Support NeoGAF

[Anno]

So is there any possibility of the ADP numbers being closer to correct than the government numbers? I know ADP only covers a certain % of the job market, and doesn't necessarily cover the really small job market very well. Is there anything they would catch that the surveys might miss out on?

Also, U6 up to 16.4. That's the worst part of all of this.

 

[Kosmo]

Aren't they suppose to create jobs when their taxes are cut?

Isn't that what you seem to argue often.

No, they are saving jobs.

 

[Incognito]

So is there any possibility of the ADP numbers being closer to correct than the government numbers? I know ADP only covers a certain % of the job market, and doesn't necessarily cover the really small job market very well. Is there anything they would catch that the surveys might miss out on?

Also, U6 up to 16.4. That's the worst part of all of this.

june earnings also fell. this is a woeful, dismal report.

 

[eznark]

Obama talking at 10:30. How far will he pass the buck on this one? I mean obviously this is all Boehner's fault, but I don't think he can just stop with blaming the GOP. I wonder if he finally hammers Bernanke.

Or will this be a "the jobs numbers are good, really!!" conference?

 

[Incognito]

Obama talking at 10:30. How far will he pass the buck on this one? I mean obviously this is all Boehner's fault, but I don't think he can just stop with blaming the GOP. I wonder if he finally hammers Bernanke.

Or will this be a "the jobs numbers are good, really!!" conference?

if it's the latter, i hope he's prepared to work his ass off next year for reelection. this is potentially make or break -- he needs to stop talking about the deficit, and restructuring medicare, or "saving" social security, and focus on jobs. how do you think average joe with no job feels when he hears the president talking about how cuts to medicare and social security, their only lifelines, are on the horizon?

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Obama talking at 10:30. How far will he pass the buck on this one? I mean obviously this is all Boehner's fault, but I don't think he can just stop with blaming the GOP. I wonder if he finally hammers Bernanke.

Or will this be a "the jobs numbers are good, really!!" conference?

It will be an "I don't have the stones to ask for more stimulus" kind of press conference.

 

[loosus]

If history is any indication, it will be a "It would've been worse! I swear! Remember my predecessor!" press conference.

 

[eznark]

It will be an "I don't have the stones to ask for more stimulus" kind of press conference.

QE3!

http://www.slate.com/id/2298563/

Be right back, I need to buy more silver

 

[Salazar]

I beg leave to recommend a blog.

Robert Paul Wolff is still dropping expansive Marxist learning pretty regularly at

http://robertpaulwolff.blogspot.com/

 

[Invisible_Insane]

QE3!

http://www.slate.com/id/2298563/

Be right back, I need to buy more silver

Didn't have you figured for the kind of person who finds inequality objectionable.

 

[eznark]

Didn't have you figured for the kind of person who finds inequality objectionable.

Sometimes I need to speak your language to let you know why things are stupid.

 

[gcubed]

QE3!

http://www.slate.com/id/2298563/

Be right back, I need to buy more silver

i made enough in my companies stock to pay for my kitchen remodel and buy a new motorcycle. I'd like to thank Ben Bernanke for artificially boosting the stock market.

 

[eznark]

i made enough in my companies stock to pay for my kitchen remodel and buy a new motorcycle. I'd like to thank Ben Bernanke for artificially boosting the stock market.

Out of pure curiosity did you borrow against them or did you cash out a bit? (I'm wondering because down here most banks are valuing securities at about 60% for collateral purposes).

 

[gcubed]

Out of pure curiosity did you borrow against them or did you cash out a bit? (I'm wondering because down here most banks are valuing securities at about 60% for collateral purposes).

cashed out a bit, i've been here over 10 years so had them built up and dont feel comfortable borrowing against them... the meteoric rise of the stock market doesnt make sense to me.

 

[Kosmo]

Obama talking at 10:30. How far will he pass the buck on this one? I mean obviously this is all Boehner's fault, but I don't think he can just stop with blaming the GOP. I wonder if he finally hammers Bernanke.

Or will this be a "the jobs numbers are good, really!!" conference?

"We have hit the bottom - the Summer of recovery starts now."

 

[loosus]

I made quite a margin on my few stock picks, as well. But I totally cashed out in May (except my Cisco shares, which are fucking languishing, so I am just leaving them be). I am not putting another dime in shares any time soon because I feel lucky as hell that I got out when I did.

 

[capslock]

Fuck...

Stick a fork in Obama. He's done.

 

[GhaleonEB]

It's very odd how every other measure of employment - UI claims, private payroll growth (which showed 150k increase), ISM indexes - all improved month over month, yet the final BLS numbers are down steeply. That's one of the stories of this recovery - the official payroll numbers are entirely de-coupled from every other reading. It's incredibly weird.

And Obama is continuing to dig his own grave with huge cuts in spending.

 

[eznark]

It's very odd how every other measure of employment - UI claims, private payroll growth (which showed 150k increase), ISM indexes - all improved month over month, yet the final BLS numbers are down steeply. That's one of the stories of this recovery - the official payroll numbers are entirely de-coupled from every other reading. It's incredibly weird.

And Obama is continuing to dig his own grave with huge cuts in spending.

Aren't month-to-month new entrants at about 150,000? Which means that an increase of 150,000 jobs is a net of zero. States were forced to cut payroll (39,000 according to CNBC) and bam...net losses start to pile up.

There was an article in Forbes latest issue about where the unemployment rate would be if those who were looking for work in 2008 hadn't become disaffected. 11.5%. That's a frightening number. I'm not sure when they put up their print articles though. If I see it I'll link it.

 

[gcubed]

Aren't month-to-month new entrants at about 150,000? Which means that an increase of 150,000 jobs is a net of zero. States were forced to cut payroll (39,000 according to CNBC) and bam...net losses start to pile up.

There was an article in Forbes latest issue about where the unemployment rate would be if those who were looking for work in 2008 hadn't become disaffected. 11.5%. That's a frightening number. I'm not sure when they put up their print articles though. If I see it I'll link it.

i think forbes had an article about unemployment insurance as well, something to the affect that extended unemployment is inflating the unemployment numbers by something like 2%

 

[eznark]

i think forbes had an article about unemployment insurance as well, something to the affect that extended unemployment is inflating the unemployment numbers by something like 2%

Definitely. I've heard from a number of labor-intensive companies (landscapers etc.) who were looking to hire in the Spring but potential employees demanded to be paid in cash so as to not interfere with their benefits. Anecdotal but I highly doubt that these are isolated incidents happening only in a small Indiana county.

 

[gcubed]

Definitely. I've heard from a number of labor-intensive companies (landscapers etc.) who were looking to hire in the Spring but potential employees demanded to be paid in cash so as to not interfere with their benefits. Anecdotal but I highly doubt that these are isolated incidents happening only in a small Indiana county.

i think its that coupled with "i make x on unemployment, but i can get a job that makes y, y isn't much more then x (or is even a little bit less), so why not just stay home and make x"

 

[eznark]

i think its that coupled with "i make x on unemployment, but i can get a job that makes y, y isn't much more then x (or is even a little bit less), so why not just stay home and make x"

It's a real problem that I've run into often. 2% often? Gut feeling that seems high.

 

[gcubed]

It's a real problem that I've run into often. 2% often? Gut feeling that seems high.

http://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/publications/working-papers/2011/wp11-8.pdf

thats the one paper i can find, which says 1.2%

 

[Jackson50]

It's very odd how every other measure of employment - UI claims, private payroll growth (which showed 150k increase), ISM indexes - all improved month over month, yet the final BLS numbers are down steeply. That's one of the stories of this recovery - the official payroll numbers are entirely de-coupled from every other reading. It's incredibly weird.

And Obama is continuing to dig his own grave with huge cuts in spending.

Indeed. I noted as much yesterday. Despite other positive indicators, the BLS data has been remarkably coy in the past. Perhaps their birth/death model is actually skewing the data. Really, it is incredibly weird.

 

[BigSicily]

Yeah, cute; a couple of graphs from those balanced and well-meaning truth-tellers over at the Weekly Standard. Meanwhile, from the very cover page of the CBO report those graphs purport to represent:

So what's the difference between those two scenarios? Oh, the usual: In one, the Bush tax cuts expire, and some effort is made to bend the insane health care cost curve down a little; in the other, the same old liars, hypocrites, and broken-headed ideologues keep getting their way.

They are the same data set. Your graphic is to 2036, mine is out to 2091 -- no doubt including such outlier years is something of an ideological consideration for Cost.

Yet, that doesn't change the point I was making, you're just set-up a strawman. The point is that in either case, invariant of your ideological 2nd paragraph, the fraction of GDP that's being reallocated in our economy is increasing. This has consequences.

Why do you always talk about the Clinton years and always fail to mention his tax hikes on the rich?

Also, I love the 'we have a spending problem not a revenue problem' argument. It's like when Colbert was debating some tea bagger chick who said the same thing, and Colbert responded with "I completely agree with you that we have too much money while at the same time not nearly enough".

I didn't mention is because I was talking about government spending as a share of GDP and how the country manged to survive at lower, pre-Obama spending levels. That, in fact, given the advances in IT over the past decade, we should be able to surpass such levels of efficiency, if we had competent leadership. Alas, we had W and now this guy.

Clinton's tax policy had NOTHING to do with what I was talking about.​

And thanks for throwing in that last paragraph, really helpful with the insults. It forwards the conversation when you: (a) don't know when/how to interject with a valid point and (b) Use 'Colbert' as support while calling someone a derogatory name: "tea-bagger chick"? Really? At least, at the end of the day, that "chick" is probably happy.

 

[gcubed]

it takes a lot of balls to ask where the jobs are when the group you are leading hasn't done a damn thing

 

[Saren is Bad]

Obama is great guise come on

 

[BigSicily]

Definitely. I've heard from a number of labor-intensive companies (landscapers etc.) who were looking to hire in the Spring but potential employees demanded to be paid in cash so as to not interfere with their benefits. Anecdotal but I highly doubt that these are isolated incidents happening only in a small Indiana county.

As an aside, I once read about this in an entry level Economics text:

Public policy designed to help workers who lose their jobs can lead to structural unemployment as an unintended side effect. . . . In other countries, particularly in Europe, benefits are more generous and last longer. The drawback to this generosity is that it reduces a worker’s incentive to quickly find a new job. Generous unemployment benefits in some European countries are widely believed to be one of the main causes of “Eurosclerosis,” the persistent high unemployment that affects a number of European countries. -- Macroeconomics, Paul and Mrs. Krugman

 

[eznark]

As an aside, I once read about this in an entry level Economics text:

​

Bold fail

 

[Hitokage]

I'd imagine if they were getting paid more then losing the benefits wouldn't be an issue.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

No, they are saving jobs.

got anything to back up that?

That had the tax cuts expired, that more people would have been laid off?

 

[eznark]

got anything to back up that?

That had the tax cuts expired, that more people would have been laid off?

I think that was a joke. Ya know, "created and saved"

 

[Kosmo]

got anything to back up that?

That had the tax cuts expired, that more people would have been laid off?

I'm sure they are somewhere in the 2.4-3.6M jobs outlined in the report issued by Obama's economic advisers.

And it was a joke - I'm just glad you now see the ridiculousness of that metric.

 

[Loudninja]

Boehner: Failing To Raise The Debt Limit Puts Economy In Great Jeopardy

In a political role reversal Friday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) warned that Congress risks severely harming the economy and exacerbating the unemployment crisis if it fails to raise the national debt ceiling in the next four weeks.

"While some think we can go past August 2nd, I frankly think it puts us in an awful lot of jeopardy, and puts our economy in jeopardy, risking even more jobs," Boehner told reporters at his weekly Capitol briefing.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...it-puts-economy-in-great-jeopardy.php?ref=fpa

Wow didn't know this thanks Boehner!

 

[eznark]

Obama: Late to the Press Conference, Late to Prop Up Jobs

Don't tolerate tardiness, vote eznark

 

[Kosmo]

Obama: Late to the Press Conference, Late to Prop Up Jobs

Don't tolerate tardiness, vote eznark

Nothing annoys me more than habitual tardiness. You have my vote!

 

[Averon]

Can we finally stop using ADP numbers now?

 

[Loudninja]

He is on now
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2011/07/watch_live_obama_statement_on_jobs_report.php

 

[cartoon_soldier]

It's very odd how every other measure of employment - UI claims, private payroll growth (which showed 150k increase), ISM indexes - all improved month over month, yet the final BLS numbers are down steeply. That's one of the stories of this recovery - the official payroll numbers are entirely de-coupled from every other reading. It's incredibly weird.

And Obama is continuing to dig his own grave with huge cuts in spending.

Yup.

But at the same time, too many Americans believe that cutting spending will somehow create jobs. Quite frankly, we wouldn't be in this situation if the American Public had thought about what they were buying last election.

 

[Evlar]

"ups and downs"

ughhh

 

[JJDinomite]

Obama is really graying. Wow.

 

[eznark]

OMG Obama blames uncertainty, what a tea bagging rube!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Evlar]

Obama is really graying. Wow.

Always happens.

 

[eznark]

Demanding new stimulus.

Brilliant.

 

[mckmas8808]

Demanding new stimulus.

Brilliant.

Did he really?

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Demanding new stimulus.

Brilliant.

Is the right thing to do.

 

[slidewinder]

Demanding new stimulus.

Brilliant.

What would your prescription be?

 

[eznark]

Did he really?

Actually he pretty much said nothing. He wants more dirt moving money. But he also wants to reduce the deficit. But spending is important. Gotta keep the taxes low too though.

 

[Jackson50]

Can we finally stop using ADP numbers now?

Sure. But it was not merely ADP's employment report that caused increased expectations. A host of other metrics indicated increased hiring and economic activity.