Nonfarm payroll employment was essentially unchanged in June (+18,000), and the unemployment rate was little changed at 9.2 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment in most major private-sector industries changed little over the month. Government employment continued to trend down.
.....
Total nonfarm payroll employment was essentially unchanged in June (+18,000). Following gains averaging 215,000 per month from February through April, employment has been essentially flat for the past 2 months. Employment in most major private-sector industries changed little in June, while government employment continued to trend down.
In June, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls decreased by 1 cent to $22.99. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 1.9 percent. In June, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees declined by 1 cent to $19.41. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for April was revised from +232,000 to +217,000, and the change for May was revised from +54,000 to +25,000.
On a scale of 1 to 10, this is a 1. We added jobs. But not really any.
15 comments:
Nice early call on the NFP data. Was able to gamble you'd be right and shorted ES before the BLS announcement. Grateful. August
Furthermore, U-6 spiked up to 16.2% in June 2011 from 15.8% in May 2011, but not quite up to the 16.5% from last June 2010.
http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
Don't forget the good news:
America continues along its second year of renewed record entrepeneurship with the birth-death adjustment showing plus 130,000 new jobs from new business formation! Without this ongoing entrepeneurial activity, we would be experiencing job losses for the last two years.
American exceptionalism!
Well, employment is a lagging indicator, and most of the concurrent data sucked for the last two months, so this balances the surprisingly good number (relative to expectations) we had for April.
Net change counting the adjustments to teh last two months, was negative.
As you almost but not quite predicted a few posts ago ('within the range of reason')
Keep up the good work!
Very weak report. I suspect that the 18,000 jobs figure will be revised down next month to a negative number. The next report will also be very weak as we hit even more headwinds such as the Minnesota government shutdown and layoffs at NASA. In August, we face government default, which could touch off the Second Great Depression.
Obama is now in serious trouble. This feels alot like 1979 and Obama reminds me so much of Jimmy Carter. Just like in 1980, I suspect that a hard right candidate such as Michele Bachman or Rick Perry will gain strength as the GOP begins to smell a landslide victory in 2012.
Obama has more political savvy than Carter did. Carter is a wonderful guy, but he was an accident who would never have been elected president without Watergate. Obama, on the other hand, has been forged in heat. First by Hillary, then by fierce opposition, the likes of which Carter never faced, even from Reagan in Election 1980. I think he can be reelected "IF" he starts focusing more on jobs than on Wall Street. (Notice that big "IF")
Bachmann or Perry??? Ha!
Might as well be Palin and W.
There is no real difference.
If the GOP wants a winning candidate, they should nominate Huntsman (or maybe Romney), but the Tea Party won't let that happen, so I think Obama will be reelected.
The last 2 months of data has been very been but things have only recently started to show improvements in some of the data. I wouldn't expect the employment reports to reflect this for a while.
In 1980, I wanted Ronald Reagan to win the GOP nomination because I thought he was too wacky and radical to win the nomination. Boy, was I wrong.
I like both Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama, but both were too inexperienced to be president. Both men did not know how to optimally negotiate. Because Obama does not know how to optimally negotiate, the GOP plays hardball against him because they know he can be bullied in giving the store away. That is why I am very pessimistic about the economy. The Republicans control the agenda, and the upcoming austerity program has a high probability of ensuring a double dip recession.
I meant to say I thought Ronald Reagan was too wacky and radical to win the general election.
What may be a shocker to young people is that ultra conservatives tend to make popular presidents, at least long enough to win reelection. People loved Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, and I predict to the dismay of you and myself, that Michele Bachman would make an extremely popular president, because people love that give me no s**t politics.
LOL at esong_98. The unemployment rate was 10% and above on Reagan term. Also , one little job report not going to doom Obama. I mean the election is 17 months away.Obama also got more spending than cuts in the first budget negotiation. He make the GOP look stupid every time. Bachman for president Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Anonymous:
But time is running out. I think this month is the momement of truth for Obama. If he proves himself tough, and subsequently the economy recovers, he wins in a landslide. But if he keeps following the same old pattern he's finished. In six months, the GOP will threaten to default again unless he agrees to another $10 trillion in spending cuts, a 20% marginal income flat tax rate and a balanced budget constitutional amendment.
esong_98
The GOP will never let the debt default. Their boss , Wall Street won't let that happen. What pattern would that be that Obama is following? The balance budget amemdment won't make it out of the house because it needs 2/3 of votes. If it do get out of the House it will be crush by the Senate.
Anonymous:
Although the GOP just a few days ago made the balanced budget amendment a new demand, the above example is just a hyperbole to illustrate a point. I really don't know whether in six months they are going to demand another $10 trillion in spending cuts.
The problem with Obama is that he has been slow to recognize that conservatives don't think like liberals. When bargaining, liberals like to establish goodwill by making the first concessions. A goodwill gesture is used to establish a good working relationship in order to make the give and take process smooth. I know, I took a course organized by the Democratic Party that taught this to me.
On the other hand, conservatives follow textbook game theory. In their philosophy, you get the best deal aiming high, being firm and using leverage. In other words, they bargain to win. The liberal method works when they bargain with like minded people. But they lose badly against conservatives.
In December's budget deal, Obama did so much compromising that John Boehner got more in spending cuts than he had intitially asked for, and preserved Bush's tax cut.
The pattern is clear, Obama does not bargain optimally because he mistakenly believes that if he takes the initiative and is the first to offer massive concessions to the GOP, the Republicans will develop goodwill towards Obama thereby causing them to return the favor. Unfortunately, the GOP interprets this behavior as a sign of weakness and only emboldens them to become even more hardlined. In the end, the GOP is able to bully Obama into giving his lunch money to them. Moreover, Obama is a highly risk averse person, and this risk aversion also causes Obama to bargain suboptimally.
Because of this pattern, the GOP has learned that when they bully Obama they win. Thus,they will continue to bully Obama because its an easy way for them to control the political agenda.
In this current negotiations, Obama wanted to wait until the economy displayed strong economic growth before undergoing any spending cuts. However, the GOP demanded $6 trillion in spending cuts and any new taxes was unacceptable. Since then, Obama has offered $4 trillion in concessions. Thus far, the GOP has offered not a single penny in concessions.
Obama's strategy is a loser. About an equal amount of people blame each party for the budget impasse. The GOP probably gets a slightly shorter stick here. On the other hand, they will clearly blame Obama for any double dip recession that occurs resulting from a govt. default or agreed to austerity program.
"In December's budget deal, Obama did so much compromising that John Boehner got more in spending cuts than he had intitially asked for, and preserved Bush's tax cut."
There was no spending cuts in December. What was Obama supposed to do when he own party didn't tackle the Bush tax cuts before the midterm elections? I mean Obama actualy said that he wanted the tax cut to expire for those making over 250,000 but his on party decided to wait until after the election to tackle the tax cuts. The GOP also held unemploymennt benfits hostage in order to get the extension of tax cuts. You also ignoring what he got out the deal in December.
"Obama's strategy is a loser. About an equal amount of people blame each party for the budget impasse. The GOP probably gets a slightly shorter stick here. On the other hand, they will clearly blame Obama for any double dip recession that occurs resulting from a govt. default or agreed to austerity program."
Really? The man that made the GOP look like they got cuts but really didn't get anything during the last negotiation suppose to have a lose strategy. How will Obama get most of the blame when the GOP won't meet him halfway. The American want compromise in the buget deal. The GOP is refusing something that the American people agree with which is taxing the rich.Obama is offering those concession so he can look reasonable in case the meetings fall apart.
Post a Comment