U.S. Adds 295,000 Jobs In February; Unemployment Rate Falls To 5.5 Percent

[LTC8K6]

92.9 million not in the labor force. A new record.

 

[rudeguy]

92.9 million not in the labor force. A new record.

Hahaha, I'll take that as an admission that you can't.

It's interesting to see someone so invested in the culture war that they respond to good news with flailing, ranting, and name calling. What a strange place to be in.

You are a shill.

 

[Blanky]

Find a chair.. the music will be stopping soon, this economy is based on nothing. No I'm not a conservative/republican that hates Obama, I just don't see the foundation this is supposedly standing on.

Honestly I've been hearing this for at least five years.

You said there is a tech bubble although this week was the first time the NASDAQ hit the same peak it had fifteen years ago, this despite a massive expansion in the tech market over this period.

With a 5.5% unemployment rate if you are not part of the labor pool it's because you don't want to be.

 

[Bowfinger]

What's the labor participation rate?

Similar to what it was in the early 80s, even better when one adjusts for retiring baby boomers (an inevitability that has been anticipated for decades).

You know you can live in the real world where the number of people working and earning a wage they can support their family on is more important than political talking points on made up stats that support your Dear Leader.

You are a shill.

Irony.

Like it or not, employment and the economy are improving. They are certainly not perfect -- never have been -- but they are getting better. Adding almost 300,000 jobs is a good thing overall, and even a slight increase in average wages is better than wages falling. Moreover, the trend continues to be positive. That this offends your RNC-worshipping sensibilities is your problem.

 

[fskimospy]

You are a shill.

Grow up and stop shitposting.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

92.9 million not in the labor force. A new record.

And? The number is meaningless with no context. Why are that many not participating? Higher rate of retirement? Higher rate of people attending college/university?

Or do we not want to ask those questions?

 

[fskimospy]

Similar to what it was in the early 80s, even better when one adjusts for retiring baby boomers (an inevitability that has been anticipated for decades).

Irony.

Like it or not, employment and the economy are improving. They are certainly not perfect -- never have been -- but they are getting better. Adding almost 300,000 jobs is a good thing overall, and even a slight increase in average wages is better than wages falling. Moreover, the trend continues to be positive. That this offends your RNC-worshipping sensibilities is your problem.

Or if you're so concerned about the 'number of people earning a wage to support their family' you would think he would care about the employment to population ratio, which has been steadily increasing for the last five years:

It's coming back from a big downturn in 2008-09 and it hasn't come back fast enough, but it's been undeniably improving.

It seems like the answer here is the same one we've had for awhile. The economy is improving, but still at a relatively slow pace. It's good news, but not great news.

This clown just looks for whatever piece of data reinforces what he wants to believe and then becomes enraged and looks for ways to ignore reality when he's challenged.

 

[senseamp]

Thanks, Obama.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Labor participation has been on steady decline for the last 40 years.

 

[Bowfinger]

92.9 million not in the labor force. A new record.

No, not in terms of percentage it isn't. (Trying to compare historical data using raw numbers is either ignorant or dishonest given continuous growth in both population and the economy.) The labor participation rate was below 60% before about 1970, and didn't rise to the current rate until the late 70s, as baby boomers flooded the work force. This peaked around 2000 and has been dropping ever since, in great part due to boomers retiring. While I agree the labor participation rate is an important metric, it is only one measure of a complex picture.

 

[rudeguy]

Or if you're so concerned about the 'number of people earning a wage to support their family' you would think he would care about the employment to population ratio, which has been steadily increasing for the last five years:

It's coming back from a big downturn in 2008-09 and it hasn't come back fast enough, but it's been undeniably improving.

It seems like the answer here is the same one we've had for awhile. The economy is improving, but still at a relatively slow pace. It's good news, but not great news.

This clown just looks for whatever piece of data reinforces what he wants to believe and then becomes enraged and looks for ways to ignore reality when he's challenged.

Just don't mind the 35.4% of American that need welfare to survive. 109,000,000 people who can't feed themselves. That is great news!
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/354-percent-109631000-welfare

Pretty pictures are fun:

Your "unemployment rate" is just a made up, fudged number and you are a shill.

 

[tynopik]

The labor participation rate was below 60% before about 1970, and didn't rise to the current rate until the late 70s, as baby boomers flooded the work force. This peaked around 2000 and has been dropping ever since, in great part due to boomers retiring.

The labor participation rate only counts those those between 16 and 64, so a demographic surge (like the baby boomers) would not impact it.

A more likely interpretation is greater number of women entering the workforce.

 

[fskimospy]

The labor participation rate only counts those those between 16 and 64, so a demographic surge (like the baby boomers) would not impact it.

A more likely interpretation is greater number of women entering the workforce.

That would only be true if all age cohorts between 16 and 64 had similar participation rates, but they don't. Specifically, 55+ is dramatically lower.

 

[Genx87]

And? The number is meaningless with no context. Why are that many not participating? Higher rate of retirement? Higher rate of people attending college/university?

Or do we not want to ask those questions?

The total number really doesnt mean anything as you said. We also hit a new record today for population.

 

[fskimospy]

Just don't mind the 35.4% of American that need welfare to survive. 109,000,000 people who can't feed themselves. That is great news!

You say you're concerned by the percentage of Americans that are working to feed their families. When you see this number has been going up, you change the subject. Why? Because you never cared about that, you just want to rage against the Hated Enemy.

Your "unemployment rate" is just a made up, fudged number and you are a shill.

Unemployment trutherism is an easy way to spot the true nutjobs. I want you to know that the irony of you quoting BLS labor force participation numbers like their fine while saying that the BLS is deliberately lying to you about other numbers has not escaped me.

I doubt you even noticed you were doing that. Lol.

 

[HomerJS]

What's the labor participation rate?

Is the job situation better then under the last Republican President?

 

[rudeguy]

Is the job situation better then under the last Republican President?

 

[berzerker60]

Just don't mind the 35.4% of American that need welfare to survive. 109,000,000 people who can't feed themselves. That is great news!
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/354-percent-109631000-welfare

Pretty pictures are fun:

Your "unemployment rate" is just a made up, fudged number and you are a shill.

So if things aren't perfect, you're completely unwilling to be happy (or even admit) they've improved? Literally no one is saying "mission accomplished" on the economy.

 

[Pens1566]

People do retire before 64 ... just saying.

 

[xeemzor]

The falling labor rate is because of automation eliminating the need for many middle class jobs. There will be few few jobs in the future with a wide gap in pay. You will have a class of people who own machine, people who configure and run the machines, and people who do menial hard to automate work. It will be interesting to see how our society handles the shift.

 

[Spungo]

Today's news is an interesting example of the "good news is bad news" we've seen over the past few years when it comes to the stock market.
How is the stock market reacting to today's good economic data? Stocks are down. This happens every time good news comes out because it means the fed is 1 step closer to raising interest rates. The stock market goes up on bad data because it means more fed money printing. The whole market is broken.

Labor participation has been on steady decline for the last 40 years.

This is incorrect. Participation peaked around 2000.

 

[dali71]

The Big Lie: 5.6% Unemployment

For those of you wearing blinders, we now return you to your regularly scheduled circle-jerk, already in progress.

 

[shortylickens]

But But But.. Obama is a Job killing president. Btw, what happened to all that austerity talk?

Obama just counted illegals as citizens. Thats why unemployment is "down".

 

[MomentsofSanity]

This is incorrect. Participation peaked around 2000.

I should have clarified. Patricipation among men was what I was referring to. It has been declining steadily for decades.

 

[ivwshane]

The Big Lie: 5.6% Unemployment

For those of you wearing blinders, we now return you to your regularly scheduled circle-jerk, already in progress.

We've got another one of these guys here! Before you make yourself look like an even bigger fool, why don't you go to the BLS website and look at all the unemployment numbers. While you are there take some time to read the various unemployment rates they use and how they calculate that.

When finished feel free to edit your post by explaining how ignorant you were.