MSNBC: "By just about any measure, last 2 years were good for job seekers"

[Human Torch]

Slowing economy brings tighter job market
Pace of new job creation eases from two years of strong gains

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15146686/

By John W. Schoen
Senior Producer
MSNBC
Updated: 1 hour, 57 minutes ago

By just about any measure, the last two years have been good for job seekers: since Sept. 2003, some 5.5 million new jobs have been created. But with the economy showing clear signs of a slowdown, so too is the pace of job creation. And unless and until businesses get a better sign of where things are headed, the job market could get even tighter.

Friday's government employment report confirmed what many analysts have been predicting: Job growth is slowing sharply. Employers added just 51,000 jobs in September, the fewest in almost a year, providing fresh evidence that the economy has moved into a slower phase.

The slowdown in new jobs has been accompanied by a pickup in announced layoffs. The total number of planned layoffs was up 54 percent in September — topping the 100,000 mark for the first time since January, according to a monthly report compiled by the employment consulting firm Challenger Gray & Christmas. That’s up from about 65,000 layoffs announced in August and roughly 37,000 in July — a six-year low. Hardest hit are industries with slowing sales, like auto manufacturing and housing.

"The economy is at a point where it may very well have reached the peak of this cycle in terms of low unemployment levels,"

said John Challenger, chief executive of the consulting firm. “It’s still very low, but it looks now like we’re starting the retreat.” After several years of strong growth, some slowdown is to be expected, say economists. With unemployment rates about a percentage point above the 30-year lows hit during the dot-com boom, the U.S. job market is still holding up well. But like the surge in housing that has now come to an end, higher-than-average employment levels can’t last forever, according to economists, who talk about a “natural” level of employment.

[ThomCat]

1. This guy is on heavy drugs.

He's so full of shit that his breath stinks.
x(

[dflprincess]

5. Indeed

I was laid off two years ago and it took me 8 months to find a job and I started sending resumes out the day after I was laid off.

[Hugin]

7. His eyes are brown...

That's what Mom used to say.

[rfranklin]

10. Compare it to Clinton...Bush has a negative creation rate...

Month after month, the job creation figures miss or barely keep up with the growing population. During the Clinton years, the stock market would have dropped a 1,000 points on job figures like these!

[hobbit709]

2. This idjit certainly doesn't live on this planet

I think he lives on Planet Bozone with shrub.

[MadMaddie]

3. More bullshit.....he forgot to talk about how many of those

people are in jobs that are paying much less than 6 years ago....they are losing their homes and the lives they were accustomed to.....

[WernhamHogg]

4. I believe that!

I believe that. I mean, everytime I go past Burger King, they have a "now hiring" sign outside...
:sarcasm:

[ThomCat]

6. As long as former professionals can say "do you want fries with that,"

There is no unemployement problem!
:eyes:

[Hugin]

8. Those jobs are like potato chips...

You can't just have one.

[warrens]

9. As long as you're not asking for health insurance, retirement

Or the same salary you were making in 1998.

[GreenPartyVoter]

22. Or a living wage for that matter

[ComerPerro]

11. Notice that they always talk about such "gains" and "improvements"

that only really exist when compared to previous lows under Bush?

The economy is stronger now, but its still weak.

The Administration of Lowered Expectations

[AX10]

12. But they are comparing these gains against the past gains/losses...

that have occured since Bush took office. Notice how they never discuss the strong job growth that occured during Clinton's tenure? :wtf:

Job growth has been anemic and the wages have stagnated. This is just what happened in the 1970's. The difference now is that we have a government who manipulates the numbers to make things appear better than they actually are. Also, we have a financial sector dedicated to issuing debt (short and long term)! That is what is really keeping this economy from falling into a reccession. Those bills will come due soon and then........

[NewJeffCT]

18. Another difference

In the 70s, the US was still a net creditor nation - meaning, countries owed us more than what made up our national debt.

Reagan turned our country into a net debtor when our total debt when from around $1 trillion to $4 trillion.

And, Bush has ramped that up to like $8.5 trillion.

[acmejack]

13. They have manipulated the way they calculate unemployment

If they still did it realistically it would be about 12%. That is if you counted part timers who want full time, disabled, everyone.

[madrchsod]

14. 7.25-8 dollars an hour temp wages

no one is hiring full time workers unless it is a high skilled job.oh there are jobs out there but do not expect to make a living from the wages they offer

[mnhtnbb]

15. Labor Dept also keeps "revising" job numbers--upward, of course.

This a.m. the Labor Dept released revised August job numbers --increased by almost 50%.

Does the Labor Dept not know how to collect data? Is it usual to see such hefty revisions? Anybody aware of any comparative studies to see what was normal for revisions during Clinton years?

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.asp?feed=OBR&Date=20061006&ID=6083437

[FSogol]

16. in China. n/t

[NewJeffCT]

17. 5.5 million jobs in 3 years sucks ass! It is 0 job growth

Simple facts:
1) The population of the United States is growing
2) Therefore, the number of people entering the workforce is growing.
3) Therefore, to account for the population growth, the economy of the US needs to create approximately 150,000 jobs per month. (for those bad at math, that is 1,800,000 jobs per year, or 5,400,000 in three years)
4) Therefore, that means, if the economy creates less than 150,000 jobs in a month, it is essentially not creating enough new jobs for the growing population.
5) Therefore, if your economy has created 5.5 million jobs in 3 years (Sept 2003 to Sept 2006) and you need to have created 5.4 million jobs just to account for the growing population, you have created a net of 100,000 jobs in 3 years.

To put that in perspective, an average 3 year period under Bill Clinton saw the creation of 8.25 million jobs, or a net of 2.85 million in 3 years.

To further add insult to Bush's numbers, he has overseen a huge increase in government employees due to the formation of the Homeland Security Dept. I saw a report from the Ctr for American Progress earlier this year where Bush had created 1.6 million new government jobs in his tenure. So, that means the private sector that Bush sucks up to has actually lost jobs these last 3 years.

[DaveJ]

19. Thanks for the reality check...

This is a smoke and mirrors economy. Job quality is the most important factor and it is next to impossible to find a quality job these days. A lot of our brightest minds have been bought out by the war machine. In the rest of the economy the people who are making money aren't working, and the ones who are working aren't making any money.

[NewJeffCT]

21. There is a brain drain, too

A lot of our top science & engineering jobs over the last few decades have been filled by bright students who came to our country from India & China for college or graduate school, or to get a PhD. Many of them used to stay here in the US.

Now, many of them go to college in Europe, or even stay home to go to school (the top colleges in China & India are pretty damn good, too).

Heck, I know of one person that already had gotten a green card here & was making $200K doing research here in the US. He bailed on that job for a similar job in Shanghai making $80K per year. Granted, the cost of living in China is cheaper than here, but Shanghai is not a cheap place to live... But, that sort of thing never happened before Bush.

[B Calm]

20. Job seekers seeking low paying jobs yeah the job market is great!

[paulk]

23. I feel like I've gotten in a time machine

and travelled back to the Reagan/Bush days.

It was the same shit back then....

[B Calm]

24. My wages have went back in time too. I'm making what I made in 1996

[City Lights]

25. The job market this year has sucked.

At least in my husband's field. He was out of work for just under 6 months and in the 9 years he's had his own business, it was the longest dry spell he's faced. The few jobs that surfaced during those 6 months didn't pay shit. He was offered a job at one company he worked at 6-7 years ago, but the salary was 25% lower in 2006 than it was in 1999. :wtf:

I don't know what type of "measure" MSNBC is using, but it sounds like they used a Foley and came up short. :evilgrin: