Skip to main content

In a highly surprising monthly job report, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced Friday that the private-sector added a seasonally adjusted 87,000 new jobs in December and government shed 13,000 jobs for a total of 74,000. That's the lowest level since January 2011 and more than 120,000 below the consensus of economists and other analysts queried earlier this week. It was also the smallest number of jobs created in December since 2009. The official unemployment rate—which BLS calls U3 and calculates in a separate survey—fell to 6.7 percent. That anomalous drop was due to a fall of 347,000 in the civilian labor force.

The seasonally adjusted 203,000 job gain the BLS reported for November was revised to 241,000. The October figures were unrevised at 200,000.

The surprising level of job growth is likely to have the experts in a quandary, especially given that Automated Data Processing on Wednesday had reported a gain of 238,000 private-sector jobs for December.

One thing for certain, the BLS report puts a crimp in the steady drumbeat of the assessments that the economy is finally set to grow substantially in 2014 after 54 months of tepid growth since the Great Recession officially ended. For millions of jobless Americans, or those who can't find full-time work, that official assessment is a joke.

The bureau makes several alternative calculations—the key one labeled U6—to estimate how many workers have given up looking for up to 12 months but still want one, as well as those Americans working part-time even though they want full-time jobs—the underemployed. U6 held steady at 13.1 percent in December. U6 does not include workers who have not looked for a job for more than a year. Those workers are no longer considered part of the labor force even if they still want jobs.

The December drop in the civilian labor force came after a rise of 455,000 in November. The employment-population ratio remained steady at 58.6 percent. The labor force participation rate fell from 63 percent to 62.8 percent.

The number of officially unemployed Americans is now 10.4 million. That tally leaves out millions of discouraged workers who have given up looking for employment. The number of long-term unemployed, those who have been out of work for 27 weeks or more, fell to 3.9 million. They make up 37.7 percent of the total unemployed. As noted last month:

While the situation has improved significantly in the past five years in overall jobs, the quality of many of those jobs leaves a good deal to be desired. Measured in "real" dollars, that is, inflation-adjusted dollars, the median wage of $27,519 in 2012 was $980 less than in 2007 when the Great Recession began. In fact, the median fell by $4 between 2011 and 2012. In fact, the median wage as measured by the Social Security Administration is at the 1998 level.
For more details about today's jobs report, please continue reading below the fold.

Here are the official seasonally adjusted unemployment rates in December for:

African Americans—11.9 percent
Latinos—8.3 percent
Asian Americans—4.1 percent (not seasonally adjusted)
Whites—5.9 percent
American IndiansNot counted on a monthly basis
Women—6.0 percent
Men—6.3 percent

Among other news in the October job report:

Professional services: + 19,000
Transportation and warehousing : minus 600
Leisure & hospitality: + 9,000
Health care: - 1,000
Retail trade: + 55,300
Construction: - 16,000
Manufacturing: + 9,000
Average weekly manufacturing hours remained at 41 hours.
Average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose 2 cents from November's revised figure to $24.17
Average hourly earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees rose 3 cents to $20.35

Here's what the seasonally adjusted job growth numbers have looked like in December for the previous 10 years.

December 2003: + 119,000      
December 2004: + 128,000
December 2005: + 158,000
December 2006: + 169,000
December 2007: +   93,000
December 2008: -  705,000
December 2009: -  220,000
December 2010: +   95,000
December 2011: + 230,000
December 2012: + 219,000
December 2013: +   74,000

The BLS jobs report is the product of a pair of surveys, one of more than 410,000 business establishments called Current Employment Statistics, and one called the Current Population Survey, which questions 60,000 householders each month. The establishment survey determines how many new jobs were added. It is always calculated on a seasonally adjusted basis determined by a frequently tweaked formula.  The BLS report only provides a snapshot of what's happening at a single point in time.
It's important to understand that the jobs-created-last-month-numbers that it reports are not "real." Not because of a conspiracy, but because statisticians apply formulas to the raw data, estimate the number of jobs created by the "birth" and "death" of businesses, and use other filters to fine-tune the numbers. And, always good to remember, in the fine print, they tell us that the actual number of newly created jobs reported is actually plus or minus 100,000.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Labor on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:03 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

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

  •  Seems too low, i expect revisions and i'm not (6+ / 0-)

    one too be optimistic on job reports.

  •  Didn't we just drop hundreds of thousands of (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandino, NM Ray

    people off UE so wouldn't that dramatically affect this number without adding jobs?

  •  Banks need more free money! (6+ / 0-)

    Or something.

    "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

    by Bob Johnson on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:09:22 AM PST

  •  and (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    which BLS calls U3 and calculates in a separate survey—fell to 6.7 percent. That anomalous drop was due to a fall in the civilian labor force of 317,000.
    told ya so... big surprise... can we just call it the BS report from now on to at least be more honest about it.
    •  Um, no (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Meteor Blades

      It may well just be a sampling glitch, and those people will reappear next month.  The UE is calculated from a survey of a relatively small number of people (around 70,000, I think), and does have sampling error as a result.  As I recall, the error is something like +/-0.2%, and could easily account for most of this change.

      So, no, it's not BS.  But it does have limitations that are worth understanding.

      Political Compass: -6.75, -3.08

      by TexasTom on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:27:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sampling glitch (3+ / 0-)

        with a mere 130% or so discrepancy. A sampling glitch.

        •  Something must be really off... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          ADP says 238,000 private-sector jobs for December. This are people who cut/process the payrolls. So this is HARD data, unlike government surveys.
          -There have been discrepancies before and we usually expect them...but not the much is wide, a diff or 164K?
          -Something is not right with either the gov't or the APD report. Both cannot be true.
          -With such divergence data, I take it that,  this economy is actually  a lot stronger or weaker than we think.

          "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis, 1935 --Talk of foresight--

          by tuma on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 08:07:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  umm yes (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        its a rigged political manipulative number, thats why 11.5% isnt used.  Which even itself is really lower than reality.

        You can make numbers say anything you want, especially when the sampling and testing being used is so poor and outdated.

        These people will NOT reappear next month, look at the trend.  

        as reality worsens, the BS propaganda increases.

    •  The Household Survey shows 143,000 more (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      satrap, Meteor Blades, Aquarius40

      employed. 490,000 fewer unemployed. 525,000 more people not in the labor force.
         Since the civilian non-institutionalized population grew by 178,000, this is a rather bleak report.
         The economy seems to be settling in to a high unemployment normal. It doesn't reflect European style levels of high unemployment because the Europeans have more generous UI benefits, which means that their unemployed don't give up and drop out of the labor force.
         The US needs some creative ideas followed by action to either get people back to work or to deal with double digit percentages of the population not working.
         We aren't seeing leadership on this issue from either of the two parties.

      •  I wonder if ACA is changing behavior. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        We may be seeing some dual earner (where both expect to be working even if both are not currently working) households who are now getting health insurance either through ACA's Medicaid expansion or very low cost for private insurance with a subsidy, deciding to be single earner households - so we see an increase in people leaving the workforce.  

        It will take a few more months of data, and other surveys, to see if this is a significant factor.

        The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

        by nextstep on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 12:47:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  My advice for the unemployed: (10+ / 0-)

    If you're not Asian-American, think about becoming Asian-American.

    "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

    by Bob Johnson on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:10:43 AM PST

  •  time to let people retire early w/o penalty (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rikon Snow, jbob, jdmorg, freesia

    I think the push to allow people to retire earlier with no Social Security penalty is a great idea.  I think it will open up the work force some and let others that have already worked 98% of their adult lives to retire while they still have some good health to enjoy it.  Many people working blue collar jobs accumulate so many health issues from the physically demanding labor and even retiring at 63 vs. 65 or 67 can have a huge impact on quality of life.

    I went into science for the money and the sex. Imagine my surprise.

    by Mote Dai on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:14:04 AM PST

    •  It's a great idea - if there is no limit (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      radarlady, Carl C, sulthernao, AlexDrew

      to how much money the Social Security Administration has to pay out. Unfortunately, you can't pay out tens of billions of additional dollars without any way of replacing them.

      •  Not sure it is "billions" extra (0+ / 0-)

        I am not sure that a 2-3 year period in which people could retire 1-2 years early would be an additional "billions" of dollars.  I don't think anyone is realistically proposing that it go on forever, but as a one time event to potentially open up employment opportunities for younger workers.

        I went into science for the money and the sex. Imagine my surprise.

        by Mote Dai on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 01:02:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Bad number (11+ / 0-)

    no two ways about it though the November revision was significant.

    In the last few months a few of the Perma Bears have become more optimistic - David Rosenberg (who is now a non-person at zero-hedge)and Roubini.

    In e-mail though one person who used to post here, New Deal Democrat, has become more pessimistic.  In e-mail he has expressed significant concerns about 2015 - tempered of course by the reality seeing even 9 months out is very difficult.  Yesterday he wrote:

    I can’t help noting that my contrast for decelerating growth is at odds with that of many luminaries, including Paul Krugman, Bill McBride a/k/a Calculated Risk, Muhammed el-Arian of PIMCO, and Menzie Chinn of Econbrowser.  Morgan Stanley went so far as to call the economy “ready for launch.”

    My critique of these optimistic calls is what I laid out at the outset of this article:  all of these forecasts, to a greater or lesser extent, engage in coincident-trend-following.  Morgan Stanley’s note, for example, cites the coincident indicator of freight transportation, as well as the short leading indicators of the ISM survey and capex spending.  Several others take similar tacks.

    And although I have great respect for both Bill McBride and, of course, Krgthulu, both of them rely on an acceleration of the housing recovery.  For example, Krugman says, “housing is still moving forward.”

    NDD beleives higher interest rates will halt the housing recovery.

    My own view has not changed: globalization depresses wages (the data on this is becoming increasingly compelling) and as a result we will suffer from a lack of demand which keeps the economy from getting out of second gear (I have probably written this sentence 60 times here).

  •  Not just 'drop outs' (4+ / 0-)

    But like in NC those forced off the rolls with shorten number of weeks to collect and less to be collected, in a 'right to work' state!!

    "If military action is worth our troops' blood, it should be worth our treasure, too; not just in the abstract, but in the form of a specific ante by every American." -Andrew Rosenthal 10 Feb. 2013

    by jimstaro on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:16:47 AM PST

  •  Maybe the timing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HeyMikey, nextstep

    Will help the push toward extending unemployment benefits?  A silver-ish lining?

  •  Austerity! Ayn Rand! Job-Creators! Tax Cuts! (5+ / 0-)

    Corporate Subsidies! More! More! More!
    . . . . . . . .
    Koch Industries

    "Where some see a system for encouraging discussion . . . others see an echo chamber of bad grammar, unchecked stupidity, and constructive interference . . . " -- Ars Technica

    by Rikon Snow on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:17:57 AM PST

  •  Big differnces between ADP and BLS numbers (0+ / 0-)

    ADP says that 238,000 jobs were added last month.  While the ADP and BLS estimate don't always agree, the delta between them is really large this time.  Anyone know how ADP produces their employment figures?

    •  Yes. It's a payroll services company and they... (4+ / 0-)

      ...use numbers derived from that. [Here's] their methodology:

      Beginning with its November 1, 2012 report, the ADP National Employment Report’s new methodology now utilizes ADP payroll data, U.S. BLS employment data, and the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank’s Aruoba-Diebold-Scotti Business Conditions Index.

      In addition, the sample size of the ADP data set from which the newly enhanced ADP National Employment Report is derived has been expanded from 344,000 U.S. companies to 411,000,
      and from 21 million employees to 23 million, which accounts for more than 20 percent of all U.S. private sector employees. This larger data set is expected to help enable the ADP National
      Employment Report to more closely match the final print of the BLS numbers.

      However, the new methodology, which was created to make ADP calculations better mesh with BLS numbers, has done no such thing.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:36:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  6.7 percent (2+ / 0-)

    unemployment rate dipped below seven percent for the first time since 2008

  •  I just got a job (14+ / 0-)

    Out of work since August 2012, Masters degree, unemployment ended in November, turn 50 this year (everywhere I applied wanted "social media savvy" so I created a f-ing Linked In account and never went back to it, and I don't do the Facebook), 10 and 12 year-olds, wife worked at Costco for the holidays, help from family, but I honest-to-god don't know how we made it this long.

    Now I have a real job again. I count as a + for January stats.

  •  On track to jobs recovery by...mid-2020. Less pay. (5+ / 0-)

    The 6-month average for job creation is now about 170,000. At that rate we'll be back to 2007 levels of employment by mid-2020.

    And, of course, the new jobs pay less than the old ones:
    new low pay jobs

    "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

    by HeyMikey on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:25:38 AM PST

  •  Christie loves this! (0+ / 0-)

    "Phew!  Heat's off me for a little while!"

  •  something like 500,000 people stopped looking (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    for jobs.  Maybe because we stopped UI employment, which requires that people look for jobs?

    So - no jobs, no UI, no real prospects for either - I wouldn't look for a job either in those conditions.

    The headline unemployment rate now means even less than it did last year.  But the Fed will still use it to decide when the economy has turned around.

    •  The cut-off of Emergency Unemployment... (6+ / 0-)

      ...Compensation has nothing to do with this. That didn't happen until Dec. 28, two weeks after the BLS data cut-off for the month. And the number of people who left the labor force was, as noted, 317,000.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:39:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  the Fed is dumping money on the banks (0+ / 0-)

      the labyrinthine connection between QE and UE is quite obscure. It's all they can do, and it might be helping us stay above water, but it's not clearly doing anything to help unemployment.

      Honestly, the Fed would do better holding picket signs outside of Congress demanding more and better stimulus.

      •  The money is staying in the banks, though. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Prior to 2008, banks were holding about $50 billion. Now that number is over $1 trillion.
          The Fed, meanwhile, has instituted a policy of paying interest on reserves, meaning that banks which park money with the Fed can choose the zero risk option of holding their money and  collecting a small rate of interest, or trying to earn more interest by lending money and taking more risk.
           The Fed has been a pretty effective backstop against collapse of the banking system and against outright economic collapse, but a real recovery requires more money in the hands of consumers.
           Fiscal policy as conducted by the administration, though, has been working in the opposite direction.

  •  The weather. (3+ / 0-)

    According to David Ader, the people who responded that they were not able to work because of weather was more than TWICE the normal rate (it was 273,000 people for this survey).

    If you factor in the "extra" and unexpected weather-based non-workers to the number given, all of a sudden you're right about at the ADP jobs number. Weather isn't ALL of it, of course, but it's reason to view the report as a fluke of sorts.

    Critics will make tons of hay out of these numbers. But they don't mean much in terms of the underlying economy.

    A round-up:

    it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses

    by Addison on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:34:35 AM PST

  •  Labor Force Participation is crashing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eyo, Aquarius40

    From Wolf Richter at Naked Capitalism

    if you’re not counted in the labor force, and you don’t have a job, you’re not counted as unemployed. There are millions of people in that category. And their numbers are growing, not diminishing.

    “The irony of the U-3 unemployment statistic is the fact that while unemployment has gone down 30% since its 2009 peak, we have the lowest labor force participation rate in over 3 decades,” observed Ralph Dillon, Vice President at Global Financial Data, in an email. “The markets and politicians celebrate the official unemployment rate, but you have to be concerned with the trend that is most indicative of the health of the employment situation in this country: the downward trend of those who want to work and can’t.”

    Sure, companies have been creating jobs since the Great Recession, but only at the growth rate of the working-age population, as evidenced by the BLS’s dreary employment-population ratio. It peaked in April 2000 at 64.7%, crashed during the Great Recession, and has been skittering along the bottom ever since. At 58.6%, it’s lower than it was during most of 2009! And the 30% improvement in the official unemployment rate – where the heck did that come from? The chart has the answer: people 54 and younger being statistically purged from the labor force.  

  •  Misleading at best (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The unemployment rate is calculated (as you know) from the household survey, not the establishment one that showed the meager 74,000 job gain. The household survey showed at gain of over 140,000 jobs AND a drop in the unemployed of 490,000.   Thus, while some of the unemployment rate drop was from a smaller labor force, it wasn't all of it (actually only about half).

    I expect the establishment number to be revised up(as most recent ones have been).

    This was a bad report, but not nearly as bad as you make it out to be.

    •  As you know, the Household Survey is... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pescadero Bill, Aquarius40

      ...less accurate than the Establishment Survey because of its smaller sample size. But, yes, today's numbers will probably be revised upward. It will, however, take more than a 30% revision to get the numbers above 100,000, half what was being predicted earlier this week. Even a 100% revision will put the total at less than the overall monthly average for 2013.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 06:57:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  There are reasons (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      to be suspicious of this number to be sure.

      I have seen the argument made that when you get a difference between the two surveys, the establishment number tends to head in the direction of the household survey in periods of accelerating economic growth.  IF growth is accelerating (I am not sure it is) then this number will get revised.

      Still, it is fair to highlight the surprise here.

  •  I just got a job (6+ / 0-)

    Unemployed since August 2012, unemployment ended in November. Turn 50 this year, masters degree, five interviews in a year and a half, three were f-ing phone screenings. I hate those. Everyone wants f-ing “social media savvy.” I do this site, that’s savvy. I even know how to put links and blockquotes in diaries. I created a f-ing linked-in account that no one, including me, ever saw again. I don’t do the facebook. But I know how. Screw social media savvy. I have skills that actually work during the work day aside from screwing around on social media but no one cared. Introverts don’t always do the interview thing well, but I kick ass once hired. Hard to get that message across when 200 other people applied for the same f-ing job. Wife worked at Costco for the holidays and makes 10K or so with small landscaping company she owns, help from family, but I honest-to-god don’t know how we kept our house and made it this far.

    But now I’m blessed with a good job and opportunity that actually matches my skills and education. I’m stunned and my head is spinning. I start Feb. 10. I’ll count as a + for that month’s stats.

  •  Most economists seem to be dismissing this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sulthernao, destiny1

    report this morning. Doesn't appear to align with the rest of the data. We've seen this before, though. Every time we get ready to sound the all clear, we get a disappointing report.

    •  The November number was also revised up sharply (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dr Swig Mcjigger, PorridgeGun
      To be sure, month-to-month volatility in the payrolls report is common, and the numbers could be revised upward in the future. For example, the Labor Department revised the number of jobs created in November to 241,000 from 203,000.
      These are pretty big revisions. I think it's partly due to the Thanksgiving falling so late this year. Some one up thread mentioned that Thanksgiving falls under the December report based on the way they do these surveys.
    •  Remember, August 2010? (3+ / 0-)

      We had 0 jobs created. It was later revised up to, I think over 100K.

      Mark Zandi of Moody's (a former McCain supporter) basically said that this morning on several shows.

      This has been happening a lot over the past several years. I expect the same thing to happen with this one.

      •  My thoughts exactly (0+ / 0-)

        Probably get it over 100K at least.

      •  But it's still NOWHERE NEAR where we need it (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Obama has failed to create the necessary numbers of jobs to get us out of this recession.

        I don't care why. He FAILED. When will his reflexive supporters remember Harry S Truman's truest words e'er spake by an American politician? If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen--and--the buck stops HERE.

        Bush gets the blame for creating the fewest jobs on record, and Clinton gets the credit for helping foster the economic miracle that he oversaw. Lying Republicans will tell you otherwise, but the policies of Presidents MATTER.

        And this President has NO POLICY WHATSOEVER when it's come to the Great Recession. He is a failure. I cannot repeat that often enough, whether people admit it or not.

        "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

        by DaddyO on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 03:06:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hope this is an anomaly of the way that the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PorridgeGun, Odysseus

    stats are gathered.

    I tend not to get excited about one-month stats one way or the other.

    Keeping fingers crossed and looking forward to next month.

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

    by dinotrac on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 07:01:01 AM PST

  •  Weather may have played a role (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fladem, HeedTheMessenger

    Dionne ‏@EJDionne

    MT @GeraldFSeib One explanation for bad jobs #s: Storms 273K couldn't get to their jobs, highest December # since '77

    "When dealing with terrorism, civil and human rights are not applicable." Egyptian military spokesman.

    by Paleo on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 07:05:41 AM PST

    •  so there fired? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pescadero Bill

      if you cant make it to your job for a week, your suddenly fired?  And what about the tens of thousands of people who gain a good job for a week or so shoveling snow?

      Is this the first time its ever been cold in winter?

      •  So many people in a state of employment limbo (0+ / 0-)

        that missing a day or two because of a snow storm makes them appear unemployed.

        Great economy we have going here.

        I have to say, Obama kind of sucks at fighting for "the People...".

        "We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." - Louis Brandies

        by Pescadero Bill on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 07:35:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Horse manure (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Aquarius40, Odysseus

          Millions more have health care. We are still coming out of the worst recession since the Great Depression. We have dropped over 3 percentage points since 2010, and that has not been because people have been dropping out. Gay people have more rights than ever. We left Iraq.

          (Why in the world do I have to keep writing this stuff on THIS blog?)

          The Republican governors are majorly responsible for this lack of job growth. They have fired a lot of public sector workers over the past several years, often for the flimsiest of reasons. If they don't do this, the unemployment rate is below 6%.

          •  He said "economy" (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Pescadero Bill, AlexDrew

            not all the other social accomplishments of the Obama admin.

            The economy sucks.  And, despite all those other great accomplishments, the Obama administration has also sucked at creating new jobs.

            And, of course, it is debatable what any administration can do to create jobs.

            But, we have seen no efforts from this admin to repatriate jobs lost overseas and/or to revive industries that have simply left the country - with the exception of the auto industry.

            •  I'd like to see the list of social accomplishments (0+ / 0-)

              DADT? Congress did ALL the work, at Obama's insistence and reticence.

              Gay marriage? What did Obama ever do but WATCH gay marriage take its rightful place in the civil rights arena? Did he ever make a speech in favor of it? Did he use his bully pulpit to encourage its supporters?

              Health care 'reform'? Don't make me laugh.

              Record numbers of African Americans falling BACK into poverty--with no safety net, no jobs bills, no Executive Orders of New Deal-style programs to help?

              What are Obama's approval ratings? Specific numbers vary, but they are ALL below 50%. Well below. Because that's what Americans think of him. The only way he looks good is in COMPARISON with a TEABAGGER.

              Obama is a failure. Assholes like larrymcmasters are assholes who don't deserve to have anyone read their idiotic screeds, coming straight from Rush, FOX News, Karl Rove, etc.

              But a hefty chunk of Obama's BASE knows what a crappy job he has done and is still doing...worst Democratic President of my lifetime. No doubt about it.

              "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

              by DaddyO on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 03:02:34 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Again, that "healthcare" thing. (0+ / 0-)

            What he was fighting for was a common ground between the corporate state and the people.

            People don't have healthcare per se, what more have is access to private health insurance. Full on healthcare when one is sick is still a dicey matter financially and otherwise for most of us.

            Now you can argue that was the best he could do under the circumstance, but I'd argue that, that was all he wanted to do.

            So, unless you are I are able to get to really know the man, to talk with him to such an extent that we can get a feel for his true motivation, I'd say we'll never know for sure what was in his heart-of-hearts with regard to the corporate/government alliance being something he deemed the best approach all along.

            "We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." - Louis Brandies

            by Pescadero Bill on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 10:32:12 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Who stopped looking for work? (0+ / 0-)

    Baby Boomers. 30,000 people turn 65 every day, 300,000 every month 3,600,000 every year. Since the long expected Baby Boomers retirements began three years ago (not including those who retired early at 62-64). Ten million people or so have retired in the last three years. The death rate of people 65 and older is about 1, 600,000 people every year. These folks have left the labor force so it's no mystery why labor force participation rates have been dropping. The labor force participation rate will continue to drop, not because people have given up looking for work but in large part due to baby boomer retirements which has been long predicted.

    •  You forget 1.5 million new workers (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      (or so) enter the labor force each year.  So, it pretty much balances itself out.

      So, you cannot attribute a smaller labor force to retirees.

    •  The number of people reaching 65 each... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      freesia, divineorder, Aquarius40 is 10,000, not 30,000. (BTW, it should be noted that Baby Boomers born up to 1954 can't retire with full benefits until they are 66.)

      The drop in the labor force is calculated, depending on who is doing the figuring, to be one-third to one-half due to Baby Boomer retirements. But the telling numbers are these, what's happening to people in prime working age:

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 08:14:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  sure (0+ / 0-)

      Trying to twist yourself in knots to support your lying failed messiah is sad.  Why dont you admit that you were wrong and move on.  Or is that too hard for a liberal

  •  WOO HOOO! (0+ / 0-)

    This economy is awesome.  

  •  The December Report's Silver Lining (0+ / 0-)

    So much for the Republicans' claims that the job market is improving to the point that we no longer need to extend unemployment benefits for those lazy people who could find a job if they wanted to work since there are a lot of job openings. HA! HA! HA!

    Also, provides more evidence that what we need is a Job's Bill with substantial spending on the Nation's infrastructure, and not more spending cuts for deficit reduction.

    "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 Jan 10, 2014 at 09:23:21 AM PST

  •  Never expect job increases in December (0+ / 0-)

    because who hires THEN? Is more/most hiring done in October and November in the run-up to the holiday shopping season?

  •  Seasonal Adjustment Problems (0+ / 0-)

    December job reports are always suspect because of seasonal adjustment problems, because of the Holiday Season. The 25,000 accounting job losses is probably a good indicator that seasonal adjustment problems is the main reason for the weak jobs report. I'd wait for the next couple of jobs report to assess whether the economy is really slowing down.

  •  hgtygr (0+ / 0-)

    my buddy's step-aunt makes $82/hr on the computer. She has been out of work for 10 months but last month her paycheck was $18010 just working on the computer for a few hours. read this….

  •  THIS IS BAD (0+ / 0-)

    Obama is a FAILURE. This is a snapshot of WHY he is an utter, complete failure as a DEMOCRATIC President.

    I don't want to hear any pathetic excuses. I don't give a shit. I don't CARE. EVERY PRESIDENT has enemies who try to thwart his will. Obama is the only one who has folded every time he was pushed to the wall--except last November, when he held all the cards. By then, he'd folded many times over, and I don't blame Ted Cruz a bit for testing the limits.

    If only Obama had done that in 2009, too.

    If Obama had burst out of the chute, like Clinton, FOCUSED LIKE A LASER BEAM on the economy instead of a shitty, insurance-industry-loving health care 'reform', he would be a SUCCESS--and I would be the first to congratulate him.

    Here is his entire two terms, reduced to a four-panel cartoon--perfection in the art of editorial. I am ashamed of the man. He has done NOTHING TO HELP the middle class and the poor. How many have fallen OUT of their respective classes, rather than UPWARD in the past five years? What do the numbers tell us?

    All I know is this: I hear nothing about Obama's successes from HIM. I heard plenty about Clinton's successes, every time he made a speech, wonky, plum with good news, economic numbers better EVERY FUCKING TIME HE SPOKE.

    "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

    by DaddyO on Fri Jan 10, 2014 at 02:53:21 PM PST

  •  Even now, people spinning in these threads... (0+ / 0-)

    ...on behalf of the status quo, downplaying this travesty (5+ years into the "recovery" no less). Don't look now, but the Y-O-Y (2012 vs. 2013) job gains were, at best, static (actually, if/until there's an upward revision to December's numbers, if I'm not mistaken, there were actually fewer "net" job gains in 2013 than in 2012).

    "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

    by bobswern on Sat Jan 11, 2014 at 01:31:28 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site