U.S. Oct. job growth surges by 126,000

[dennis4868]

U.S. Oct. job growth surges by 126,000 By Rex Nutting
WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) - The U.S. economy added 126,000 nonfarm payroll jobs in October after a revised gain of 125,000 in September, more than double the 57,000 originally reported, the Labor Department estimated Friday. August's 41,000-job loss was revised to a gain of 35,000. The unemployment rate sank to 6 percent, the lowest rate since April, the department said. Total hours worked in the economy rose 0.4 percent to the highest level since January. Economists were expecting a gain of about 56,000 in October, according to a survey conducted by CBS MarketWatch. They also expected the jobless rate to remain at 6.1 percent.

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/newsfinder/pulseone.asp?dateid=37932.3546643518-809512918&siteid=mktw

MY QUESTION IS THIS: HOW MUCH CAN WE TRUST THAT THESE GOOD ECONMIC STAISTICS THAT HAVE COME OUT LATELY (including the job numbers that were put out today)ARE ACCURATE? I mean everything that comes out of this so-caled government's mouth has been lies for the most part. They White House after all has played games with EPA's statistics after 911. This government knows it can lie and get away with it because the corporate media will NOT hold their feet to the fire. That is for damn sure!They are in bed with eachother......

[T Roosevelt]

1. dupe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=205334

[59millionmorons]

2. Thats funny

Just the other day there was a report were 171,000 jobs were lost in Oct, double that of Sept. Did these people not file for unemployment benifits.

[HootieMcBoob]

5. yeah I don't understand how this works

Just a few days ago I read that layoffs increased in Octorber by 125%. How does this stuff work?

[dennis4868]

6. I believe and....

I could be wrong but those were layoffs that were coming in the future and did not happen just yet. Anyone know for sure about this?

[jeter]

14. dennis you're right

There have been many lay offs that will begin to take effect.

Remember that this is one month. There were 160,000 jobs created. But what about next month and the next.

I'm sure that everyone will say that life is grand. But Bush has to make up for 3 million jobs. One month, this does not make.

[doppledang]

48. Source?

Your report was flat out wrong... 57K new jobs in Sept; revsied ypward to 125,000.

[asjr]

3. jobs

The Secretary of Labor is Elaine Chao. Remember her? The sleazy wife of the sleazy Senator McConnell. She is the one who wanted to change overtime rules. I believe when she was in college she majored in lying, with a minor in CONTROL.

[dennis4868]

4. I just have this gut feeling....

that the Labor Department has been pressured by Cheney to put up good economic numbers after years of bad numbers. Much like what Cheney did to the CIA. Pressured them to give him the evidence he needed to go to war in Iraq.

[hayu_lol]

7. Remember that fuzzy numbers...

run in the Bush family. Just like VooDoo economics, fuzzy numbers help keep bread on the family.

[HFishbine]

23. Actually

it was Bush I who coined the phrase voodoo economics in describing Regan's proposals when he was chellenging him for the nomination.

[Don_G]

8. How Much Of That Job Growth

Can we attribute to the unemployed taking up the slack in the civilian sector for the National Guard being called up?

[asjr]

9. jobs

Your gut has good sense. We have been taken over by the most corrupt administration ever and some people believe every word. Cheney may be behind the scene but he is definitely in control.

[papau]

42. 127k jobs - but no comment on structural Deficit or decline in real wages

The decline in real wage growth and, more importantly, increased deficits that are now structural in nature, will destroy this economy - Bush must be replaced.

But our media can not even mention that 8.8 million remained unemployed last month, with about 2 million without jobs for 27 weeks or more

Job Watch -

On October 21, The New York Times reported that Treasury Secretary John Snow projected that the economy will generate two million additional jobs,about 200,000 per month, before next years election. This new numberis a huge retreat from the administrations previous projection made when it was selling its tax cuts. In February the Council of Economic Advisers projected 306,000 per month job growth starting in mid-2003 if the tax cuts were passed and roughly 228,000 jobs created per month without the tax cuts.

It takes 170,000 new jobs each month just to provide jobs for an expanding population and workforce and 300,000 new jobs each month to lower the unemployment rate by one percentage point over the course of a year. http://jobwatch.org/

So we got a "good" number -127,000 -but still increasing unemployed - as 127,000 does not cover population growth. Once military rotates back - if they rotate back with a lower reserve/guard call up - we may see a drop in "job creation"


http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
Technical information: Household data: [phone] USDL 03-675
http://www.bls.gov/cps/ Establishment data: 691-6555 Transmission of material in this release is http://www.bls.gov/ces/ embargoed until 8:30 A.M. (EST), Media contact: 691-5902 Friday, November 7, 2003.
THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: OCTOBER 2003 -Employment rose in October, and the unemployment rate, at 6.0 percent, was essentially unchanged, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 126,000 in October,following a similar increase (as revised) in September. Job gains occurred inseveral service industries in October.Manufacturing employment continued to decline, but the rate of job loss has moderated in recent months.


Perhaps we should remind ourselves that in Feb 2003 the DOL changed all the seasonal adjustments - so anyone want to compare last year to this year?

From Feb 2003:
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_notice02.htm Several major changes affect the Current Population Survey (household) dataThese include the use of new population controls that reflect Census 2000 results and new information about net migration, the use of new questions about race and Hispanic ethnicity, the introduction of new industry and occupation classifications, improvements in the seasonal adjustment processes, and the annual update of seasonal adjustment factors. For all data series, these changes affect the comparability of the anuary 2003 estimates with those for earlier months. Additional detail is provided in the release at http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_notice02a.htm

Several major changes affect the Current Population Surveyhousehold) data Revisions and additions have been made to the A tables of theEmployment Situation. Several series have been affected by conceptual changes or new standards for presenting data. The changes are described in the release at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Last Modified Date: February 07, 2003

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Terwilliger]

12. I'm sure you do

If you give him "credit" for the "turnaround"...do you give him credit for the horrible shape the economy was in in the first place?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LittleApple81]

18. and you also like republican Miller (your sig line)

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skittles]

40. Miller is f***ing garbage

there is nothing even remotely worthy about him

[9215]

51. hee, hee

Then Clinton should get credit for a booming economy during his tenure.

"What's good for the goose...."

[asjr]

13. job growth

How long have you been on this planet?

[59millionmorons]

16. Yeah right

I guess we should credit Bush with the uptick in the U.K. economy which was just announced. It is nothing Bush did, the economy is doing better everywere. I may be mistaken but I dont believe we gave tax cuts to the Brits.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dennis4868]

29. but my question is.....

how do we know that the economy is really getting better? All these good numbers coming from this government could be lies just like the evidence to go to wat was. right?

[Skittles]

33. IMPROVING ONE???

we aren't even CLOSE to where we were when Clinton left office. And with this illegitimate, moronic piece of SHIT in the White House, WE NEVER WILL BE.

[HFishbine]

38. I think

if you're going to deny that a bad economy was his responsiblity that you should not give him credit for a less bad economy.

[cosmicdot]

19. am I dreaming - I am at DU, yes?

praising * and quoting Zell Miller

:eyes:

both aren't very popular stances amongst Democrats

[jeter]

24. Parabura is definitely a freeper

But gave me a chuckle this morning so i'll forgive his ignorance.

I suspected that the freeps would be around this morning. That this one is so obvious is what makes me laugh.

To myself: Remember, Parabura - freeper.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jeter]

35. So what?

Zell Miller?

First off, in response to your post above 126,000 jobs is not that much. Second of all, Zell Miller has supported every initative by the most right-wing President in US history. That doesn't make him a Democrat, it makes him a right-wing republican.

I could understand if Zell supported him on one or two issues. But he supports him ON EVERY issue. Then he endorses him, and attacks every Democrat - including Joe Lieberman, who can hardly be called liberal - more than one year before the general election. He endorsed him before most Republicans.

Miller not only supported the most regressive and backward tax policy of a generation - but he cosponsored it.

He not only supported the war (any war for that matter) but questioned the patriotism of those who opposed it. Including a four star General.

He supported every right wing fanatic nominated for the court.

Name one issue that makes Zell Miller a Democrat?

Sorry pal, your defense of Zell Miller is indefensable. I stand by my statement accusing you of being a freeper. It's not an insult, just a hunch. 9 posts, and supporting Miller, and saying that we must "give Bush credit." For what 126,000 jobs? This is nothing. We need to create 170,000 to 200,000 jobs just to keep up. Most of them are probably part time or seasonal jobs. What ever happened to the American dream? Of building yourself up into the middle class? Doesn't Miller support that? Bush certainly doesn't.

[Skittles]

39. um, he is YOUR PRESIDENT

NOT OURS

[NoKingGeorge]

41. It would take 18 months of 126,000 to break even.

What are you talking about? 170,000 jobs need to be created each month just to keep up with people entering the work force. Clinton created 230,000 Every month. Announced layoffs of 172,000 (coming months but announced now) and not making a dent in the 3 million lost in the past 3 years does not sound like a good job to me.

[qanda]

44. Thanks for holding your nose while you said that, because

I wouldn't want the stench from all that BS to overcome you. Bush*, he's not my President, has yet to take credit for anything negative and just because the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer spells "good" numbers for the economy, it doesn't mean that we should applaud him or tell him what a wonderful job he is doing screwing up our once-great country. If the economy is so great, tell that to my husband who has been out of work for over 20 months now or to the many small businesses shutting down all around us. How about telling it to the mall, where there are more employees than shoppers at any given time during the day.

You join up and the amongst the first things you have offer is praise for the pResident and Zell Miller who uses every chance he gets to bash Democrats. I'm not calling you a FReeper, because it's against the rules, but could you save this type of rhetoric for someone who wants to hear it.

[adriennel]

45. hahaha

can you explain what Mr Bush did that so admirably improved the economy?
we've returned to the same jobless numbers that we had in January 2001.
so, I guess Bush does deserve credit--for maintaining a stagnant economy.
funny how Clinton was never given credit for the economic upswing experienced during his presidency...but in Bush's America, unemployment plunges from 6.1% to 6.0% and the man's a genius! sickening.

[dennis4868]

46. I agree 100%!!!!

[joeprogressive]

11. Stark slammed Bush

The Squawk Box crew was pumping up the numbers, then Pete Stark came on and called Bush an idiot and took some nice parting shots at Ashcroft. It was brilliant. Anyone see it?

[LittleApple81]

27. Who is Stark? Where was this? sorry, not familiar with name. n/t

[LittleApple81]

32. I went and found it.

DESPITE STRONG THIRD QUARTER GDP GROWTH,
PAYROLL JOBS DOWN BY 146,000 IN THE QUARTER


Washington, D.C. – U.S. economic growth spiked up sharply in the third quarter, according to today’s report from the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP)—the most comprehensive measure of U.S. production—grew at an annual rate of 7.2 percent in the July-August-September period. However, that surge of growth did nothing for the stagnating job market and questions remain about the sustainability of the recovery.

http://www.house.gov/stark/news/news_JEC_OctEconRel.htm

[mopinko]

17. yes, please, facts, where are the real facts?

my first reaction to the economic reports was 'they are massaging these numbers' the last couple of quarters i recall sunny numbers being "revised" later on. and the question about reservists and jobs is also a good and important one. killing off workers does, indeed, reduce unemployment. deficit spending does too.
how much of the "growth" can be directly attributed to the war? like how many people is hallibuton paying rdiculous wages to not provide clean drinking water to soldiers.
facts, facts, please.

[flpoljunkie]

26. Krugman said pump $500 billion into the economy, it will create some jobs

The problem is that this deficit spending will come home to roost--perhaps not until 2005, which is what Bushco is counting on.

Borrow and spend is what the Rethugs are doing, driving up the federal debt and emptying the social security and medicare trust funds to pay for these outrageous deficits.

Yes, tax cuts for the rich are being paid for right now with your FICA and medicare taxes! Yet many are not aware of this.

The Rethug plan is to starve the federal government so that Social Security and Medicare must be privatized-- and no longer guaranteed by the federal government.

So far, it's working.

[joeprogressive]

21. let em blow their load early

Regression statistics will take over. When you inflate something or catch a moment in time that is an outlier you will soon revert back to the mean and the mean has sucked for the last several years. With 12 months out, they can't keep up the lie that long.

[NicRic]

22. Holiday Season #'s ?

I would think that some growth in the economic numbers would be expected this time of years. With companies gearing up for what they hope is a good holiday season. That icludes buying to get their inventories full with items ,and hiring employees .Lets see what happens after the holiday's and that will be the telling point on this economic news having any legs. Also as you point out ,who knows what to belive ,if its coming out of this White House !

[mmonk]

30. jobs cycle as the economy cycles

and you can bet the party in power will make sure the economic numbers will look good come election time. This is why the DLC strategy of just concentrating on economic issues and remaining dormant on foreign policy issues is a loser. That is why I support Wes Clark. He taught economics and is a registered investment banker, so economics is covered. Everyone at least has an inkling of his foreign policy credentials (some of us alot of course). While everybody in the media is concentrating on the anti-Dean, I'm concentrating on the anti-Bush and I think Clark is just that.

[ozone_man]

31. Manufacturing lost 24,000 jobs.

That's more indicative of the health of the economy.

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B236C2A63%2D4FC8%2D4FA1%2D8A64%2DA12D0EA29923%7D&siteid=mktw

[livinontheedge]

34. Unfortunatly, we will continue to lose manufacturing jobs for years.

We'll go from 14 million down to 8 million or so. It is inevitable. Those products can be produced much, much, much cheaper overseas. Unless Congress enacts some very protectionist walls around the US, those manufacturing jobs are lost forever. We can't compete with a Chinese worker earning $8 a day.

[mmonk]

36. The direction of economic numbers

won't be bad come election time and perceptions rule (despite any permanent job loss). People will think they don't have to worry much 'because the economy is on the rebound' and will feel Bush Co will keep them secure (unless we are hit by something unforeseen). Be prepared for the realities we will probably face (election wise).

[adriennel]

37. arg!

what about the surging layoffs of October 2003? approximately 170,000 jobs lost during the same time 126,000 jobs were added. this is still a net loss of jobs, not to mention the millions of Americans who are already unemployed.

[retyred]

43. About as far as

you can pick them up and throw them!

Jobs where I live {St. Pete) are few and far between with most being in the services area minimum wage field, where I have my shop (Lakeland) it's worse, my customers are reporting 100-200 people applying for 1 job when advertised.

With outsourcing taking a heavy toll on jobs here, recovery will be slow in coming and will never be what it was, funny no one reports the number of people still out of work whose UE benifits have run out but still haven't found full time work.

My wife said "Of course new UE numbers are low, most folks out of work have already applied last year, there's no one left to lay off or fire and still stay in business, at some point you reach that minimum allowable number of employees that will do the job of the three you get rid of."

I know that my bottom line is shrinking in order to keep the three guys I employ working even with bush's great tax cut (sick twisted laugh).


Retyred In Fla
So I Read This Book

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

47. So you only believe the bad news from the same source?

It is funny how some people here react to good economic news - "it must be wrong". Yet bad news from the same source is fully embraced and touted without question.

[qanda]

49. I think what they are saying is that the bad news

Is more reflective of what they are experiencing. Even when the numbers are not so good, I think they are still not presenting how bad things really are out here in the real world. It's easy to say that things are improving when you have not lost your job, but it's a little harder to believe good news when you're struggling to make ends meet. jmho

[adriennel]

52. reality

we're (at least I am) trying to put the "good economic news" into perspective. we're not saying it's wrong (if you've read my other posts on the jobs numbers), nor do we accept "bad news" without skepticism.
I'm a librarian by profession, and mis-information really pisses me off. No one should believe 100% outright what anyone tells them. That's why it is most helpful when links to articles and statistics are included with postings. Don't just believe what were are saying; review the sources for yourself!
most people just don't want to do the work. it's much easier to accept what people tell you.

[leftofthedial]

50. I am glad for the 126,000 newly employed people

But we still have almost 9 million (by the Fraudministrations's own bogus numbers) who are not employed.

I don't believe their numbers at all. They have politicized the reporting agencies, so even the eventually corrected numbers are not believable. But the initial reports are consistently overstated for Bush's political advantage. What surprises me is that they consistently do modify them downward eventually.