Skip to main content

Chart courtesy of Calculated Risk

The consensus view is that the Bureau of Labor Statistics will announce that 200,000 jobs were generated in March. But among the experts that Bloomberg surveyed ahead of Friday's government jobs report, predictions range from 150,000 to 310,000. If it hits the high end of that range, it would mark the best private-sector gain since November 2005, continuing an upward trend over the past six months.

That would fit with other statistics regarding the job market, which struggled to gain traction through most of 2010, when only 77,000 new positions were generated each month, many of them temporary Census hires. For instance, the Conference Board reported Wednesday that online advertised job vacancies have risen 600,000 in the first three months of 2011:

“Thus far in 2011, labor demand is looking strong,” said June Shelp, Vice President at The Conference Board.  “In the first quarter of 2011, the monthly increase in advertised vacancies has averaged about 200,000/month.  That’s good news after the overall anemic growth in labor demand over the last 11 months of 2010.  In March, almost half of the advertised vacancies were new ads that were not there the previous month (new ads up 98,200). This is a further positive sign that employers are continuing to look for workers.”

Moreover, state and local tax revenue rose 2.2 percent in the fourth quarter compared with the same period in 2009, according to the Census Bureau. While these revenues are still well below their pre-recession peak, their improvement is an indication that more people are employed and spending money, which generates more revenue from sales and other taxes.

So a big headline producer in the jobs report seems possible. But even if the BLS's seasonally adjusted survey clocks in with 300,000 new jobs for March, there's a very long haul ahead. Adjusting for population growth, just getting back to where we were in December 2007 means 10.5 million jobs need to created. To reduce the jobless rate to 6 percent, which would still be above the so-called full-employment level, requires that 360,000 new jobs be generated each month for the next 36 months, until March 2014. Against that metric, a jobs report which only comes in at the expert consensus level of 200,000 is essentially at the break-even point, enough to keep up with population growth but not much more.

Given the depths to which the recession took us, reducing unemployment in any significant way will require that gross domestic product rise more than the 3.1 percent it did in the fourth quarter of 2010. More along the lines of 5 percent. But nobody thinks that is going happen. Durable goods orders, for instance, have been down four of the past five months, and took a 0.9 drop in March against expectations of a 1.1 percent increase. Government layoffs, rising oil prices, the wretched housing market, the wreckage in Japan, continuing debt problems in Europe all serve to shackle a recovery.

As a consequence, financial experts have been downgrading their GDP estimates for the first quarter of 2011, which ends today. Macroeconomic Advisers decreased its estimate to 2.3% from 2.5%, Morgan Stanley to 2.5% from 2.7%, and Bank of America to 2.2% from 2.5%. Those anemic numbers, if they turn out to be accurate, mean millions of out-of-work Americans have a long way to go before they get a regular paycheck again.


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

  •  What's the break even number? 150K jobs? (5+ / 0-)

    The axis should be re-zeroed there.  We're barely climbing out just now.

    All kidding aside - it's the f'ing oligarchy, stupid.

    by nightsweat on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:32:30 AM PDT

    •  There is a wide range of opinion... (14+ / 0-)

      ...about where that break-even point is. It's complicated by the fact that the population-to-workforce ratio plummeted during the recession. Some put it at 100,000, the Economic Policy Institute puts it at 127,000, and others put it at 150,000 to 200,000.

      Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:44:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  and (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        It's complicated by the fact that the population-to-workforce ratio plummeted during the recession
        and i find that t e complete Government bullshit.  With things so tough out there, who wouldnt take a good job if offered,

        That ratio is just the game played by beancounters to keep the numbers artificially low for many reasons including political.

        Bad is never good until worse happens

        by dark daze on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:52:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  meanwhile, how many jobs are the (0+ / 0-)

        American companies sending overseas?

        In 2010 alone, US companies hired a little under 1 million workers in the US, but hired a little over 1.4 million workers overseas.

        And American wages continue to decline, so even the jobs we are still getting here, are low-wage shit jobs. The good-paying jobs continue to flee overseas, where they too are turned into low-wage shit jobs.

        •  Amazingly, GM is again employing... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Pozzo, ferallike, greenchiledem

          ...more U.S. workers than workers overseas. So, in this single case, the "balance" has tipped back a tiny bit. Of course, those new hires are paid half what their predecessors at GM made a decade ago. And their benefits are less.

          Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 10:13:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  the Japanese and Germans, meanwhile, (0+ / 0-)

            are locating more of their plants here (nearly all of the Japanese cars sold in the US are actually made in the US). There are advantages to being located close to or within one's primary market.  And of course Japan and Germany both have strong unions, which they can evade by relocating their factories here --where there exists a large market with a well-educated low-wage unorganized workforce with virtually no safety or environmental regulations. In effect, the Germans and Japanese are doing to us (and their own workers) what we did to Mexico and China (and our own workers).


            Looking into my crystal ball, my prediction would be that in the next few decades all the American, German and Japanese plants currently located in the US, will pack up and move to Mexico, where they get all the advantages of being in one's primary market, at one-tenth the wages.


            •  According to the ... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              ...Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, 55 percent of Japanese cars sold in the U.S. are made here.

              Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

              by Meteor Blades on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 11:47:01 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  wow, that's gone down quite a bit (0+ / 0-)

                It was much higher back when they had all sorts of "voluntary quotas" to keep the US happy. Indeed, the reason why they started building plants in the US in the first place (back in the 80's) was to get around all those quotas.

                I'd assume that the WTO probably has something to do with it. For the WTO, such quotas are a no-no.

                Thanks for that info.

          •  the GM situation may have something to do with (0+ / 0-)

            the conditions imposed upon them by the terms of their government bailout. They may have been required to hire X percent of their workforce within the US, as a condition of the US government saving their asses.

            I'm not sure about that, though.

            Certainly they are not doing it out of the goodness of their patriotic little heart.  There's a payoff for them in it.

  •  Quality concerns (18+ / 0-)

    as well:

    [A]s of January, 40 percent of the jobs lost in the recession came from higher-wage industries but just 14 percent of the jobs created during the recovery were in those industries. Lower-wage industries, where jobs paid on average less than $15 an hour, accounted for 23 percent of the jobs lost but fully 49 percent of newly created ones. Among the industries that grew in 2010, the top three occupations were retail sales clerks, cashiers and food preparers; each has a median hourly wage of less than $10.
    •  Yep. As I noted ... (13+ / 0-) February:

      Annette Bernhardt, policy co-director of the National Employment Law Project, recently conducted a study of job loss and growth. During the Great Recession, jobs were lost in high- middle- and low-wage categories. But in the first seven months of 2010, she found that 76 percent of the new jobs created were in low- to mid-wage industries – those in the $8.92 to $15 an hour range. The national average wage is $22.60 an hour.  While high-wage jobs – those in the $17.43 to $31 an hour range made up half the jobs lost during the recession, they had only produced 5 percent of new jobs since hiring resumed last year:

      Even in some of the higher-wage industries that are hiring, it's lower-wage occupations within the sector where the jobs are being added, according to William Rodgers, chief economist for the Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University.

      Case in point: Professional and business services sectors gained a healthy 366,000 jobs in 2010. Workers in that sector earned $27.23 an hour, on average, in 2010. But almost all of the new jobs -- 308,000 -- came in temporary help services, where the average hourly wage was only $15 an hour.

      But total pay at Wall Street firms rose 5.7 percent in 2010.

      Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:41:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  this chart should ALWAYS be shown with the (9+ / 0-)

    date that Obama took office.

    This administration HAS turned the economy around after 8 years of Bush.

    •  and tie it to the GOP notion that only the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      amk for obama

      wealthy succeed when more citizens are unemployed

      Präsidentenelf-maßschach; Warning-Some Snark Above "Nous sommes un groupuscule" join the DAILY KOS UNIVERSITY "makes Beck U. and the Limbaugh Institute look like Romper Room"

      by annieli on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:40:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  this is absurd. (5+ / 0-)

      we do not have anything close to a healthy economy.  You can make the case that Obama has put into place things that will help the economy down the road- but any true investigation will show just how unresponsive our government has been to the jobs situation.

      Where is the jobs program?
      Where is the infrastructure and construction program?
      Where is the construction of a nationwide high speed rail network?
      Where is the rebuilding of the mississippi delta?
      Where is the establishment of a program to promote domestic manufacturing?

      While we can be relativists and say that Bush would have been worse, I am not sure that is saying much.  And, it is quite possible, that Bush actually might have pushed for doing some of the things listed above- because, quite honestly, they would have made some wealthier people even richer.

      I am convinced that our government really does not comprehend the seriousness of the problem we have.

      •  I agree we are not fully recoved yet (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        amk for obama, malharden, Lawrence

        but there's no doubt in my mind that we are better off than we were two years ago, and that the current administration played a part in that improvement.

        Is there more to do?  Of course.

        Are we doing it?  Of course not, especially after the 2010 elections.

        Will we fall back into a 2nd recession soon?  Maybe.

        Still, wouldn't you agree that we better off than 2 years ago?

        And if we are, shouldn't Obama get at least some credit for the improvement?

        •  so you look at this governemnt (0+ / 0-)

          you look at this GOP congress, the GOP governors and you really think better days are just ahead for the average working man? really?

          Bad is never good until worse happens

          by dark daze on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:57:14 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Things are not "good" - just better than they were 2 years ago.

            I think things may degrade from here because of the Republicans - and if you extend the chart in the top post, in a year or so you may see improvement in Obama's 1st 2 years followed by a flattening or a decline after the Republicans took the House and the state governments.

            Same with unemployment rates, GDP or most other economic indicators.

            I hope not, but it wouldn't surprise me to see another trend change for the worse.

            •  well (0+ / 0-)
              Things are not "good" - just better than they were 2 years ago.
              considering we have dumped and cleaned out our entire treasury, you would think the return would be better than a few hundred poor paying jobs a month.

              Bad is never good until worse happens

              by dark daze on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 08:17:28 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  the GOP government doesn't hire people and doesn't (0+ / 0-)

            ship their jobs off to China or India.

            American business owners do that.

            If you want to go after the people who are producing this situation, then make sure you're going after the right people.

            •  however... (0+ / 0-)

              ...our government does perpetuate policies that encourage wealthy americans and their corporations to do that.

              It is absurd that our federal government does not require itself to buy all its goods from domestic manufacturers.  That sort of policy would go a long way to setting our manufacturing policy headed in the right direction.

              of course, we would have to deal with the WTO...but, big deal, can't someone in our government be smart enough to make the case that our soldiers should be able to wear uniforms that are made in the U.S.?

              •  wealthy american companies don't NEED any (0+ / 0-)

                encouragement to move jobs overseas, from the government or from anybody else.

                People here are paid X.  People there are paid one-tenth X.

                That's all the encouragement they need.

                The idea that companies move their jobs overseas because of taxes or regulations or government policies, is silly. They move their jobs because the labor is cheaper, and labor is far and away the biggest expense they have.

                As for "buy American", the American corporations themselves are against it--they're no longer "American".

                From my diary series on the history of corporations, here:


                The Obama Stimulus Plan

                When the $900 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the “Stimulus Bill”) was passed in 2009, it contained this provision:


                (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used for a project for the construction, alteration, maintenance or repair of a public building or public work unless all of the iron, steel and manufactured goods used in the project are produced in the United States.

                (b) Subsection (a) shall not apply in any case or category of cases in which the head of the federal department or agency involved finds that—

                (1) applying subsection (a) would be inconsistent with the public interest;

                (2) iron, steel and the relevant manufactured goods are not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities and of a satisfactory quality; or

                (3) inclusion of iron, steel and manufactured goods produced in the United States will increase the cost of the overall project by more than 25%.

                (c) If the head of a federal department or agency determines that it is necessary to waive the application of subsection (a) based on a finding under subsection (b), the head of the department or agency shall publish in the Federal Register a detailed written justification as to why the provision is being waived.

                (d) This section shall be applied in a manner consistent with United States obligations under international agreements.”

                The Stimulus plan’s “Buy American” provisions were painted by supporters as a way to insure that the economic benefits of the bill would stay in the US. The Alliance for American Manufacturing argued, “If we're going to try to create American jobs, we need to direct stimulus money to American firms. . . When we're investing hundreds of billions of dollars, tax dollars, into infrastructure, into economic recovery, we want to make sure we're creating jobs in the United States and not in China.”

                In reality, of course, the provision was intended as a protectionist aid for the politically powerful steel industry, and particularly the Steelworkers Union, a key Democratic constituency. American steel factories were running at less than half of capacity, with 40% of their workforce laid off. “What we’re already seeing is that demand is going down,” explained a spokesman for the American Iron and Steel Institute, “but imports of Chinese finished steel is going up because they are subsidizing it. What we’re saying is that this is a stimulus package to promote American jobs. We ought to maximize every dollar in that bill toward that end. If you were building a bridge in West Virginia, you wouldn’t bring in German workers to do it. Materials should be no different.” The Steelworkers Union also sent its members on a series of talks with legislators to win support for the provision. In Ohio, one Union official declared, “Buy American, the whole ideal is that we’re rebuilding the infrastructure of the United States with tax dollars, American tax dollars and the idea is that is going to create American jobs, they’re predicting that's going to create 133,000 jobs for Ohio with the stimulus money.”

                Outside of the industries that would benefit from the protectionism, however, the Stimulus Bill’s “Buy American” requirement met instant opposition from American corporations and their political supporters. The president of the US Chamber of Commerce issued a statement against the provision: “If we refuse to buy foreign-made goods, then our trading partners will refuse to buy from us. And since we are the world’s largest exporter, who will be hurt more?” A number of American-based corporations joined in the opposition. One of these was Caterpillar, which actually stood to reap windfall profits from the proposal. During the Multinational Wars in the 1980’s, Caterpillar had faced crippling competition from Komatsu, and was one of the chief proponents of protectionist trade policies. Now, however, times had changed—like most other American corporations, Caterpillar now made over half its profits through foreign sales, and was moving an increasing portion of its manufacturing capacity overseas. As a result, the corporation was now an enthusiastic supporter of the rules-based WTO framework, and spoke out strongly against the “Buy American” bill: “There is no company that is going to benefit more from the stimulus package than Caterpillar, but I am telling you that by embracing Buy American you are undermining our ability to export U.S. produced products overseas.”

                A measure to delete the “Buy American” provision was introduced by Senator John McCain, and failed 31-65. But by pointing out that the provision violated WTO rules, critics did force Congress to adopt modifying language that allowed for exceptions to the provision, and that explicitly stated that the provision could not be utilized to violate WTO rules.

                and from:


                Nearly all of the protectionist “solutions” offered by the labor movement appeal, in one way or another, to someone’s patriotism, whether it’s asking employers to voluntarily pay higher wages to American workers and patriotically refuse to relocate their jobs to low-wage havens like China, or asking American consumers to voluntarily pay higher prices for American-manufactured products than for cheaper imports. As President Obama summed up the argument, “Look, people don’t want a cheaper T-shirt if they’re losing a job in the process. They would rather have the job and pay a little bit more for a T-shirt. And I think that’s something that all Americans could agree to.” Reality, however, demonstrates conclusively that Obama is wrong—people do indeed want the cheaper T-shirt. Any time that either employers or consumers have been asked to choose between their wallet and their patriotism, the wallet always wins.

                There are many reasons why “Buy American” campaigns that appeal to patriotic nationalism have failed every time they have been attempted.

                In the United States, real wages have declined steadily for the past 30 years, the wealth held by the lowest 80% of the population has decreased drastically, and unemployment levels are at their highest in many decades. Under those conditions, consumers are forced to stretch as much value as they can out of every scarce dollar—and asking them to patriotically (and voluntarily) pay higher prices to protect someone else’s job, is unrealistic at best.

                Any attempt to appeal to the “patriotism” of the multinational corporations is also unrealistic. They have no patriotism; they belong to no country.

                It was, after all, American-owned corporations who began the global rush to relocate their plants to Mexico and China, and the reason for that is simple—the corporations will always go where the costs are lowest. It was not the Chinese or Mexican or American governments who forced all those corporations to move their plants or outsource their jobs—the American business owners did that all by themselves, for their own selfish motives. The corporate owners don’t care about patriotism or national interest—all they care about is their bank account, and their bank account likes being able to pay workers in Mexico one-tenth as much as workers in the US. American corporations don’t mind putting thousands of workers out of work by moving their jobs overseas; they don’t even mind relocating their factories inside a single-party Communist police state like China, as long as they can make a ton of money doing it.

                And of course there is the simple fact that there is no “American” to buy anymore.  It is no longer the 1970’s, when Hondas were all made in Japan and Fords were all made in Detroit. All of the large corporations are now global, and none of them have any loyalty whatsoever to any national government anywhere. General Motors is no more or less “American” than BP or Toyota. Which is the “American” car?—the GM (which is partially foreign-owned) that is made in Canada, or the Toyota (which is partially American-owned) that is made in Tennessee? What happens when you have an electronics device that is made from material mined in South Africa and plastic from Germany, using semiconductors from Ireland that were designed in Costa Rica, whose parts were shipped here on a Swedish ship that's financed by an Icelandic bank, then assembled in Mexico and sold in an electronics chain store in Boston that is owned by the Japanese?

                In one surreal scene, US Steel and the Steelworkers Union jointly organized a “Rally to Restore American Manufacturing” in Illinois to protest the use of “foreign steel” to build a Canadian-American oil pipeline—while at the very same time US Steel itself owned manufacturing plants in England, China, Mexico, Canada, Slovakia, Brazil and Serbia. Even as US corporations were busily outsourcing American jobs all over the globe, unions were appealing to the patriotism of those same corporate bosses: at a meeting to discuss AT&T’s outsourcing of jobs to India, one American union official declared, “In this time of high unemployment, the company could be a leader and bring these jobs back here and be patriotic.” The steel company Nucor helped form the Domestic Manufacturing Group, which, in partnership with the Steelworkers Union, lobbies for trade sanctions and tariffs against China to “protect American jobs”—while at the same time Nucor itself negotiated a deal with the Chinese Shougang steel company to build a joint operation in Australia.

                That is why “Buy American” campaigns always fail. There is simply no way to force business owners to continue to pay workers in America higher wages when they can easily move the entire plant somewhere else and make lots more money—and any attempt to entice the boss to voluntarily keep his factory in places where wages are higher, out of pure benevolent patriotism, is the height of idiocy.

                And yet that is precisely the strategy that most labor unions practice, because they have fallen into the trap of believing that the employers and employees are partners with similar interests, and that one of the goals of the corporation is to give us all good-paying jobs.  It’s not. The corporations aren’t in business to give us jobs. They’re in business to make as much money as possible—for themselves, not for us.

                That is why, despite all the noise we make in the US about opposing sweatshops and supporting human rights and democracy, not a single multinational corporation in China has ever pressured the Chinese government to pass minimum wage laws or workplace safety laws or consumer protection laws or child labor laws. The simple fact is that the corporations don’t want any of those things. That’s why they all moved to China in the first place.

                Indeed, the very idea of a “national economy”, or even a    “nation-state”, is now dead; the supra-national corporations have killed it. Economically, there is no longer any sovereign nation anywhere on earth.  Economic decision-making power is no longer exercised by national governments--it is exercised by supra-national corporations who owe loyalty to no national government, and by the international bodies (like the WTO and IMF) that those corporations have set up. No nation, not even the “only remaining superpower”, holds its economic destiny in its own hands anymore. Indeed, the WTO and the rest of the multinational economic structure was set up specifically so that no “nation” can stand against the corporations.

                •  thanks for proving my point... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...which is that until we as a society demand that our government start legislating to protect ourselves from these entitities, we will not solve any of these problems satisfactorily.

                  I completely agree with your post.  And I do agree that we don't need to encourage them to move jobs.  Nonetheless, our government does encourage them.  

                  What we need is for our government to actually encourage them to create jobs here.  I am not talking about less regulation or less taxes.  I am talking about effectively controlling our trade policies so they benefit american workers and domestic manufacturers.

                  The idea that there are no remedies available is a fantasy.

                  •  our government is no longer in charge of econonomy (0+ / 0-)

                    The WTO is.

                    They answer to no government. And every government that has tried to fight them (ours included) has failed abjectly.

                    •  and this is simply impossible (0+ / 0-)
                      I am talking about effectively controlling our trade policies so they benefit american workers and domestic manufacturers.

                      The entire WTO framework was set up specifically to STOP governments (ANY governments) from using trade policies for their own narrow national interests.

                      Any such policies we have tried to implement will be (and have been) instantly invalidated by the WTO.

                      THEY set our trade policy.  Not us.

                      And THEY are utterly unelected and are responsible to nobody.

      •  Yup-might as well say the GOP restored confidence (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and now the employment numbers are taking off!  Because that is surely what the right-wing blogs will be doing.. it is laughable.

        And the real explanation is neither Obama nor the GOP landslide last fall has very much to do with any of it.

        There's no one left to lay off, so the unemployment numbers were bound to go down.  But, we are now at a 26 year low in terms of employment rates!

        Persons not in the labor force and multiple jobholders by sex, not seasonally adjusted

        2 million less participating from 2010 to 2011!

        And we want to stroke ourselves for this news????

        100,000 new entrants into the job market each month means we need 100k just to stay even.  So, yeah.. 200k is nice, but we got a long long way to go, folks.

        Where's the freakin' jobs bills?

      •  Extraordinary (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lawrence, Escamillo

        Someone points out that it's worth mentioning that nearly every indicator of economic health started improving and turning around in 2009, and that's "absurd" for a laundry list of reasons.

        Don't you think we ALL want those things?  How is this even a reply to the comment you replied to?

        I don't accuse people of wanting ponies and pots of gold, but surely you can see how implying nothing has been accomplished because a list of programs that didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of becoming law gives people that idea?

        •  point taken. (0+ / 0-)

          I just do not think it is anything to brag about when you have a nation still in the grips of a national depression.

          It is worth noting, however, that all indications are that our society and its government is not committed to reducing unemployment.  I just wish it was otherwise.

      •  You stated that Obama may have put into place (0+ / 0-)

        things that will help the economy down the road, but then end by saying our government really does not comprehend the seriousness of the problem we have. Seems contradictory.

        •  It is possible... (0+ / 0-)

          ...for people to make decisions that will help, in some small measure, but at the same time for these people not to grasp the full scale of the problem.  Sutely, this is a possibility.

    •  The chart is stunning. A classic bell curve... (0+ / 0-)

      ... situation on downside. Goodness knows what it would have looked like without some Keynsian high level thinking. Hope the upside is the same curve going up with top in 2012 and then continuing on up for another 4 years. But I'm not betting substantial sums of my life savings.

    •  Wow. (0+ / 0-)

      Just wow.

      "economic democracy is a pre-condition for political democracy" - Dennis Kucinich, in WI

      by Words In Action on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:57:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  these numbers are all so low... (9+ / 0-)

    ...that it really doesn't seem to matter.  The truth is that not enough demand exists to spur adequate employment growth of real income earning jobs.

    But, anyway, no one really cares- at least not anyone whose opinion matters.  I am sure we will see the president crow about how wonderful these numbers are.  And then twiddle his thumbs.

    The whole situation is pathetice.

    •  Not pathetic (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lawrence, Pozzo

      especially for those who have been out of work and are now gainfully employed.

      Sarah Palin - reality TV is the closest she's ever going to get to reality.

      by jackandjill on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:42:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  My question is (3+ / 0-)

      in what sectors are these jobs? Reports point at service jobs, as well as manufacturing, transportation and construction. Some well paying jobs, but largely below livign wage jobs, and not exactly the wide scope of job creation we really need to counter the kind of job losses we've had.

      Texas, like many states, is facing massive layoffs in education right now. From admin and teachers to counselers and tech people to paraprofessionals and clerks. Where will they go? How many tech people can go into construction? Is having a laid-off teacher end up a shift manager at Taco Bell or a cashier at Home Depot the kind of job growth we should be excited about?

      Also, as it's been pointed out by many journalists, the jobs being lost by budget slashing effective women disproportionately, while what jobs are being created are in sectors that employs men more than women. As a unmarried women myself who works in education, I can't exactly be that optimistic about this.

      •  You can see where some of those jobs are... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lawrence, shanikka, Pozzo, wsexson looking at the BLS figures and the Conference Board figures. The growth has been skewed in the low- and middle-wage jobs. The job losses, however, were balanced across low- middle- and high-wage positions.  

        Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 08:17:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Without demand, supply is irrelevant. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Terra Mystica, wsexson

      That's the name of the that tune.

      "economic democracy is a pre-condition for political democracy" - Dennis Kucinich, in WI

      by Words In Action on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:56:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  very true. (3+ / 0-)

        And it is amazing how many people don't understand this...or pretend not to.

        It is like there is this notion out there that these corporations who are having record profits because of their foreign sales and foreign employees would just decide to hire employees in the U.S. and provide them with good wages just because they want to.

        We currently live in a nation with bizarre notions of how things work.

        •  bingo (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Words In Action

          Great comment.

          I also find it bizarre that people actually think and accept the notion that the corps and the rich hire people because of good will or something.  Like they are doing it out of the goodness of the heart.  Its beyond bizarre.

          If I hire someone, thats great, but its not because Im a nice guy, its because I can use you to make myself even MORE MONEY.  Its crazy people dont get that.

          Bad is never good until worse happens

          by dark daze on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 08:21:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  the demand is producing plenty of jobs (0+ / 0-)

        Of course, the supply (and the jobs) is being produced in China, not in the US.

  •  Oh brother... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action

    This is lame-o.
    Obama and Geithner decided that jobs are not a priority.
    At least Wall Street is happy and that's what counts.

    •  you are kind of full of it ...but you think (0+ / 0-)

      you have consensus behind you so you flaunt your bullshit.....Obama is a politician if unemployment does not improve that is a risk to his job....he not you and your kind will be held responsible.

      you might as well say, he does not care about that case you would only have to explain away why he is running for reelection.

  •  Help Wanted Signs (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    frandor55, malharden

    I have seen the help wanted signs at several restaurants in the last couple of weeks for the first time in a long time (north Atlanta).  Restaurants seem busier than they have for a while as well.

    We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts. -- Senator Al Franken

    by Do Something on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:44:11 AM PDT

  •  The GOP is taking down the economy and the (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dark daze

    Democrats can't talk-up the economy because, there is nothing good to say about a 8.9% could have been worst, is not a positive message.

    This creates a situation were there is a tangible improvement but the public perception is negative, this negative attitude toward the economy can become a self-fulfilling prophecy...and that is what the GOP is banking on.....

  •  Some of the comments here are truly amazing... (4+ / 0-)

    This is actually pretty good news and some responses are complete doom and gloom.

    Astounding mental disconnect at work there.

    "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle" - Mohammed Nabbous, R.I.P.

    by Lawrence on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:49:33 AM PDT

  •  Unfortunately, the "good news" (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    annieli, dark daze, Terra Mystica, wsexson

    is that the current level of job generation, which is still short of the job generation needed just to keep up with population, will NEVER scale to even just replacing the jobs lost.

    So, the Class War is still going well.

    "economic democracy is a pre-condition for political democracy" - Dennis Kucinich, in WI

    by Words In Action on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:49:38 AM PDT

  •  Dollar is weakening... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dark daze

    as a result, especially in light of understated inflation figures, that GDP number might be padded (or get padded), making things appear better than they are.

    Remember, the GDP often gets revised retroactively.

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    -Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:50:50 AM PDT

  •  This just proves (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, The Nose, malharden

    that the Democrats need to grow a pair and harden up to keep the Republicans from pushing through job-killing cuts right at a time when the economy really is starting to show some real hopes.

  •  More jobs better. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Meteor Blades

    More better jobs would be better still.
    (rather like Democrats in congress)

    "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

    by tardis10 on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 07:59:22 AM PDT

  •  This is going to be a long-term process (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    But the ADP report showed around 200K. A friend of mine who is in the HR field told me he saw a change over the last few months. Up until the end of 2010 most of the HR-related openings were for benefits administration and non-hiring aspects of employment. He said that, over the last few months, he has seen a dramatic increase in openings for HR recruiters. So that means that companies are planning to hire more.

  •  New Approval Ratings Prove Obama Is The GOP’s (0+ / 0-)

    New Approval Ratings Prove Obama Is The GOP’s Worst Nightmare!!!!
    something very interesting happens when you look at Obama’s approval numbers. They aren’t going down. Obama’s job approval rating is still at 53% which is where it has been since January. Obama’s personal approval rating was 59%, which is a four point increase since November. A majority of Americans (50%) believe that Obama should be reelected.

    •  great. Obama is fine. What about... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dark daze, Victor Laslo

      ...our nation's problems?  When do we get to work on those?

      At this point, the white house just seems concerned about their re-election.  Do they really want to do anything?

      •  When do we get to work on those problems? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lawrence, Final Frame

        When the people finally decide they want to.

        Until such time people stop voting against their own economic issues, and start demanding the necessary fundamental change, nothing will change.

        •  I agree that we have a societal problem. (0+ / 0-)

          I no longer think our government is the problem.  I really think the problem stems from our own society not acknowledging our problems, not wanting to do anything about them, or both.

          Personally, I don't have much hope that this situation will change within the next few decades.  If this nationwide depression hasn't yet forced the issue, then the only thing left that might is a world or civil war.  At this point, I am not sure our nation would face those things effectively.

          It would be interesting to see how much of the New Deal would still be around if World War II and its subsequent Marshall Plan didn't occur.

  •  I really hope when they do these totals (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Terra Mystica, Lawrence

    from now on, they make a separate count of the jobs being artificially destroyed by Republican governors.  

  •  Of course, the gains are about to be wiped out (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dark daze, ctsteve, malharden, wsexson

    by States cutting teachers and other public employees.

    "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed." General Buck Turgidson

    by muledriver on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 08:18:53 AM PDT

  •  What an amazing turnaround (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    malharden, shanikka

    In 2010, CEOs of multinational corporations repeatedly said they couldn't increase hiring in the U.S. because the tax and regulatory situation in the U.S. was "uncertain," although they were sitting on huge cash reserves. Two weeks after Obama signs legislation preserving Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and promises to look at relaxing regulations, hiring in the U.S. suddenly jumps.  The hiring figures support what some people have been suggesting; that a corporate mafia has effectively taken control of our government.  "Nice little country you have a shame if the economy worsened because you didn't pay up."

  •  and from someone who should know (0+ / 0-)

    and he knows ore than just about anyone in this country about such things.

    Bad is never good until worse happens

    by dark daze on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 08:28:38 AM PDT

    •  People have been calling for a double dip... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lawrence, malharden, Escamillo, Pozzo

      ....for two years now.

      So far, it has not materialized.

      I read the Reich article. Reich is a very smart man, but he is also a merchant of doom, with a vested interest in pessimism. Notice how he backs off the certainty of the double dip at the end.

      Could it happen? Yes.
      Is it likely to happen?

  •  And Initial claims again.. (0+ / 0-)

    Initial Claims 388K.. MISSES Expextations

    Also, last weeks "beat"?? Well, yeah about that..

    It was revised, Higher.. Like they ALLL are..

    And it went to a Miss..

    Worse.. The Hits just keep on coming..

    See Case-Schiller last week?  Double dip recession housing collapse anyone? Double=Dip Depression??

    Wall Street? Oil companies? WONDERFUL..

    Record Corporate Profits? OF COURSE..

    What, do you think any of them work for the American People> HA!

    Aetna Profit? Skyrocketing.. Who wouyld have thought a health plan without Single payer or a public option written by the insurance companies wouldn't control costs..

    Who would have thought that printing Trillions for war and Bank Bailouts would lead to inflation..

    Let them eat cake? Hershey's raised wholesale prices 9%, can't even afford cake.. Sorry..

  •  Dems win or lose in 2012 on job handling (0+ / 0-)

    This is a drop in the bucket.

  •  It is highly unlikely... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...that there will ever be a "recovery" in the conventional sense of the word. The cycle that we're in and the long term demographic, energy, and financial trends just point to stagnation and slow decline probably for the lifetime of everyone reading this (in the optimistic case).

    But yay! Predicted BLS numbers show marginal, temporary improvement!

    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

    by Sparhawk on Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 08:56:42 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site