Obama report: 95,000 jobs to come open each month

[Peacetrain]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100211/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_economy

WASHINGTON – The United States is likely to average 95,000 more jobs each month this year, while personal savings will remain high as credit remains tight, according to a White House report released Thursday.

The Council of Economic Advisers also trumpeted the $787 billion economic stimulus package, which it said has saved or created about 2 million jobs.

In a message to Congress, President Barack Obama pointed out that the economy he inherited was losing 700,000 jobs each month.

I am making my bets with the President, and not the do nothing know nothing republicans and their shills in the media

[NJmaverick]

1. Rec because some DUer thinks jobs are bad an worthy of an unrec

[Peacetrain]

2. I saw that..You just cannot figure people out..

Anything with any kind of positive outlook for the future just gets under their skin.

[HughMoran]

3. Creepy

Would Democrats really do that or are there Republican trolls here?

[mopinko]

6. those sites that shall not be named all brag

about their moles. one claims it has a mod here who is a mole.

[Kdillard]

4. Good I hope things continue to move in the right direction.

[phantom power]

5. I wish these articles spent more time explaining such claims...

Why do they think the economy is going to add 95K jobs per month? What kind of jobs will they be? In what industries? Will they be full-time, with benefits? I assume they must know these things, because otherwise they're just making shit up. And when they (or reporters) don't discuss these things it sure gives the impression they're just making shit up, even if they aren't.

Also, it seems like a good time to remember that it takes about 120K jobs per month to keep up with population. So if we do get 95K jobs, that's not quite level relative to population.

[HughMoran]

7. The article does expand on the claims to an extent

"Indeed, even adding an average of 95,000 jobs each month, unemployment is likely to remain around 10 percent through this year and not fall below 6 percent until 2015. And while Americans are likely to save more for big-ticket items such as homes or cars, it means a slower recovery for a nation that has lost 8.4 million net jobs since this recession began in December 2007."

Perhaps they don't have the other information you are looking for in their study - is it OK with you that some sources have limited resources?

[phantom power]

8. I suppose in a sense it's "not OK" with me, except by default...

I understand that any given article can't drill down indefinitely. I'm genuinely curious: how do they arrive at these numbers? Again, even a paragraph's worth of additional detail would be very illuminating: who do they think will be hiring? Why? Or, if it's some kind of more general economic model that doesn't use that kind of detail, what is the basic reasoning?

Maybe those details aren't released either, but it's the sort of thing I always wonder about. I'm often left with the impression that administrations predict things are leveling off, or improving, just on some general principle that "these things don't last forever." Hopefully they have better models than that.

Seriously, it may be just another symptom of Bad Reporting, too.

:shrug:

[dmallind]

9. Statistical models, regression, correlation etc. All numbers, not descriptions. NT

[JNelson6563]

11. Ok, really?

While I too wouldn't mind a few particulars, you're not really suggesting that the Obama Admin. is putting out projections based on the notion "these things don't last forever", are you?

Julie

[phantom power]

12. I suppose I *am* suggesting it's possible.

This is the administration that just put Bernanke back in the drivers seat, and also employs the crack economic services of Tim Geithner.

I don't know what to say: I'm skeptical about whether they really know what they're doing. I don't take it for granted.

[JNelson6563]

14. Small business will drive the recovery

Those fools on Wall St. and elsewhere in the realm of rarified air won't have much to do with it. Tax incentives to hire more people will go a long way in the small business community. I manage a small business in the heart of a vibrant downtown that is filled with small businesses. There is so much happening here! Buildings going up, vacancies are almost non-existent and it's go, go, go! And I'm in Michigan, one of the hardest hit states of all.

I see signs of recovery every day. Slow and gradual of course but it's everywhere around these parts.

I'm sorry to learn you likely live in a place where none of this is happening if you've ventured your best, most informed guess at how recovery is expected to happen.

Julie

[Beetwasher]

16. That's Good To Hear Happening In Michigan!!

Very very good to hear! You guys deserve some good stuff coming your way, you've been hit hard. Hang in there, it's starting to turn!

[amandabeech]

28. She's in Traverse City.

It is a high end resort town on Lake Michigan.

I have heard it referred to as the Aspen of the Midwest.

It's absolutely wonderful in the summer, but I don't think that it is typical of the state, even though there are some other nice spots on the Lakes all around the state.

[phantom power]

17. I live in Tempe...

Not a wasteland, but lots of empty storefronts. The housing boom *was* the single largest economic growth driver here in AZ. So you can imagine how that's been working out lately. I like to ask local small-biz owners "how's business?" Over the years I've discovered that most owners will say "things are good!" whether they are or not. Which I can appreciate, since it's terrible PR to be telling your customers "Man, things really suck! I'm a gnat's ass from going out of business!" I've been told by owners multiple times "things are really good" and seen their doors close not long afterward.

I used to live in Ann Arbor. Where in MI are you? What businesses are doing well?

I'm not sure the overall small business picture is that good. They're dependent on people spending money to hire. But people aren't, and for good reasons:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=114&topic_id=75537&mesg_id=75537

[JNelson6563]

19. I'm sure it's small pockets across the country

I manage a chocolate shop and there are all kinds of shops around us. Restaurants, outdoor shops, books, tourist crap (mostly open in summer) and on the list goes. We have a theater downtown (The State Theater) that has undergone a magnificent restoration and is rockin'. It's a Michael Moore project, BTW. they simulcast the Met Opera on Saturdays, they sell out almost every opera. We have a really strong "buy local" sentiment here and it goes a long way in shoring up the local economy. In the summer the farmer's market is huge and brings so many people downtown, great stuff!

Fabulous Traverse City, great place to be. :toast:

Julie

[phantom power]

22. Synergies between businesses in clusters seems to be a big deal...

You seem to have such a synergistic cluster going on. Good news! :toast:

One thing that fascinates me is that attempts to engineer such clusters frequently don't work very well. Lively business neighborhoods just seem to either work organically, or... not. Either it's just hard to engineer, or there are subtle principles that aren't well understood.

I've become very curious about economics and business in the last few years. Amusing -- when I was in college I would have gnawed my own leg off rather than subject myself to learning about economics.

[vaberella]

10. Good stuff. n/t

[branders seine]

13. What the hell Barack.

Just go ahead and tell us it'll be 250,000 a month.

We'll feel even better.

[rug]

15. At that rate it will take 7 years to return to December 2007.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. Too slow for 2012...

...I wonder which party will enjoy the boost in 2016.

[MadHound]

20. First of all, what is this projection based on?

Second, even 95,000 jobs a month is about thirty thousand jobs short of the number needed to keep up with the numbers coming into the job market each month. Not to mention that there is nothing here that would help all those folks who've given up looking.

We'll see, but I think that this is simply hot air.

[boppers]

21. 95,000 a month is just a number, not a spin.

Media (and politics) hates numbers without spin.

The number I'm used to seeing is a minimum of 100,000 a month (I guess you've heard 125,000), but either way, it's under both of the reference numbers, but still a lot better than, oh, 25,000 a month.

[MadHound]

24. Not saying that it is spin,

I'm just wondering what is this administration's basis for saying 95,000/month jobs will be created this year.

Most government figures state that 125,000 jobs need to be created in order to keep up with the number of new job seekers each month.

Yes, it is bigger than 25,000/month, but it still means we're losing ground, just at a slower rate. Meanwhile the number of permanent/long term jobless continues to grow.

Sounds to me like the creation of a permanent jobless class. Hmmm, wonder how those people are supposed to survive.

[AllentownJake]

27. They can't project January in December

They have no idea what is going to be occurring this year.

[boppers]

29. More coverage here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x178858

...which links back to the source:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cea/economic-report-of-the-President

The numbers I've seen for when the job loss trend finally reverses range from 2011 to 2017... which is quite the range of optimism to pessimism.

[budkin]

23. Woot! Please let this be the case!

[AllentownJake]

25. From the people that projected the stimulus bill would stop

unemployment from reaching 8%.

Love to see the model and assumptions they are using to get this number.

[asdjrocky]

26. Gotta keep catapulting the propaganda.