I'm not saying it wasn't miserable for a few years, but I managed to make about $40,000 a year in those days (mid-90s) working from home.

          •  Been there...done that (0+ / 0-)
            Much of it depends on your life situation.  Family?  Spouse with a career?  children?  Large city?  Smaller town?  In a small town you can (or could in 1984) find an old solo practitioner who would show you the ropes and even shove some work your way. The judges were generally understanding of your situation (and they needed to keep anyone willing to practice in the community) Overhead costs are lower in smaller communities but the actual paying clients are fewer and are less willing to pay what to them are large fees.  It was exciting for a while, but eventually the time and financial pressures caught up to me and my family.  Sayonara solo practice!
    •  I feel your pain (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Data Pimp, BYw

      My boyfriend (recent grad) has been out of work for a long time now. He's had a temp job but it ended last month, so we're back to my lowly income now. It's tough, but all you can do is hang in there. Good luck.

    •  Me too! (0+ / 0-)

      Although my safety net is giving up my apartment to go live with my mother, who was laid off in January and remains mostly unemployed.

      But yes ... it's depressing. What's even worse are all the people being told to go to law school to avoid the bad economy when the truth is, there were too many lawyers before the recession.

  •  Not good at all (10+ / 0-)

    This is not looking good. Our state wants to use the stimulus to plug the budget hole. Interesting how the first part of the stimulus tax cuts did NOT help create jobs hear that conservative Dems and Republicans???

    Cato institute was on NPR again indicating if we extend unemployment people will become lazy and they should just go get part time jobs instead. Nice live on a p/t job plus are there even p/t jobs?  

    China has been pumping out massive loans to their businesses. Of course they are communist and can do that...China is not in two wars either.  China  demands you set up in their country to get the money also.

    I wish the President would pull out of Afghan and spend the money at home. War should not be our economic growth.

    •  Regarding wars and money... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jds1978, coffejoe

      it's not like we were ever paying for those wars in the traditional sense, i.e. raising taxes to pay for them...Maybe instead of a "balanced budget" amendment we need a no-war-without-tax-to-pay-for-it amendment to the constitution...even if we could end all involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan tomorrow, we'd still be stuck with the debt...

      We need a mechanism for requiring the banks to pay back all the TARP funds at some point in the future, not just proceeds from the "toxic assets" that turned out to be good loans.

      "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

      by Alice in Florida on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:43:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Lazy? Really? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Meteor Blades

      Can we fire all the Cato Institute people and give their jobs to the unemployed to help prevent laziness then?

  •  If the dollar is a proxy for the economy.... (0+ / 0-)

    it should get a pretty good whacking today.

  •  Sorry to add to gloom, but these figures (14+ / 0-)

    do not even count the employers who have lowered salaries for positions that they are hiring for, which is also going on.

    Bullshit is the glue that binds us as a nation. George Carlin

    by gereiztkind on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:32:37 AM PDT

  •  Unemployment Chart (8+ / 0-)

    Image Hosted by

    ..from Advance Realty and Rutgers.

    Interestingly though the Unemployment rate was higher in 1983 the number of job losses is far higher now, a larger work force obviously, with more women working now among other factors. But the unemployment rate for men is well over 10% now, while for women it is only 7.2%.

    2009 may end up seeing 5 million in job losses. Kind of remarkable.

    Here we are now Entertain us I feel stupid and contagious

    by Scarce on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:33:08 AM PDT

  •  An awful report (7+ / 0-)

    the fundemental reality is that we do not as of yet know where new jobs are going to be generated.

    Absent the comercialization of a new technology on the scale of the PC in the 80's and the Internet in the 90's it is hard to where the number of jobs are going to from to offset the exploding pace offshoring.

    The bitter truth of deep inequality has been disguised by an era of cheap imported goods and the anyone-can-make-it celebrity myth - Polly Toynbee

    by fladem on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:33:39 AM PDT

  •  Hmmm... (4+ / 0-)

    The once-all-but-ignored alternative measure of unemployment and underemployed – U6 – rose from 16.8% to 17%.

    This is the only number really worth looking at, shouldn't it be?

    So old I remember when NASA was just two drunk guys and a case of dynamite.

    by dov12348 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:34:25 AM PDT

  •  biden to speak on this at 9:45am. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    "I have confidence that the American people are more interested in doing what is right to protect this country than in political posturing."

    by fhamme on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:34:46 AM PDT

    •  Hands tied: If he doesn't blow smoke up our ass (5+ / 0-)

      ... then the economy would tank.  

      The media and markets have turned the presidency into cheerleading.  Clap for the markets!  Clap for tinkerbell!  Green shoots!  

      Biden won't lie, per se.  He's an honorable man.  I voted for him;  I like him.  But he can't appear grim.  He can't be frank.  He can't be pessimistic, even if that's how he really feels.

      Not that you'd expect him to;  I just need to vent that his appearance on TV is worthless to me.  I could probably write the script of exactly what he'll say.  He has no choice, even for an off-the-cuff guy like him.

  •  Is there a study out there that shows (4+ / 0-)

    what impact a single payer health care system would have on these awful numbers?  I'm just thinking, maybe that could kill two birds with one stone.

    I would like to be known as a person who is concerned about freedom and equality and justice and prosperity for all people. Rosa Parks

    by Alice Olson on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:35:41 AM PDT

    •  The problem evidently is that (0+ / 0-)

      fear of losing jobs in the private health insurance industry is being presented as a reason for maintaining private health insurance as the healthcare system for able-bodied adults under age 65. Also, of course, the national phobia of "socialism."

      Switching to a single-payer system would involve some up-front investment and probably a good bit of disruption and confusion in places, as a major shift of any kind pretty much always does....we would have to come up with tax mechanisms to pay for it...but ultimately, separating health insurance from employment for the majority of workers would greatly reduce the cost of labor, which would make it easier for businesses to increase hiring.

      "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

      by Alice in Florida on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:58:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  A Question that I always ask myself (6+ / 0-)

    When I contemplate the ideology of these anti-small-business, pro-multinational-corporate politicians... When it comes time where we have 15% U3 and 25-30% U6 Unemployment, do they think they are immune to the pitchfork and torch-bearing mobs?

    We as a nation have decided that we can exist with this phantasmagorical economy for the last 30 years because it was always someone else who lost their job, and they only lost their job because they were mouthy to the boss, or stole paper clips out of the office, or were never qualified to begin with for that job.

    And at the same time, we as a public have to face a simple fact with the current corporate culture: the only people with secure jobs are the upper echelon of management, anyone else is ultimately expendable. If your title is less than 16 letters long, you are expendable.

    The idea that we are innovating our way into massive unemployment, either due to increased productivity out of one person or outright automation has been a concern of mine forever, and I wonder if that, combined with the current class of executive whose first instinct is to slash human cost rather than increase the economic viability of their employees combined with our ever increasing national and global population means we aren't heading for a situation where the new normal unemployment will be 20% instead of 5%

    BR Cossacks for Barack!

    by BlueDWarrior on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:38:22 AM PDT

  •  One statistic I didn't mention ... (12+ / 0-) the main text is that 571,000 workers left the labor force in September. How many of those are discouraged workers, retiring early, choosing to go to college, or go back to college, is unknown.

    Science is just a theory.

    by Meteor Blades on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:38:37 AM PDT

  •  Obama's economic advisors. (14+ / 0-)

    Some of us are very disappointed in the people that were chosen by President Obama to advise him on the economy.  As you probably know, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and his friend, Larry Summers, were instrumental in getting Bill Clinton to deregulate finance.  Instead of choosing a New Deal Democrat to get us out of this mess, the President chose to appoint the very people who are responsible for the mess.  Now they've promised to reform and regulate the system, but instead what they're proposing is to put the problem into the laps of the culprits in the Federal Reserve.  Some of us thought that our government is a government of laws and not of men, but I guess we were wrong.

    We desperately need to change laws and go back to regulations that kept the financial community kind of honest and saved us from the economic collapse that cost us trillions of dollars and still hasn't created jobs.  I would like to ask the President if he can tell us what will happen when a Republican becomes president or when Congress is controlled again by a GOP majority?  I can't imagine ideologues of the free market ever putting strings on anything their friends in high finance do.  After all, they've been working overtime to destroy the New Deal since Reagan was elected.  They finished the job under Bill Clinton and it didn't take too long for us to see the consequences.

    Please call your senators and congressmen and tell them to pass laws that regulate banking and finance.  We obviiously cannot depend on the people who run this important part of our economy to do the job.  Haven't we learned anything from this economic collapse?

  •  I sure am happy we included 40% of (7+ / 0-)
    Stimulus as tax cuts.  Whew.  What we we have done with those jobs as an alternative.  

    And Democrats are at it again with health care.   Let include some failed Republican ideas to make the village happy on the outskirts while Rome burns.

    We need leadership, and we need it now.  And I am not talking about the dlc kind.  

    "Republicans drove the country into a ditch and now they are complaining about the cost of the tow truck"-Jim Cornette

    by justmy2 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:40:51 AM PDT

    •  Well I think of that overused saying... (6+ / 0-)

      You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

      We might have to face facts that we will not see a true change in the legislation out of Congress until we get rid of the Conservative Democrats where we can get rid of them.

      We can yell at Pelosi and Reid all we want to, but if the Conservadems refuse to budge, we'll just have to add them to the unemployment rolls as well.

      BR Cossacks for Barack!

      by BlueDWarrior on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:43:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  indeed....we can not be afraid to primary them (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pescadero Bill, JesseCW

        when appropriate...

        "Republicans drove the country into a ditch and now they are complaining about the cost of the tow truck"-Jim Cornette

        by justmy2 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:01:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Sadly, they'll all land on their feet. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JesseCW, QuestionAuthority

        There's a K-Street job awaiting every damned one of them.  (And I say "damned" knowing full well what that means.)

        I would like to be known as a person who is concerned about freedom and equality and justice and prosperity for all people. Rosa Parks

        by Alice Olson on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:20:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No good deed goes unpunished. (0+ / 0-)

          Yet another overused saying.
          I don't know what you can do to make lobbying as we understand it to go away. I mean it's not like European legislatures are immune to graft and corruption (look at Britian every couple of years)

          It really requires the public (beyond us) to be ever vigilant and determine between who is on the take and who is just ideologically opposed to us.

          BR Cossacks for Barack!

          by BlueDWarrior on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:39:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  This Is Not Unexpected (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NYFM, NDakotaDem, badger1968

    By the end of the year the unemployment rate should be 10%.  But if that is so, unemployment should be going down by next year.  I see signs that jobs are out there.  

  •  Obama needs to set the course on HC (0+ / 0-)

    and Climate Change/ New Energy during his first term.

    We knew he inherited a fucking mess.  The chances of getting a 2nd term will be greatly diminished if this keeps up.

    It's the fascism, stupid!

    by lastman on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:42:54 AM PDT

  •  What?? Joe Biden says we're recovering! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slippytoad, coffejoe, Wom Bat

    So how can this be?  /snark

    But all seriousness aside..

    How well will the American public take a medical reform bill like the Senate's that costs a Trillion bucks and does nothing to lower healthcare costs.. or how about that new energy tax?

    2010 oughtta be an interesting election year.

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - G. Marx

    by Skeptical Bastard on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:44:52 AM PDT

  •  Growth vs Jobs (5+ / 0-)
    The "growth" of 3% is a simple average across the entire country. It mainly measures corporate profits. When we give banks $1.5 TRILLION or more in a $15T GDP, that 10% is going to raise their "profits" (income - expenses) by quite a lot. When they don't invest it in business that employs Americans, but rather just churning around speculation that inflates prices, there's not going to be jobs to go with that profit. But that kind of "growth" is preferred by the banks, and their investor class, which increases that kind of investment on that "good news".

    Cancer is also growth. When you gain 7 pounds from a tumor, but don't get out of bed, nobody's happy about it. Except your bank, happy to loan you the money (that it took from your taxes) - for a while - to stay alive.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:46:07 AM PDT

  •  Something else that's often ignored (10+ / 0-)

    Is that after the 2001 Bush recession, the job market never really recovered.  Bush's administration didn't even create a single net job until his second term, and I believe his job creation record is the worst since the Great Depression.

    So when this Great Recession hit, we were already hurting although Clap Louder apologists kept telling us we were at "full employment," according to U6, we were standing at an employment level comparable to the 1981 recession.

    Every time I see Alan Grayson, he's tearing some freaked-out bureaucrat a new asshole in the middle of some empty conference room in the Capitol somewhere

    by slippytoad on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:46:41 AM PDT

  •  unemployment rate is consensus (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NDakotaDem, NorthlandLiberal

    lets get one thing straight.  the consensus was 9.8%, and it came in at 9.8%.

    briefing even had it at 9.9%.

    so the number is NOT as bad as the media wants to spin it.

    expect it to peak around mid 10's then start dropping back down.

    nonfarm payrolls was worse then expected, but that number zig zags every month.  the trend is getting better.  dont forget we were shedding 750K when Obama took over.. and now we are shedding 200's.. so things are not as bad.  

    are things great?  NO  are things good?  NO.

    but things are improving thanks to Obama.  

  •  Question.... (0+ / 0-)

    and someone more knowledge about it than me can certainly answer....

    but isn't job creation and lowering unemployment numbers one of the lagging indicators of an economic recovery?  

    Isn't it one of the last things to "get better" or to come out of a recession?

    I may have just heard or read that somewhere, but....

    There is nothing about this that can be considered good, I suppose. Its unfortunate.  I am lucky to have a relatively good, stable job, but I am looking for something to be closer to where I live and to not have to commute so long, but its tough going.  

    Any bets as to how long it will take some Republican or Republican news media shill to blame this on the Dems or the President? ;-)

  •  A lost decade on top of a lost decade . . . (16+ / 0-)

    The fundamental problem is that we don't know what we are going to do in this country to sustain ourselves.  What is our role in a global marketplace when our wealth and standards of living are so much higher than the rest of the world?  

    Our prosperity, when we had it was based on a manufacturing and export driven economy and the development of national infrastructure that didn't previously exist.  It was fueled by and sustained by cheap fossil fuel produced domestically.

    Our economy ran into trouble in the early 1970's when domestic oil production peaked.  We have been papering this over with a debt driven consumer culture that has led to the greatest misallocation of resources in human hisotry (the development of suburbia).  

    We now live in a country that is culturally fragmented, in an economy where so called "efficiency" has both destroyed all our means of making a living, and left us perilously exposed to crises resulting from supply chain disruptions or shortages.

    I don't think regular people have any idea how difficult a situation we actually face, and mature discussion of the problems is completely absent in Congress and the media.  

    While in principle I support the concept of Keynsianism, the dirt is in the details.  Its nice to call for more stimulus, but further unenlightened investment in doomed systems like highways and suburban infrastructure will only leave us in debt and without the capacity to restructure our economy.

    Because this is America, the crises starts at the bottom and rises upward.  This means that the crises will not be televised as more and more Americans are left jobless, homeless, hungry, and desperate.

    There has been much discussion about what differentiates a "Recession" for a "Depression", In America, a "Depression" only happens when the wealthy are affected.  

    A year ago, we saw the nation panic as the wealth of Oligarchical families and institutions was threatened.  The "Nation" rushed to "rescue the country".  The country is now rescued, and "the worst has been averted", but this has had no affect or impact on the lives of 90% of the country.  

    In America, we have a slavish devotion to the protection of Capital at the expense of all other values and concerns.  We need to confront our problems head on if we ever hope to fix them.

    If you don't stop lying about me, I'm going to have to start telling the truth about you. Barack Obama

    by dbratl on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:48:27 AM PDT

    •  Our Role Is to Get In Line With Living Standards (4+ / 0-)

      of our present suppliers before we can compete again.

      Both parties accept the teachings of Reagan on trade, progressive taxation, and regulation of finance & business, so we're not going back to our 20th century impositions on business.

      Those standards would be child labor, bare feet and dirt floors in my sector.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:50:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The middle class has been destroyed. (14+ / 0-)

        It all started with Reaganomics, and the ideologues are still here.  Most of them are millionaires and billionaires by now.  They couldn't care less about everyone else.  What happened to our economy and their lame attempts to fix it without passing laws are proof.

        •  It might just be . . . (7+ / 0-)

          That 10% unemployment is not bug, but simply a feature of normal, mature, industrialized economy this is not propped up by cheap oil or debt spending.

          After all, 10% unemployment is what Europe has experienced for the last 30 years (they have no oil, and did not partake in the debt fiesta that we did). This is neither good or bad, it just is.

          The question going forward is how to organize our society in recognition of this fact.  The Europeans have created a welfare state funded primarily by excess wealth that in this country accrues to those who own capital.

          That is the "Nice" approach.  But just as likely an outcome might be a polarized state like Brazil where the wealthy literally fly helicopters from their living compounds to their shopping centers and most people are either barely clinging to the middle class or have fallen out and live in shanty towns and make their living off the shadow economy.

          If you don't stop lying about me, I'm going to have to start telling the truth about you. Barack Obama

          by dbratl on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:24:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I agree to large extent (4+ / 0-)

      In fact, I will put it this way, ever since 1968 we have developed a seemingly full blown schizophrenia. When the nation saw every group that wasn't conservative and white, we became engaged in a full blown culture war. Unfortunately, at the same time, that is about when our domestic production of basically everything started to plateau.

      When we elected Reagan, the white conservatives thought "Praise be, we've finally won."

      And what did they win, an increasingly hyper-sexualized and hyper-violent mass media, a rise in this Evangelism of Wealth that doesn't resemble anything Jesus taught, and a(n almost) maliciously amoral Corporate culture whose only concern is expanding their profit line by any means necessary.

      They thought that they, being white and conservative, were immune to the trials and tribulations of a faltering economic system. Now that they have just a mild taste of what some of their grandparents went through, they are in full blown freakout mode, egged on by Conservative talkers and writers who say that it's all the fault of the government governing, making those poor CEOs have to abide by laws and regulations (no matter how weak we say they are.)

      BR Cossacks for Barack!

      by BlueDWarrior on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:56:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  67 Was Summer of Love + Visible Vietnam Resistanc (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dbratl, BlueDWarrior, jds1978, Wom Bat

        increasing. Fundies were already organizing against liberal protestantism although not yet in terms of electoral politics. 68 was also the high water mark of the middle class.

        Culture war was gonna happen because of the pill and hippie sex, but the war resistance enlisted the power structure into it, and some of the power structure began helping organize fundamentalism around that time.

        Yep, that's about the time frame as I experienced it.

        We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

        by Gooserock on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:04:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm still convinced the culture war . . . (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BlueDWarrior, Alice Olson

          Is just the redirected rage that resulted from the falling of racial barriers.  The heterogeneous experiment that is American society is just that, and experiment.  It has never existed without either the codification of racial segregation in law and culture or the artificial economic crutch of cheap oil and post-war economic hegemony.  Now that the economic crutch is gone the racial resentments are rising back to cognitive primacy.  

          Sex is just a distraction.  

          If you don't stop lying about me, I'm going to have to start telling the truth about you. Barack Obama

          by dbratl on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:19:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  On the left, we expect an FDR to emerge . . . (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        trinite, FuddGate, beglin, Wom Bat

        from this mess and reshape the country to face the new century.  This was, in essence, the "Hope" behind the Obama campaign.  Unfortunately, history teaches us that for every FDR there are a dozen Hitlers and Stalins (and their lessers in evil - Milosevic, Franco, Stalin, Pinochet, etc).  

        Obama is a wonderful man, but he is an incrementalist and surprisingly enamored by the status quo.  We thought we were voting for a Gorbachev, he may turn out to be more of an Andropov, a man who saw the failings of his system but ultimately couldn't bring himself to challenge the elites who perpetuated it.      

        If you don't stop lying about me, I'm going to have to start telling the truth about you. Barack Obama

        by dbratl on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:16:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Meteor Blades, dbratl, jds1978

          How do we know that Obama is operating this plan of incrementalisim because our Legislature is functionally incapable of passing anything more than that.

          FDR couldn't get more 'radical' programs through because of it, he fell backwards in his second term because of it. Even the nouveau great hero of Legislating LBJ wanted Universal Health Care but could only get insurance for the elderly with nearly 70 Democrats in the Senate. Not to mention large chunks of the Great SOciety just never went anywhere

          BR Cossacks for Barack!

          by BlueDWarrior on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:23:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  All true . . . (0+ / 0-)

            But the underlying vision of both FDR and LBJ was transformational.  They were looking to reinvent our society on better terms.  Obama's language can sometimes be transformational, but his actions have been incremental and deferential towards those with money and power.

            If Obama chose to target insurance companies and publically villify them for the actions they already do, he could get the public firmly behind a public option in about 1 to 2 weeks.

            Instead he defers to insurance companies and makes side deals with major industry players like pharma and hospitals.  Maybe this is smart, maybe it isn't, but its not transformational.  

            If you don't stop lying about me, I'm going to have to start telling the truth about you. Barack Obama

            by dbratl on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:29:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  We're living in Robert Moses' wet dream (0+ / 0-)

      only we're the sheets.

  •  My US Customer Base is Crashing for My Home Biz (5+ / 0-)

    in artsy craftsy. The rest of the globe is keeping me going.

    Since mid summer I've become about 80% export.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:49:02 AM PDT

  •  "Watch Out for Muscular Government" (4+ / 0-)

    Edward Harrison of Credit Writedowns has a lengthy post on Naked Capitalism entitled The recession is over but the depression has just begun. One of the things Harrison is worried about is that this new depression will result in

    a wave of populist sentiment, leading to an unpredictable and violent geopolitical climate and the likelihood of more muscular forms of government.

    For those interested in the step-by-step analysis of how bad it is and why we can't get out of it, you can go read the entire article. But, basically, Harrison has concluded that the private sector -- that would be you and me, folks, plus the corporations -- have way too much debt, and not enough income to service it. That leaves the national government as the only entity that can "pick up the slack" in generating aggregate demand to get the economy moving forward. But, here's the key, "large scale government deficit spending is politically impossible." Hence, welcome to America's new Lost Decade.

    One of the points Harrison makes is that the U.S. economy is dependent for growth on asset price inflation. This is echoed by Brad DeLong in an article on Seeking Alpha, Macroeconomic Policy for a Stronger Recovery:

    And it is by asset prices that the banking-sector support policies should be judged. The right way to look at monetary and financial policy is that it has, ever since 1825, been focused on manipulating asset prices: the central bank buys and sells and guarantees and regulates and subsidizes and nationalizes with an eye toward pushing the prices of financial assets to levels where businesses seeking to raise capital to build capacity and households seeking to spend out of wealth together can issue new assets and so access enough money to push their spending to a level that gets the economy to full employment, or at least out of depression. The policies are always sold as opaque technocratic adjustments to the "money stock" or to a "federal funds interest rate" that real people do not see and is of concern only to bankers. But the policies are and always have been truly aimed at manipulating asset prices. We may believe in a market economy. But since 1825 we have also believed that asset prices are too important to be left to the market to determine when their free market levels produced either depression unemployment or runaway inflation.

    Now, I am quite surprised to see DeLong arguing this, because I thought he was more progressive than this. The alternative view, which I prefer, is that of Thomas Palley, who wrote in February 2008 -- before the final collapse of the financial house of cards -- The Debt Delusion:

    America's economic contradictions are part of a new business cycle that has emerged since 1980. The business cycles of Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush share strong similarities and are different from pre-1980 cycles. The similarities are large trade deficits, manufacturing job loss, asset price inflation, rising debt-to-income ratios, and detachment of wages from productivity growth.

    The new cycle rests on financial booms and cheap imports. Financial booms provide collateral that supports debt-financed spending. Borrowing is also supported by an easing of credit standards and new financial products that increase leverage and widen the range of assets that can be borrowed against. Cheap imports ameliorate the effects of wage stagnation.

    This structure contrasts with the pre-1980 business cycle, which rested on wage growth tied to productivity growth and full employment. Wage growth, rather than borrowing and financial booms, fueled demand growth. That encouraged investment spending, which in turn drove productivity gains and output growth.

    A conservative is a scab for the oligarchy.

    by NBBooks on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:49:54 AM PDT

  •  Free trade with China doesn't work. (7+ / 0-)

    I wish I had saved the NYT article in which President Clinton said that China would buy lots of things from us and that would create jobs in the United States.  Didn't someone tell him that China is not a consumer society?  Why would people in China buy anything from us when they manufacture it right there in China?

    On C-Span this morning the Commerce Secretary said that we create lots of technology for alternative energy and the final products are then manufactured in China or Japan.  These are the jobs we need right here.

    •  Free Trade Is Not Working (0+ / 0-)

      We should put big penalties on US companies that are making products overseas and wants to ship the products back to the US.  If they don't make products here in the USA they should have to make up the difference on what it would cost to make them here.

      •  we will pay the difference (0+ / 0-)

        the cost of doing so will be passed on to the consumer, always has been always will be, which will spell trouble for walmart, the devil, and all those dollar stores that pepper our country. No more cheap toys for bobby and cindy.

  •  I blame this all on my credit card limit. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NYFM, BlueJessamine, Rip Van Mongo


  •  Great Diary.....!!!! (4+ / 0-)

    Horrible News...!!!!

  •  Very bad numbers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I am reserving judgment until it shows a trend of at-least 2 months (and claims moving up in that period). IMO this month is a fluke just like June was. we will see.

    The Baucus caucus is quite raucus and in the end will fauckus

    by FistJab on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:02:23 AM PDT

    •  Could be. But combined with the ISM ... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Timaeus, TJ, Brooke In Seattle

      ...states, with the first-time unemployment claims - which are still bottom-bouncing in the mid-500,000s - and things like the fact that with July-August cash-for-clunkers no longer in the picture, annualized car sales in September continued their plunge which means those folks hired back onto the line at the beginning of September may be out of job again by December.

      I don't know a person who doesn't want those numbers to be as you say. But September was, according to a few folks in early July, going to be the month we broke into positive territory.

      Science is just a theory.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:11:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ISM (0+ / 0-)

        was actually decent. it was expanding for the second month in 18 months or so (52.6, compared to 52.9 last month). lower than expected that's for sure (which fits the data for this whole week, expect for pending home sales and home prices which blew over the expectations in the positive).

        I would be fine with a bit of correction in the markets, right now interest rates are CRASHING which will bring the mortgage rates back to 4.8% next week. That is great for borrowing, homebuying, debt financing etc. The interest rates right now at 4 month lows.

        Still I need this month to be a fluke to remain optimistic. we will see what happens with claims this month.

        The Baucus caucus is quite raucus and in the end will fauckus

        by FistJab on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:55:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  except* (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:


          The Baucus caucus is quite raucus and in the end will fauckus

          by FistJab on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:57:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  The other bit of bad news out this ... (0+ / 0-)

          ...morning is:

          U.S. and foreign businesses slowed their demand in August for capital equipment to expand production, the Commerce Department reported Friday. Factory orders decreased 0.8% in August, slower than the 0.5% fall expected by economists surveyed by MarketWatch. Orders for durable goods decreased 2.6% in August, revised down from 2.4% estimated a week ago. This is the biggest drop since January. Orders for nondurable goods rose 0.8%.

          I agree with you. I hope all these numbers are flukes, from the initial claims rise last week, to the ISM, to factory orders, to the grim annualized car sales in September, to these dismal unemployment stats. If it's just one bad month in the middle of an improving trend, hurrah.

          But even if that's true, we still need measures to deal with structural unemployment and a multitude of other economic problems that I mentioned in passing in the diary.

          Science is just a theory.

          by Meteor Blades on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 08:15:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Dead in the Water on Jobs (0+ / 0-)

    We can lament all day and night, but NOBODY is listening in Washington.

    It's all about health care (which probably won't pass), climate change (which won't pass) and financial regulatory reform (which has no chance at all).

    Has anyone in Washington even said the words "Full Employment Budget?"  No. All the talk is about record deficits and how they need to be cut.

    Paul Krugman says we need another stimulus package.  Won't happen now or in the near future.  Maybe in 2010 when the election approaches and unemployment is double digits, the Dems will finally focus on jobs.  But don't hold your breath.

  •  Will Barack be Jimmy Carter II? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    10 percent unemployment = One-term wonder.
    So far, Barack is more like Herbert Hoover than like FDR.

    •  You mean I might get 7 percent on my money again? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      It was also a time of very high interest rates to cool the inflation at the time. I had a friend back in those days who got so used to getting 7 percent on her CDs that she was completely at a loss to understand what happened when they started dropping back into more normal ranges of 4 percent or so.

      Moderation in most things. Except Reactors. IFR forever!

      by billmosby on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:27:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  7 percent on a CD is small comfort (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        when inflation is 14 percent. Jimmy managed a great trifecta: double digit inflation, unemployment, and mortgage rates.

        •  I know. I kept telling her that! (0+ / 0-)

          On the other hand, if I remember correctly, you couldn't make jack shit anywhere there for a few years, and that 7% was one of the better options.

          Oh, if you owned mineral rights on oil and gas property, now that would have been different.

          Moderation in most things. Except Reactors. IFR forever!

          by billmosby on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:22:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Maybe (0+ / 0-)

      Although remember unemployment hit 10.7% in Jan. 1983 during Reagan's first term, and he ended up winning in a landslide. If we can get a decent recovery by 2012 we may be in good shape. But, frankly, I'm pretty pessimistic myself right now.

      •  Maybe...but unemployment plummeted after that. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        "The rate of unemployment for civilian workers dropped more than a full percentage point from the fourth quarter of 1983 to the second quarter of 1984 and then showed more modest improvement, ending the year at 7.2 percent."

        I'm just sayin'...Obama ain't winning unless this jobs picture gets better. And if it's still above 9 percent NEXT Fall, the Dems can kiss Congress goodbye.

    •  His only hope is the Republican candidates (0+ / 0-)

      will be crappy.  The majority might not be happy by the current situation but I doubt they'll think Palin or Romney will have the solution.  Maybe if zombie Reagan ran...

      "Only now with the advent of potato day has tyranny come to our shores." - Jon Stewart

      by methinshaw on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 09:10:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Double Edged Sword (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    QuestionAuthority, Rip Van Mongo

    I wonder which way the reaction to this will go?  Will the Republican CW prevail that the Obama stimulus has failed and we should not throw anymore taxpayer money into it, or will the Democrat CW prevail that we need more stimulus now since the problem is the original amount wasn't enough?

    Part of the problem is that much of the stimulus related to job preservation has been spent (mainly given to States and localities to preserve the jobs of teachers, firefighters, police and other public servants). However, much of the stimulus money slated for job creation projects (highway/bridge construction, high speed rail, and other job creation projects) has yet to be spent.  Most of this job creation stimulus money will be going out over the winter and spring to fund projects for the summer of 2010.  But will it be enough to reverse the job hemorrhaging trend?  I will bet that Krugman will say no, since he has said the original stimulus fell short of what was needed.

    It will be interesting to see how the WH reacts?  Will they bow to fiscal conservatives and take the cautious route, afraid to suggest putting another dime of taxpayer money towards the jobless problem, or will go with progressives like Krugman and take the bold step of beginning to put together a hefty Stimulus II package for 2010?  My guess they will take a "wait and see" posture arguing for patience to let Stimulus I complete its "magic", but they will emphasize they are not ruling out the need for a Stimulus II.

    "Some men see things as they are and ask, 'Why?' I dream of things that never were and ask, 'Why not?"

    by Doctor Who on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:07:55 AM PDT

    •  My guess is that... (0+ / 0-)

      the only stimulus that can pass now would be tax cuts.

      •  So might as well not do anything. (0+ / 0-)

        Tax cuts will just make it worse.  When the government is forced to intervene again, we will be even further in the hole with nothing to show for it.

        "Only now with the advent of potato day has tyranny come to our shores." - Jon Stewart

        by methinshaw on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 09:08:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Public And Media Can't Accept The News (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Brooke In Seattle, beglin

      that we are in the midst of a long term economic crisis that will see high unemployment rates. That the unemployment rate was going to drift upward while we might see a small uptick in GDP growth has been predicted since the crisis began pre Obama. The stimulus was not needed to forestall a minor recession. It was needed to forestall a once in a hundred year economic collapse. It could have been predicted (I certainly did) that we would get to this point in late 2009 where the unemployment #'s will still be for shit and the free marketers would be bashing the stimulus. The stimulus was too small and the financial system needed a major overhaul. We didn't get that because the policymakers thought we could dodge a bullet and emerge realatively unscathed from the troubles. Obama's message should have been one of perseverence and not hope. The consensus for the policies that can still turn this around is damn narrow or may have vanished.

  •  My neighbor (6+ / 0-)

    teaches at a very expensive, very exclusive private school a couple of towns over. Trust me, it is a bastion of those kids of UK's upper crust that can't get into Eaton or Harrow.  
    She was subbing for the economics teacher one day and told us that these kids are taught that the US has one of the fastest growing gaps between the rich and poor. The discussion point was whether the US could survive long as a democracy if this continued. Irony is not dead if the upper class Brits are speculating on the outcome of the accelerating American income gap.

    If nothing is very different from you, what is a little different from you is very different from you. Ursula K. Le Guin

    by northsylvania on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:08:02 AM PDT

  •  Just like Brownie... (0+ / 0-)

    "This is the first time since the Great Depression of the 1930s that America will have an absolute loss of jobs over the course of a decade."

    Hell of a job, Dubya. Hell of a job...

    "Ridicule may lawfully be employed where reason has no hope of success."

    by QuestionAuthority on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:09:40 AM PDT

  •  Note the trend in the graph (0+ / 0-)

    From WWII till the early '70s, depth and length of the recessions in terms of unemployment dwindled.

    Then, the trend reversed, with recessions getting deeper and longer.

    Apparently, in the long term the New Deal was essentially eliminating recessions as an unemployment force -- and with the abandonment of the New Deal in the early '70s, we've slowly returned to the previous status.

  •  Just makes me want to say.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BlueDWarrior, jds1978, spencerh

    Rosa sat, so Martin could walk, so Barack could run, so our children could fly.

    by Sweet Georgia Peach on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:11:58 AM PDT

  •  I'm grateful to be living in BIZZARROWORLD (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    My desk overflows with work, I'm in custom magazine publishing, and my division's sales are strong. It's been predicted for more than a decade my sector would see long term growth.

    I'm guessing our growth is at the expense of the rest of the magazine industry. Advertisers are looking at their budgets and thinking, "Why buy a page, when you can buy the entire magazine for similar coin?"

    "Yes we cane!"--Sue Sylvester, Glee

    by Scott Wooledge on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:16:22 AM PDT

  •  The following words will need to be pre-loaded (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    when speaking with a Wingfuck:

    "What goddamn taxes? What tax increases would you be trying to discuss here? Come on, I know you can come up with just once, right? I mean, you're so GOOD at doing this, I KNOW you can find a single tax that has increased since Obama has taken office!"

    He beat the Republican party and the Republican party fell apart.

    by Thomas Boyko on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:19:31 AM PDT

  •  The layoff of 30 city employees go into effect (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, beglin, QuestionAuthority

    here today to to fill a four million dollar budget deficit.

    Out of the 30 employees are 8 police officers and 8 more are firefighters.

    "The devil made me buy this dress!" Geraldine Jones/ Flip Wilson

    by BlueJessamine on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:20:39 AM PDT

  •  More evidence even "experts" are not (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    beglin, BlueJessamine

    oracles with crystal balls. Especially the ones on the IdiotBox.

    Great diary.

    Bullshit is the glue that binds us as a nation. George Carlin

    by gereiztkind on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:21:41 AM PDT

  •  Resume polishing jobs on the upswing. (0+ / 0-)

    Always a silver lining somewhere.

    Moderation in most things. Except Reactors. IFR forever!

    by billmosby on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:22:13 AM PDT

  •  Blame it on Bush. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NYFM, jds1978

    They blamed the crash after 9/11 on Clinton and continued to fail to take responsibility for their own actions throughout the Bush presidency. At least saying "Well, the last president drove the economy off a cliff and did nothing to mitigate the crash" is credible and correct in this case.

    He beat the Republican party and the Republican party fell apart.

    by Thomas Boyko on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:22:47 AM PDT

    •  Nonetheless... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      When Obama was elected, my friends and I felt there was a good chance of him being a 1-term President --- in spite of the landslide...and in spite of his obvious skills, and the historical nature of his election.

      Because the American people have very short memories.

      The original stimulus was probably too small, but we can't have a do-over. Any new fiscal stimulus will have to be masked as something else [a massive energy efficiency campaign?]...

    •  responsbility for their actions (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I like the sound of that, would make a good bumper sticker

    •  I blame every President of the post-Carter era. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      "Only now with the advent of potato day has tyranny come to our shores." - Jon Stewart

      by methinshaw on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 09:03:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, though Carter wasn't (0+ / 0-)

        particularly pragmatic, he was the last decent president. Plus he didn't just fade off into "oh, I was the president" territory like everyone after him.

        He beat the Republican party and the Republican party fell apart.

        by Thomas Boyko on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:36:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for helping blow up the U3 lie... (0+ / 0-)

    ...U3 gets quoted here constantly.

    When an old man dies, a library burns down. --African proverb

    by Wom Bat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:26:26 AM PDT

  •  They'll adjust the numbers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    in every way possible to keep the "official" unemployment rate below 10%.

  •  THE Misery Marketing Problem. Since RayGun We've (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Meteor Blades

    all been working harder per hour, we've all been working MORE hours, and we've all been working for LESS - and this actually started before Raygun.

    (EXCEPT the thieves at the top who TAKE the biggest slice for themselves - which is WHY they want to be on stop and why they work hard at staying on top.)

    Under the phantastical lies of the right wing, letting the thieves at the top KEEP more of what the community made would = freedom!

    WHAT is 'FREEDOM' when you got to work harder and longer for less, AND, the pigs at the top get more and got more, AND, the pigs at the top are NOT accountable for their own lies and corruption?

    The ONLY people voting republican should be:

    1. the wealthy and powerful who want us all to be doormats, arsewipes, catch-farts, ass kissers, cannon fodder and serfs.
    1. their well paid henchmen.
    1. the fools dumb enough to think they're gonna be part of group 1 or 2, OR, the fools tooo dumb enough to know their fools, OR, the sadly duped.

    The OPPORTUNITY to out market the right wing's lies have been there for decades, BUT, our side has too many "leaders" too pre-occupied with trying to come up with the newest gettysburgh address INSTEAD of making stuff work better - first of which is beating the right wing to an irrelevant legislative pulp.


    Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous

    by seabos84 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:32:28 AM PDT

  •  Terrible news, but don't lose your sense of humor (0+ / 0-)

    To add some levity to this dismal report, here's a short "instructional video" on how to cut corners and stretch unemployment checks in the kitchen:


  •  Devastating numbers! (0+ / 0-)
    "The combination of a weak economic expansion sandwiched between two recessions (2001, and 2007-2009) produced what will be a lost employment decade. As of August 2009, the nation had 1.3 million (1,256,000) fewer private sector jobs than in December 1999. This is the first time since the Great Depression of the 1930s that America will have an absolute loss of jobs over the course of a decade."

    And what's the number of jobs that need to be created every month just to keep up with populationg growth?  Isn't it something like 200K?

    Last week in a town very near my residence a man in his 30s shot his sleeping wife in the head with a shotgun, then the two kids, then the dog, then himself. They'd been trying with no success to sell their house for more than a year.  His main income was from cabinet installing, which had almost completely dried up. I fear there will be more of that.

    Meanwhile, the CEO class keeps getting richer and richer.

    When does the "middle class" realize it's not "middle" any more?

    •  When it's THEM losing their job (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The public is a great deal more myopic.
      The only way they will care is then it's their butt in the unemployment line.
      We as a country just seem to not want to do any prevenitive maintenance, in fact, we seem to intentionally set up systems that only work when we are in freak-out crisis mode.
      We haven't reached freak-out crisis mode on Health-Care.
      We haven't reached freak-out crisis mode on the Economy in general.

      (This is subject to change, of course...)

      BR Cossacks for Barack!

      by BlueDWarrior on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:47:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That 1.3 million figure divided ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Timaeus 12 is the monthly figure for population increase's effect on the labor force, about 110,000.

      Science is just a theory.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 08:09:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What gets lost in the discussion (0+ / 0-)

    of recession/recovery is that, as used, "the economy" really is a meaningless term for most citizens. It has become a shorthand definition of the world of corporations mostly and by extension shareholders.

    Playing into this is the phrase "jobless recovery". Calling it an oxymoron helps but doesn't go far enough in changing the framing of the issue of what is important to a country and it's citizens in general.

    I'm going to start correcting people of what I think is a deceptive meme and asking "so what" or "why should I care" when they tell me the economy is recovering. From there I hope to generate a conversation on this.

    Unapologetically pro-citizen. Not anti-corporation just very pro-citizen.

    by CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:45:30 AM PDT

  •  U6 (0+ / 0-)

    It is amazing -- many liberal bloggers have been touting the U6 number for many years ..During the Bush administration between recessions liberal bloggers pointed out that the U6 Number was showing the Bush recovery was extremely weak in job creation. but you never heard ANYTHING about the U6 number. Suddenly you have a Democratic in office and the media has discovered the U6 number. Thank you so called Liberal Media

  •  How about a 4 day Work Week... (0+ / 0-)

    This Bushit we've been bequeathed by U Know Who may be a good opportunity to reevaluate the whole shebang.

    Since those with employment are presently working an average of 33 hrs/week --- let's just make it official by raising the pay for all workers so they get the same $$$ for 4 days as they now get for 5 days or 40 hrs.

    Let's face it,,, the more hours we put in the more fucked up the environment becomes so if we all just slow down the destructive rate of our so-called economy we'll all be better off and have more time for the kids & football.

    I Was Born To Be Censored.

    by olo on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 08:00:16 AM PDT

  •  Welcome to Michigan (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, jds1978, beglin

    Well, to two thirds of Michigan.  Our unemployment rate is 15.6%.

    I honestly wish you all weren't catching up with us, but it looks like you are all really trying.

    We've been screwed for years.  Thanks Big Auto and Republicans for your vision and guidance.  Trickle down sure has worked here!!!

    'Party Before Country' - Official Motto of the GOP.

    by WSComn on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 08:12:05 AM PDT

  •  'Liberating Resources' (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, beglin

    That's what the company I work for is calling it. It's the new PC way to say your job has been outsourced to an H1B visa holder from India who will do it for less money. He'll be here next week so you can train him and then adios!

    Seriously, we found out on Monday that pretty much the entire IT dept. is being outsourced to an Indian company. And yes, they do expect us to train our replacements before we leave.

    So there's your 'jobless recovery' for you. This company is making money hand-over-fist but in order to satisfy the greedy investors, and because the chief bean counter has a pathological hatred of IT, they are kicking a whole group of talented, dedicated, hardworking Americans out the door to replace them with cheap, imported slave labor.

  •  THE problem is we don't have manufactoring jobs. (0+ / 0-)

    1/3rd of high school students in the US drop out of college and then do what?  In the past they could support a family working in a factory but that option is gone.  Add to that all the people with high school degrees or B.A.s in low demand fields.  There aren't very many jobs for them to do anymore that can't be shipped over seas.  

    If a really rich country engages in free trade with a really poor country, eventually the system is going to move to some sort of equilibrium.  China's economy grows mostly at the expense of ours shrinking.  As their standard of living rises, ours will have to lower.  

    Welcome to the Second World America.  

    "Only now with the advent of potato day has tyranny come to our shores." - Jon Stewart

    by methinshaw on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 09:02:48 AM PDT

  •  I speak to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    several people each week who either teach in the financial/economic field and almost as many banking insiders.  While there are a few who do not agree for various reasons the vast majority say we are in for a deep double dip or the dreaded "W" recovery.  But instead of sharp upticks like a "W" would suggest they say it may look more like a "Double U"  with the right side arm more of a small "u".

    Signifying a return to a "lesser normal" than we have seen in the past.

    The moral is live below your means and if you can pick off bargains when and where you can. There will be fortunes, huge fortunes, made in real estate for those who are prepared.  

    Some say it is happening now....  

  •  Experts: Sky far bluer than expected (0+ / 0-)

    It should come as absolutely no surprise that jobs are disappearing, because technology is increasing and machines are replacing humans.  This isn't a bad thing, it's a good thing.  The only reason it seems like a bad thing right now is because we're using an obsolete economy based on a world where all work is done by humans.

    We can't expect 95% employment to continue indefinitely:  what jobs can people do when we have robots that can do everything quicker and better?  Not that we're there yet, but we're getting closer every day, and of course jobs are going to disappear.  Thank God...  I hope it comes soon enough that in my lifetime I can see a world where the "American dream" doesn't consist of working 'til you die.

    There'll be some grief and misery during the transition, until we update our economic views to reflect reality.  But take solace in the fact that you won't starve anytime soon.  Already, thanks to technology, less than 3% of the workforce provides all the food we need plus surplus, and we aren't even pushing farms to capacity.  What you might be deprived of, at least til our economic models are updated:  unnecessary luxuries.  Junk you don't need anyway.  Good riddance.

    •  That's assuming that benefits are shared (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Meteor Blades

      and you're ignoring the fact that, as more and more work is done by machines, fewer and fewer people are reaping the benefits.

      This whole notion of humanity benefiting from automation ignores the facts of capitalism, which is the dominant ideology of the US (and the world, more and more), which are that those who own the means of production are the ones who benefit from lower costs. Those on the outside are left begging for crumbs.

      "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

      by Alice in Florida on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 10:36:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  By the way, I think no one would mind (0+ / 0-)

      if their job disappeared but their salary/wage stayed. That has never happened in history (automation is hardly new), and there's no sign of anything like it happening now. Of course if you're a member of the investor class, that's not a problem for you.

      "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

      by Alice in Florida on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 10:38:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm feeling lucky... (0+ / 0-)

    I got laid off a month ago, but was able to get another job fairly quickly. I start the new job next week.  It's in a completely different industry, so I'll probably flounder a bit at first.  But hey... I got no complaints. I'm just amazed I have a job.

    Having had a small taste of unemployment, my heart goes out to everyone that is struggling out there. I have friends that have been looking for months with no luck.

    I can't say that I did anything different or special than anyone else. I used the shotgun method. I sent out something like 70+ resumés in the month I was laid off. Most of those went out in the first week and a half.

    One thing I will note... I got zero responses from,, and  The two interviews I did get... one was via Craigslist, the other was directly through the company website.

    I sent out no actual cover letters. When you're sending that many resumés out, it gets to be too much effort to send a cover letter with each one. I used to believe in cover letters, but I'm finding with the new automated systems that cover letters are rarely, if ever, read by recruiters. They seem to just parse your resumé for keywords. If you're in a very specialized field, cover letters might still have value, but recruiters are inundated right now.

    One last thing... when I was laid off, I had just moved to a new state (Utah)... so I had no contacts and no professional network to build from. That's why I did the shotgun. If you happen to have a decent professional network... USE IT! Don't be afraid to ask each and every contact you have. Even though I didn't have a network here in my new home, I reached out to a lot of friends and lo and behold, several had family or friends that lived here. While none of those contacts panned out, it definitely eased my mind to know my friends and contacts were helping me from afar.

    Good Luck to All the Job Seekers!

  •  Here's a "technical" U3 question: (0+ / 0-)

    How do other countries measure THEIR unemployment, and which of the various BLS rates is comparable?  I don't know if the entire EU reports identically (I imagine not), but what is a rough equivalent for comparison in France, Germany, and the UK?  We need an international labor/economic statisticcs-type geek (and I use the term affectionately).


    Torture is Wrong! 10% of the US population on Food Stamps: help your food bank.

    by tom 47 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 10:33:44 AM PDT

  •  This number and its trending improve quickly or.. (0+ / 0-)

    .. Dems are very likely in for an extremely difficult cycle in 2010.  Could the massive swing evidenced in '06 and '08 be in jeopardy already?

  •  Learning from the Reaganomy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Look at the most recent four lines on the chart.

    1981 -- Gipper, 1990 -- Bush the Prudent, 2001 -- George the Worst, 2007 -- George the Worstest.

    Note that each takes longer to reach its starting point than did its predecessor.  Imagine where things would be if Panama Red had won.


    According to the chart, the "Percent Job Losses Relative to Peak Employment Month" are NEGATIVE LOSSES!  OH MY F'ING GOD!  We're actually in one of the greatest job creations in history!  You see, if you have NEGATIVE LOSSES, then according to math, you have POSITIVE GAINS (two wrongs make a right).  The numbers should not have a negative sign in front of them.  I guess it was the way, who ever made to plot, to emphasize LOSSES.  You know, the lines deviating down from the nominal 0.0% line gave all the visual cues I needed to be seen as BAD!

    By the way, this totally invalidates any of the stuff you all are talking about.  See, if there are any mistakes, any small ones, about any thing you talk about, the wingnut assclowns latch onto it like flies to shit.  No matter how much reasoning you use, everytime you swat them away they come right back to it.

    •  no, they're not (0+ / 0-)

      the negative numbers represent losses. The positive "1" is there to accommodate slight increases in the timespan the chart covers.

      If wingnuts see it otherwise, I can only say that they have a knack for that. The graph is clear and the information it presents pretty obvious.

      "I give up...I'm praying to Darwin." - dharmasyd

      by mieprowan on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 01:44:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes it it right... (0+ / 0-)

        It still is bastard labeling.  I know how deviation plots work.  All my engineering co-workers look at this plot on my computer at work.  It's the first thing we all notice.  The title should just say percentage job change releative to peak employement month, not percent job losses.  

        Yeah! liberal infighting!

        •  there's nothing wrong (0+ / 0-)

          with giving people feedback that could result in their work being more accessible. Not at all. But how you do it will affect the response you get.

          The only way to win, is not to let the lies work. - thanks to Diane W. for the inspiration

          by mieprowan on Mon Oct 05, 2009 at 06:48:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  This reminds me of those stock analysts that (0+ / 0-)

    would eventually drop their taget prices from $200/share to $5/share. Time for America's Financial experts to take off the rose colored glasses. Fortunately people on main street seem to have a far more realistic outlook.

    Job Losses Far More than Expected. U6 Hits 17%
    by Meteor Blades
    Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:15:00 AM PDT
    Another 263,000 jobs were lost in September, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced this morning, far above the consensus of experts.

    Henceforth I ask not good fortune. I myself am good fortune. Walt Whitman

    by Sacramento Dem on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 06:07:09 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site