Jobless Rate in U.S. Falls to 5.9% in September, Payrolls Jump

[Triana]

The U.S. jobless rate declined to a six-year low of 5.9 percent in September and employers in the U.S. added more workers than projected, signs of more vigor in the labor market that will help sustain faster economic growth.

The 248,000 gain in payrolls followed a 180,000 August increase that was bigger than previously estimated, the Labor Department reported in Washington. The median forecast of economists in a Bloomberg survey called for a 215,000 advance. The unemployment rate fell to the lowest level since July 2008 from 6.1 percent.

“We appear to be ending the third quarter on a solid note,” Sam Bullard, senior economist at Wells Fargo Securities LLC in Charlotte, North Carolina, said before the report. “This will continue the trend of gradual improvement we’ve been seeing so far since 2014. There’s greater traction in the U.S. economy right now.”

Sustained, elevated gains in hiring are needed to help bring about faster wage growth and put the expansion in a self-reinforcing cycle of more consumer spending and employment opportunities. Federal Reserve policy makers are trying to determine the extent of labor-market slack as the central bank approaches the end of asset purchases aimed at boosting growth.

THE REST:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-03/jobless-rate-in-u-s-falls-to-5-9-in-september-payrolls-jump.html

[WillyT]

1. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[Gothmog]

2. This is great news

[Fred Sanders]

30. Fox News has sent all its crack propagandists to the emergency propaganda editing room

to blame it all on Obama.

[DesMoinesDem]

3. The rate dropped because 315,000 people left the labor force

[stevenleser]

4. Not correct. U-4, U-5 and U-6 also dropped. If you were right, those measurements would go up.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

[Triana]

5. +1 n/t

[whatthehey]

12. depends what is meant by "leave"

technically no u-rate includes those who have truly left the labor force, but on the other hand all you have to do to be included on u-5 and above is to have looked for a job, just once, in an entire year.

It is clear that if you can't be arsed to look just one time in 365 days you don't want a job. Yes it's a tough job market, but therer is no excuse for spending a year without trying once and then pretending you are unwillingly unemployed. Even a disabled sexagenarian felon with learning disabilities can find something worth trying to get once in a year. They may fail, but not trying ever just means not wanting.

[stevenleser]

18. Well put. Of course, U-5 and U-6 don't include people who have been retired for a year or more

If that is to what that person is referring, they are really reaching for something to complain about.

And your point about not looking for a job once in a year is also spot on.

[DesMoinesDem]

21. No, you are not correct.

People unemployed over a year are not included in any of those. Take a look at the employment to population ratio. It is the same as last month at 59%. It has barely moved since Obama took office.

[stevenleser]

25. Yes, I AM correct. People unemployed for over a year ARE included so long as they looked ONCE

just ONCE in the entire year for a job. Someone who hasn't bothered to look once in an entire year for a job is not someone who wants to be employed.

All of the numbers support me. Check all the boxes under the seasonally adjusted heading on this page and hit retrieve results. http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab12.htm

You will see the numbers of folks unemployed for various periods of time are cut in half since the worst of the great recession.

[DesMoinesDem]

29. Wow, what bullshit.

"Someone who hasn't bothered to look once in an entire year for a job is not someone who wants to be employed. "

That simply is a lie, and not a believable one at all. There are millions of people that have given up looking for work completely but would prefer to be employed.

[stevenleser]

34. Wow you are ridiculous. I don't think you even listen to yourself.

Someone who hasn't bothered to send in one application, who hasn't knocked on a single door or called an employment agency in a year you think we should count as unemployed in the stats, why?

So you can blame the President which is really what your agenda is here?

[DesMoinesDem]

38. Why should they count? Maybe because they ARE unemployed?

Are you even seriously trying to argue this?

What is your agenda here? To whitewash the real problems of this country to try to score some points for the President? Sorry that I care more about the real people of this country than the perception of the President.

[stevenleser]

39. No, they're not unemployed. They don't want to work. See the response by Peacetrain, it says it all

You're trying WAY too hard to spin this into something bad, and it is obvious.

[DesMoinesDem]

43. Yes they are and you refusing to admit it doesn't change that fact.

The number of people not in the labor force is at an all time high. Millions of these people were working in 2007. Now they are not and millions of them are not counted in the official unemployment statistics. They all just decided they don't need to work?

[stevenleser]

45. You look more ridiculous with each time you try to defend it. nt

[DesMoinesDem]

48. You have no defense. Just sticking your fingers in your ears.

[stevenleser]

50. In your attempt to attack Obama, you thoughtlessly justify the worst right-wing smears against the

unemployed.

You're wrong, and you insult the people who are unemployed out there who are actually trying to find work.

[DesMoinesDem]

53. I'm not attacking Obama, just pointing out the real unemployment situation.

And I didn't smear any unemployed person. Not one. I'm defending the unemployed that have given up looking for work. The people that are no longer counted and that you claim don't exist. It is YOU that are attacking those people. It's time for you to stop your attacks on these people and acknowledge they exist. In your attempt to defend Obama you are attacking the unemployed.

[stevenleser]

55. Yes, you are attacking Obama. That is your only agenda here. You don't care at all about the

unemployed. Your spin paints them as lazy goodfornothings who can't be bothered to look for a job once in an entire year.

[DesMoinesDem]

60. Wow, you just called these people lazy and you think I am attacking them?

I personally KNOW some of these people. I have never once attacked them like you just did. You are pathetic. Anything to try to make Obama look good I guess.

[stevenleser]

63. No, YOU paint them as lazy in your quest to attack the President. nt

[DesMoinesDem]

69. No I don't! Acknowledging that they exist doesn't mean I think they are lazy.

It's you that think if they exist they are lazy. You have stated EXACTLY that. I do not think they are lazy like you do. I do not think they are goodfornothing like you do.

[BlueCaliDem]

54. Makes you wonder what DesMoinesDem is really doing, doesn't it? eom

[stevenleser]

62. It is becoming obvious what their agenda is and its sick that they throw the unemployed under the

bus to do it.

[Agschmid]

68. That last part was a bit OTT.

[BlueCaliDem]

67. Their goal justifies all means - no matter how painful and tragic for some vulnerable Americans.

Instead of celebrating this wonderful news and saying, yes, it's good but we can do more for those still suffering and that's why we need to elect more Democrats (since it's clear that it were Democratic policies that turned the Great Recession around) this coming November 4th, they put their vilification of the president and Democrats in overdrive and nitpick the tiniest most inconsequential "flaws" just to distract everyone from, yes, this is REALLY GOOD NEWS.

Their posts have a taste of panic, too. It's almost as if they're panicking that 248,000 jobs have been added in September (soon to be revised, as always, since they had to revise the July and August numbers to add 61,000 more than previously reported) and that unemployment has dropped to mid-2008 levels! Now why would that be?

[brentspeak]

88. Wow, so unemployed discouraged applicants are really "not unemployed", after all

Furthermore, unemployed discouraged applicants are also lazy bums who "don't want to work".

Meanwhile, anyone who points out the stupidly obvious fact that that is clearly false are doing so because they must, of course, clearly have an agenda to "attack Obama". There couldn't possibly be some other explanation for it -- like, maybe, there are some people out there wide-eyed enough to see through the purposefully misleading feel-good bull$hit that constitutes contemporary federal government unemployment rate statistics.

It's like some unholy marriage of Freerepublic ideology meeting Branch Davidian cult worship.

[Peacetrain]

37. I had to pull on the hip waders to read this..

People who are unemployed..even those for a long period of time.. keep trying..sending out apps.. they do not sit on their nether regions like so many republicans try to imply.. I am now retired myself..but I have been in that could not find a job group for the life of me.. I know the frustrations.. and I know one thing for sure.. we keep looking... and unemployment is there to keep us from starving to death while we try and find jobs..

[stevenleser]

41. Exactly. I was unemployed and then underemployed for nearly 2 years from 2001-2003

I went through some severe discouragement. But I sent out a few apps and called employment agencies at least a few times a quarter even when I was at my most discouraged points in that ordeal.

No one who really wants a job does absolutely nothing for an entire year. That's B.S. and you are spot on.

[Peacetrain]

46. I know

I read that and saw red.. literally..people who are unemployed and trying to find work.. have to deal with crap like that..that they are just sitting there collecting benefits.. it is just a total out and out lie.. and I am sick and tired of it getting passed around.. that is pure right wing bull crap.. they use that to try and take away long term benefits.. some people live in areas where jobs have not come back yet.. they are long term unemployed, but they are still trying to find jobs..

[DesMoinesDem]

42. You are not everyone and you do not know everyone's situtions.

There are millions of people that want to be employed but for one reason or another no longer look for work. That is an undeniable fact. That people here refuse to believe this fact is crazy.

[stevenleser]

44. You don't know everyones situations either. But its obvious what you are saying is nonsense.

Again, no one who really wants a job does absolutely nothing for an entire year.

[1StrongBlackMan]

52. Amazing, isn't it? ...

[stevenleser]

76. Yes, but quite illuminating. The whole "I'm not attacking the President" thing is being exposed

for the nonsense it is.

[DesMoinesDem]

57. I've never claimed to know everyone situation.

It is you that groups everyone together and claims to know them all.

"Again, no one who really wants a job does absolutely nothing for an entire year. "

There you go again claiming to know everyone's situation. I know people that you just said don't exist. Your denial of simple facts is pathetic as well as your attacks on these people.

[leftynyc]

72. I can't believe you're continuing with that

bullshit that "of course they want a job" but they haven't bothered to send out an application, make a phone call or anything else to help themselves. If they haven't done anything for a year, they don't want to work. Perhaps they do have reasons for that (I can't think of any other than they are sick and CANNOT WORK) but to say they want to work is complete bullshit.

[stevenleser]

77. FYI, I did not alert on the post that was hidden. nt

[whatthehey]

79. and their numbers are decreasing too....

Among the marginally attached, there were 698,000 discouraged workers in September,
down by 154,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged
workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are
available for them. The remaining 1.5 million persons marginally attached to the labor
force in September had not searched for work for reasons such as school attendance or
family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)

Note that most of the marginally attached haven't even "given up" but are simply in situations where they cannot seek work.

[JaneyVee]

75. "There are millions that want to be employed but..."

No longer look for work". Um, that's the definition of NOT wanting to work. Jobs don't just fall in your lap, you have to apply and want to work. Not trying = not wanting.

[liberal_at_heart]

9. shhh. You're not suppose to bring up pesky details like people leaving the labor force, temp work,

part time work, and wages.

[whatthehey]

14. however temp and part time ARE included in the declining U6. nt

[liberal_at_heart]

20. ...

"Drew Brown, 62, is among the underemployed after being laid off from her job as a science editor in November 2009. Despite decades of experience and a master’s degree in biological oceanography, jobs in her field were hard to come by. Last summer, she took part-time work as a driver at a car rental lot near Baltimore.

While the work is “pleasant,” she said, “the commute is long and the pay is low.” Brown is still searching for work in environmental biology or microbiology, something that pays a “livable wage.” Until then, she’d like more hours."

[stevenleser]

26. And she is included in U-6 nt

[stevenleser]

15. All those are accounted for under various unemployment measurements. Here's proof

Check all the boxes under the seasonally adjusted heading on this page and hit retrieve results. http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab12.htm

You will see the numbers of folks unemployed for various periods of time are cut in half since the worst of the great recession.

[snappyturtle]

24. Thank you. Again, I am skeptical. It's matters such as the decline in

mortage applications that bothers me. Then when I read about slumps in buying at Wal-Mart and dollar stores I just don't get it. If employment is better why aren't we seeing more economic activity to put $ back into the economy?

I am actively looking to buy a home, hopefully my last, either in the Hill Country of Texas where I am presently, or in the Twin Cities to be near my kids. I see prices dropping and more foreclosures showing up on sites such as Zillow and Trulia. It's just a nagging feeling I have, hopefully that's all it is. We should know a whole lot more after the Christmas buying season.

[Schema Thing]

51. prices aren't dropping, and there are not more foreclosures in the Hill Country

You may "see" it, but you don't see it by the actual numbers. IOW, don't believe your own anecdotes, because that is how humans turn into republicans.

[snappyturtle]

66. Excuse me. The little green arrows next to a house asking price

means the house asking price has declined. The number of shown foreclosures has greatly increased since the last time I bought in the Hill Country (2006). Period. Deny if you wish. I've been watching for six months....many of those same homes six months ago are still on the market.

I don't appreciate being accused of morphing into a republican.

[progree]

80. Chart 11 - Duration of unemployment, 1990 - present. Chart 20 - U1, U2, ... U6 1994-present

http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cps_charts.pdf

The above by the way is full of interesting charts / graphs, is updated each month when the jobs reports comes out.

Thanks hugely much BTW for debunking a lot of the nonsense.

[snappyturtle]

13. I know in the #4 post one would think this is good news. I am very skeptical

of the job/employment numbers. Simply, some unemployed are not counted. Then there are reports such as:
http://www.startribune.com/business/277694911.html

Here's the article in its entirety:

General Mills Inc. will slash another 700 to 800 jobs as part of a big cost-cutting effort, layoffs announced less than two weeks after the packaged-food giant posted a bleak fourth quarter and announced two plant closings.

Golden Valley-based General Mills, buffeted by weak sales, revealed the job cuts late Tuesday in a filing with federal securities regulators. The head count reduction will primarily be in the United States, the filing said. General Mills employs about 5,000 in the Twin Cities, mostly in white-collar positions.

General Mills spokeswoman Kirstie Foster said in an e-mail that the new cuts include “salaried positions in General Mills’ U.S. businesses, and the functions and groups that support those businesses.” She said the company did not yet know how jobs in Minnesota would affected.

The 700 to 800 job cuts will be completed by next spring and will lead to annual cost savings of $125 million to $150 million, the securities filing said. Tuesday’s moves include $40 million of the $140 million in cuts that General Mills has announced in recent months

[stevenleser]

16. See my #15 nt

[whatthehey]

17. what makes you think they won't be counted? layoffs are also declining - to near a 40 yr low. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

47. You forgot the ...

"Fox news said ..." part.

[DesMoinesDem]

49. Is Fox News reporting facts now?

[1StrongBlackMan]

58. No ...

But they are "reporting" exactly what you have said.

[DesMoinesDem]

61. Well I don't what Fox news. Why do you?

[1StrongBlackMan]

64. Because I am a well rounded intellectually curious individual ...

I read/watch/listen to a lot of stuff that I do not subscribe to.

[Johonny]

6. I blame Obama

[stevenleser]

7. LOL!

Well done!

[JaneyVee]

8. Unemployment from 10.2% to 5.9% under Obama so far.

Is that a record?

[stevenleser]

10. Forbes says its the best and fastest recovery of any modern President. And no matter which jobs

measurement you use, U-1, U-2, U-3, U-4, U-5, or U-6, huge improvement has been made since the worst numbers of the great recession.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

[Triana]

11. It's all Obama's fault!

and he did it while being constantly thwarted and kicked in the teeth by Republicans. Imagine how much better this would be if he didn't have the GOP obstructing everything.

[DesMoinesDem]

23. Yea, look at the HUGE improvement.

[stevenleser]

27. Yup, it's huge. nt

[DesMoinesDem]

31. Yep, 0.8% improvement. HUGE!!

[stevenleser]

35. No, not whatever it is you are pushing. The actual stats are huge. nt

[karynnj]

70. I would bet that a large portion of the decline from 2007 to 2014 is due to babyboomers retiring

Obviously, with many retiring earlier than they expected or wanted to when the recession hit in 2008. Because I am in that age group, I know many people who opted to retire - because they could - rather than look for a new job.

Consider that the baby boom started in 1946 - consider that in the 7 years between 2007 and 2014, there are 7 years of baby boomers hitting 62, the earliest age to get SS and many older baby boomers reaching 66. Given the demographic bulge that we have always been, is it really surprising that as we retire, the % in the work force declines?

As the proportion of the population that is 60 plus increases, I would assume the % in the workforce will decline.

Here is some analysis from the WP:

Since 2000, however, the labor force rate has been declining steadily as the baby boom generation has been retiring. That's why, in 2012, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago predicted that the labor force participation rate would be lower in 2020 regardless of how well the economy does.

One way to see the demographic shift is in this chart by Bloomberg Businessweek (via Derek Thompson).

Americans over the age of 65 are much less likely to work than prime-age Americans. And since that subset of Americans is expanding its ranks, that drives the labor-force participation rate down. Note that this shift is happening even though older Americans are staying on the job for longer than they did during the 1990s.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/10/the-biggest-question-facing-the-u-s-economy-why-are-people-dropping-out-of-the-workforce/

Here is the chart referred to:

[JaneyVee]

73. Yup. Boomers retired in droves.

[lonestarnot]

19. Now that would be fantastic if a person didn't have to work 3 of those jobs to live.

[snappyturtle]

56. Maybe it's time we re-think employment as being an economic indicator.

I just can't help but think too about how GDP numbers and the cost of living numbers are determined. Things are not always as they seem.

You have made a good point. I wonder how many, even with two or three jobs, are making the income they did 10 years ago? I guess what I am saying is that employment numbers may be up (I hope this continues) but are people and the economy in general experiencing growth?

[TheFrenchRazor]

89. stop raining on the parade... nt

[daleanime]

22. So how many hours per week....

and what kind of pay rate?

[Puzzledtraveller]

33. stop it, your gonna make them mad.

No more questions.

[daleanime]

78. Heh, if an honest question upsets some one.....

I think that maybe they haven't been very honest with themselves.

[Puzzledtraveller]

83. very true

[progree]

81. Inflation-adjusted average earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees

Real average hourly earnings, production and nonsupervisory employees
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000031

Same as above but Weekly earnings
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000031




To be clear, these are all inflation-adjusted

I don't know why the big jump in the latter half of 2008 ... I guess that when the big layoffs began, the people with the least seniority -- disproportionately the lowest paid -- were let go first.

[whatthehey]

82. hours up .1 and weekly pay up $2.11, since you asked.

[IronLionZion]

85. How many unicorns are underemployed? Have you ever seen a unicorn work?

What's the unemployment rate for leprechauns and pandas?

[stevenleser]

28. The desperate way some folks here try to spin this as somehow bad is really eye-opening.

Great post Triana.

[Fred Sanders]

32. Sometimes you can not tell the difference between Fox News comment threads and DU.

President Obama, you did rebuild that.

[Puzzledtraveller]

36. I quit my job, I wonder if that adds up anywhere.

I was a SNAP and Medicaid caseworker in KY for 5 years. My last day was this week. They have come in with consultants to reorganize us into a "business model", as they put it. They abolished our caseloads and split our duties into parts you are more likely to see in a health insurance company. They put people in a call center, and are using terms like "customer". Many I know have quit. You get the sense they want to outsource a major portion of our role within our department and in the Cabinet.

[MohRokTah]

40. DU has more anti-Obama posters than Red State. eom

[BlueCaliDem]

59. At least they expose themselves for true Dems to see, don't they?

[IronLionZion]

87. Democratic Underground exists to bury the Democrats deep underground

low post counts often show up to bash the president and the party in the month leading up to a major election. The real October surprise would be if they mostly stayed over in discussionist.

And lots of other DUers live in a fantasyland where Republicans just don't exist. And the solution to every problem from global warming to ISIS to the patriarchy starts with an "S" and ends with "ingle Payer".

[ballyhoo]

71. How about the labor participation rate? Here's the graph.

Lowest since they started recording.

[stevenleser]

74. That is explainable quite easily. Retiring Baby Boomers. That is why U6 is important

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2014/09/05/obama-outperforms-reagan-on-jobs-growth-and-investing/

“Labor participation is affected much less by short-term job creation, and much more by long-term demographic trends. As this chart from the BLS shows, as the Baby Boomers entered the workforce and societal acceptance of women working changed, labor participation grew.

“Now that ‘Boomers’ are retiring we are seeing the percentage of those seeking employment decline. This has nothing to do with job availability, and everything to do with a highly predictable aging demographic.

---------------------------------------
The fact that U-6 is also declining right along u-3 (The standard unemployment rate) is because of the Boomers retiring.

[W_HAMILTON]

84. That, plus the record number of students currently enrolled in college.

If you choose to devote your time to college rather than enter the workforce as a part-time or full-time worker, you are not considered a labor force participant.

[Renew Deal]

86. Bear Stearns collapsed March 2013

It is still higher than pre-collapse levels but it's still good news.