Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

The U.S. will start adding jobs again, sooner than the doom and gloomers think

Recs

27

September 29, 2009 – Comments (44)

I came across an interesting Jim Jubak post on his new blog this morning titled The economy will start adding jobs again–in April. While I am not sure of the exact month that it will happen, as I noted in a recent post the rate of job losses is slowing (see post: The Jobs Market Continues to Improve).  While I don't personally envision the roaring, V-shaped recovery that some foresee, at some point likely in the first half of 2010 the terrible string of monthly job losses that we have been experiencing for too long will come to an end.

In the aforementioned post, Jubak cites a Financial times piece that extrapolates the current rate of decrease in new jobless into the future and comes to the conclusion that job growth will begin again in April 2010.  Here's how the FT came to this conclusion:

Last week the number of initial jobless claims–the number of people newly unemployed–fell by 4% to 530,000.

The weekly number jumps around so much because of short-term news that it isn’t especially useful as an indicator. Economists prefer to use the four week moving average. (This average of the most recent four weeks changes every week as the oldest week drops out of the calculation and the most recently completed week gets added.)

Right now the four week moving average is giving us good news too. By this measure the number of initial jobless claims is falling at a 6% rate.

There’s always a lot of churn in U.S. economy so the number of initial jobless claims doesn’t have to fall to zero before the economy as a whole starts to add jobs. Unemployment will start to drop when the number of people getting new jobs exceeds the number losing their jobs for the first time.

So when will that be?

Economists figure from past data that the economy starts to add new jobs when the number of people filing new claims falls to about 400,000 a week.

At the 6% rate of decline in the four week moving average, the number of initial claims for unemployment will have declined to that 400,000 level by next April.

So we can expect that the economy will start adding jobs again in April 2010.

Jubak goes on to note that the FT estimate is based on the optimistic assumption that the economy will continue to recover for the next two quarters at the same rate that it has recently. 

Furthermore, as optimistic as a return to job creation next spring sounds, that assumption is actually less optimistic than the consensus estimate on the street...which sees unemployment peaking during Q1 2010.  Not meeting the street's optimistic forecast could lead to a drop in the market.

Interesting stuff.  I won't go as far as to predict a specific month, but I too see an end to job losses and a return to very modest growth some time in 2010...possibly as late as the summer.

Deej

44 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On September 29, 2009 at 7:41 AM, alstry (35.42) wrote:

If you take weekly job claims as a percentage of the workforce....due to the evaporation of the workforce from so many who have lost their jobs, we are still running close to peak levels.

If we draw down our workforce to only a few million people, do you think a 300,000K weekly claim will be an improvement????

Once you lose enough workers, even if conditions get worse, it becomes very difficult to lose many more because there are so few left.

Right now we are losing over 500,000K per week with relatively few hiring and even fewer company creations....the net job loss rate is absolutely astonishing.  Just wait until the BLS is forced to adjust the birth/death figures to current conditions.

Report this comment
#2) On September 29, 2009 at 8:31 AM, alstry (35.42) wrote:

Deej,

How do you think we are going to add jobs now that we are laying off workers in health care and government.....the two sectors probably account for about 40% of our employment base.  Practically every hospital, school district, and government entitity is now contracting employment.  In light of the above and the following, how is it possible to add jobs now that practically everything is contracting and the leaders of our biggest companies seem to agree:

SINGAPORE -- General Electric Co. chief executive Jeffrey Immelt warned Tuesday that high unemployment and slower lending will drag on U.S. economic growth, likely resulting in the weakest recovery in decades.

"There are reasons to believe that this recovery could look different from ones in the past," Immelt said in a speech in Singapore. "There's not a lot of confidence that it's going to be great."

Immelt suggested the world's largest economy could be facing its slowest recovery from a recession since before the 1970s as increased government regulation and bank consolidation pinch off available credit.

Joblessness, which reached a 26-year high of 9.7 percent in August, will also weigh on growth by undermining consumer spending, he said.

"Easing up money has always been the elixir to keep the economy in recovery mode," Immelt said. "But once you get interest rates to zero percent, you can't go much below that, which is kind of where we are right now."

"A lot of the jobs lost in financial services and construction are never coming back."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/GEs-Immelt-warns-US-recovery-apf-4203929705.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=5&asset=9be2d452993dd128c7a3bd440a774a6e&ccode=rd

If the jobs are never coming  back, and the two largest employer sectors are now cutting, what is the rational basis for your argument that the jobs picture will improve in the foreseeable future?

What do you think the impact from the cuts to health care and government are going to be on the economy?  Remember, if we are not consuming, we really don't produce much to sell overseas.

Report this comment
#3) On September 29, 2009 at 8:51 AM, leohaas (31.56) wrote:

Only 2 comments from alstry, and none from the other doom-and-gloomers. Are they running out of steam?

Report this comment
#4) On September 29, 2009 at 9:02 AM, catoismymotor (24.55) wrote:

Leohaas,

It is still early. I am sure more fingers are flying on keyboards professing the end of time as we speak.

Cato

Report this comment
#5) On September 29, 2009 at 9:02 AM, alstry (35.42) wrote:

Alstry is not a doom and gloomer....just a realist.  It is not hard to see if Mr. Immelt tells us that jobs in construction and financie are not coming back.......and he should know, and government and health care are cutting...........that any prospect for job stabilization seems unlikely.

I recommend practically every one of Deej's post......he gives a good balance to my perspective....if he is confident of his position, I am sure he will come up with an excellent response to my comments.

Report this comment
#6) On September 29, 2009 at 9:20 AM, brickcityman (< 20) wrote:

@ leohaas & cato

 

I'm certainly not a "doomer gloomer", but don't fall into the trap of defining your position in juxtraposition to a theoritical or small minority of opinions that foresee the end of life as we know it.  If anything it undermines your credibility (at least in my eyes) since it shows that you are more willing to defend your position against extreme (and unlikely) challenges and less interested in more reasonable counter-arguments. Leave that sort of thing to the politicians...

Report this comment
#7) On September 29, 2009 at 9:26 AM, russiangambit (29.30) wrote:

I find it intresting that many bloggers think that only if they could turn bears into bulls, i.e. make bears abandon their pessimistic views, then everything will be resolved. Thus so many references to doom&gloomers. The economic crisis is not about anybody's opinion, it is about the fundumental problems with the economy, not about validating bull or bear views. There is enough cheerleading already. Apparently, lots of people think cheerleading can fix underlying problems. History teaches us that it can't.

Report this comment
#8) On September 29, 2009 at 9:27 AM, alstry (35.42) wrote:

Guys,

It is not the end of a life as we know it...it is the end of an economy as we know it.  An economy that is changing from a consumer economy to a savings economy.

Take a look at Detroit...it is a perfect example of what happens to an economy that changes dynamic....we went from a primarily domestic consumption auto economy to an import consumption economy......and now that we are moving foward to a savings economy.....Detroit is feeling the brunt of the headwinds.

The same is happening to many cities across the rust belt.  Now that we are cutting contruction and finance....similar effects will be felt on the coasts as we move forward.  It will spill over into technology as it is currently being felt in government and health care.

There is little doubt where this is heading....the train has left the station in 9.09.

Report this comment
#9) On September 29, 2009 at 9:48 AM, drgroup (69.07) wrote:

The Jubak article seems to pull out of thin air an arbitrary magical number 400,000 unemployed/week, to be the pivot point between employment increase and decline.

"Economists figure from past data that the economy starts to add new jobs when the number of people filing new claims falls to about 400,000 a week."

Therefore I am going to assume that these same economist do not take into consideration those who have fallen off the unemployment rosters because benifits have run out, those who can't file because they are not qualified for benifits...

Money has to be put directley into the hands of taxpayers in order to generate growth and employment. Putting money into the hands of bankers and auto companies is not working. Shovel ready projects are almost non existent. The ones that do exist impact only a small sector of the construction industry.

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, then it must be a duck. This economy is a disaster and will remain this way until the money supply is opened up for the construction industry.

This is not gloom and doom, this is reality.

Report this comment
#10) On September 29, 2009 at 9:54 AM, TDRH (99.65) wrote:

Again, great post.   I respect Jubak- but one key assumption

"Jubak goes on to note that the FT estimate is based on the optimistic assumption that the economy will continue to recover for the next two quarters at the same rate that it has recently."

 On this point I do not agree.  The recovery will be a long L through 2010 and possibly beyond.  This is a natural correction from the contraction in qualified demand based on the loss of wealth and security of the driving force behind 70% of our economy, the consumer.  

Report this comment
#11) On September 29, 2009 at 9:55 AM, catoismymotor (24.55) wrote:

# 6 - I like your personal quote:

brickcityman says: Why are you reading this? I'm not that interesting of a person.

I think that says it all.

Cato

 

Report this comment
#12) On September 29, 2009 at 10:04 AM, TMFDeej (99.32) wrote:

The funny thing about Alsty is that rather than citing actual statistics like most credible people who write articles and blogs do, he makes up generalizations out of thin air.

If you take weekly job claims as a percentage of the workforce....due to the evaporation of the workforce from so many who have lost their jobs, we are still running close to peak levels.

Really?  According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the total U.S. Civilian labor force was 154,577,000 in August 2009, down from 155,387,000 in August 2008.  That's a decline of 810,000 or approximately 0.5%.

How can this be you ask?  Well, I'll tell you.  As families struggle to make ends meet during this tough economy more people, such as mothers who used to stay at home, older people who were once retired, people who take on second jobs (which do count), etc... are entering the workforce.  This increase in the total number of people either working or looking for work is how the total workforce can fall by so little with the unemployment rate rising at the same time.

Deej

Report this comment
#13) On September 29, 2009 at 10:06 AM, brickcityman (< 20) wrote:

You weren't exactly the most quick witted kid on the schoolyard were you cato?

 

Extrapolating my commentary on the frivolity of a personal quote to a judgement of my opinions while neglecting to address my earlier statements... Classic, just classic... 

 

So which house of congress are you looking to run for?  If I may... I suggest you focus your energies on that instead of wasting your time attempting to "cut" people with butter knives...

Report this comment
#14) On September 29, 2009 at 10:08 AM, TMFDeej (99.32) wrote:

Here's a link to the source data for my statement for anyone who's interested: 

Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age

Deej

Report this comment
#15) On September 29, 2009 at 10:16 AM, catoismymotor (24.55) wrote:

#13 - I hurt you with your own words? I am sorry. Give me your address and I will mail you some long stem glasses to go with your whine.

Report this comment
#16) On September 29, 2009 at 10:20 AM, portefeuille (99.60) wrote:

-----------------------

Economic outlook: Signs of rally losing steam

...

 

...

In the US, the Institute of Supply Management survey is expected to rise from 52.9 in August to 54, the highest since April 2006m, as destocking in the manufacturing sector slows.

Personal income and spending data for August, due on Thursday, should show a rise of 1 per cent in spending, mainly due to higher car sales under the cash-for-clunkers programme.

US employment data, due on Friday, is expected to show a decline of 188,000 in non-farm payrolls in September following a drop of 216,000 in August. The pace of job losses has slowed considerably so the unemployment rate should rise slightly from 9.7 per cent to 9.8 per cent.

...

----------------------- 

 

Report this comment
#17) On September 29, 2009 at 10:26 AM, brickcityman (< 20) wrote:

Its worse than I originally thought cato, you can't even read all that well can you?

 

"wasting your time attempting to "cut" people"

 

Now I must diplomatically suggest we end this delightful shadow boxing match, not of my own accord but for the good of anyone else who reads this... 

 

Afterall we wouldn't want them to get the impression that a lowly "sub 20"  was worthy of consuming the intellect of a mid 70s related CAP. 

 

Also I don't want to aid and abet the defacing of a venerable libertarian organization by demonstrating that a proud follower is incapable of engaging in any kind of reasonable dialog.

Report this comment
#18) On September 29, 2009 at 10:38 AM, topsecret09 (37.14) wrote:

Obama has done nothing substantial to grow or keep jobs in this country.The only thing that was stimulated was the stock market via financial companies.

Since March when CNBC’s Jim Cramer declared the worst in the stock market may be over, the job numbers have not gotten better. The stock market has gotten better but not the job situation. Companies continue to lay off employees, laid off people continue to not be able to find work, a large sector of the population have settled for part-time work as there is no full time opportunity. And people continue to be out of work long after their benefits stop.

So far the stimulus package has kept some teachers, police and firefighters on the job, but no measurable employment in any other sector. All the talk about Green employment is a huge farce.  The Green job Czar resigned In disgrace.Obama reports things are getting better in the job situation, on what planet does Obama live ?

How can you have an end to a recession when jobs are bring eliminated and off-shored everyday by IBM, GE, and every other manufacturer and customer support organizations. Obama is blind to all this and that is exactly why his ratings are falling faster than any other President in history.

The last very large chink in Obama armor is that he cares not to listen to the masses on health care reform, and  his government run health care options change with the wind. This Is not going to get better anytime soon .... TS

Report this comment
#19) On September 29, 2009 at 10:42 AM, alstry (35.42) wrote:

Deej,

The key stat is the employed people in the civilian labor force....not the civilian labor force.  Those that apply for unemployment benefits were employed the week before.

Once you factor the part time/underemployed workers who are struggling right now still considered employed...I think you will find my 10% number very reasonable if not conservative.

If the employed number gets low enough.......there will be no more unemployment claims.

Thanks for helping to clarify this issue for all....my initial presentation was confusing.

Report this comment
#20) On September 29, 2009 at 10:50 AM, catoismymotor (24.55) wrote:

#13 - What I got from your comment was that you are of the opinion that leohaas and I blindly cast aside the doom and gloomers. This is simply false. You must be new to TMF not to be more fimiliar with leohaas and me and where each of us stand on this issue. Speaking stricktly for myself I must admit to being tired of the dominant core of doom and gloomers professing the end is near and that we will be eating baby flesh by the end of 2010. These people are irksome, like that neighbor that always lets her dog drop a deuce on your lawn but never picks it up. This core that I speak of frequently Shanghai's the bogs of others. One of them has already paid this blog a visit.

Cato

P.S. -

"You weren't exactly the most quick witted kid on the schoolyard were you cato?"

I prefer "You weren't the sharpest tool in the shed." But to each his own.

 

Report this comment
#21) On September 29, 2009 at 10:54 AM, bigcat1969 (92.59) wrote:

I believe the employment-population ratio is a major key to recovery in a consumer driven economy, so I think this post from Deej is very insightful.  My question is if this trent will continue.  The auto industry has been gearing up the factories again and housing starts are showing life which has helped.  Both industries have been helped by government intervention that has already expired for autos and may or may not expire for housing.  Retail sales face a big test in Q4.  With a very high rate of unemployment and tightening credit, it is reasonable to think that this Christmas season might be tough on retail.  If retail cannot exceed last year's Q4, then I expect new unemployment to again become a big problem.  As I've said in other posts, I think by 2/10 we will have a fairly clear view of what direction we are headed.

Report this comment
#22) On September 29, 2009 at 10:56 AM, catoismymotor (24.55) wrote:

#17 - It is nice that you are paying me so much attention. A girl could get used to this. ;-)

Report this comment
#23) On September 29, 2009 at 12:00 PM, maxnik0215 (64.34) wrote:

i'm hearing that quite a few companies, at least in New England,  are hiring in my industry - semiconductors. Many had job cuts early this year and cut too much. Now, demands is picking up and they are looking for people again. Maybe if so many people actually wanted to work for companies that make things, not just make money out of nothing  - writing lame mortgages and working in finance, the unemployment situation was not that bad....  

Report this comment
#24) On September 29, 2009 at 12:05 PM, TMFDeej (99.32) wrote:

Funny, Alsty, that's not what you said:

If you take weekly job claims as a percentage of the workforce....due to the evaporation of the workforce from so many who have lost their jobs, we are still running close to peak levels.

OK, so now you've changed your tune and you are saying:

Once you factor the part time/underemployed workers who are struggling right now still considered employed...I think you will find my 10% number very reasonable if not conservative.

By part time / underemployed workers, I assume that you are referring to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' U6 data point aka "Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers."

Unlike the more widely publicized unemployment rate, U6 actually seems to have peaked at 16.8% in June of this year.  It has since fallen to 16.5%.  It certainly is not rising at some astronomical rate as you seem to imply with the majority of your posts.

Here's a link to the report that I obtained this data from:

Table A-12. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

Deej

Report this comment
#25) On September 29, 2009 at 12:06 PM, jesusfreakinco (28.92) wrote:

Deej - I think the difference betwee Juback, Deej and the sold called doom and gloomers is whether or not you trust the government for their statistics - BLS and beyond.  Many of us have seen alternative statistics such as what has been provided by Shadow Statistics and get lost as soon as you start quoting the govt propaganda.

My two cents...

JFC

Report this comment
#26) On September 29, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Olorin00 (< 20) wrote:

Hey all,

 Having been an asset manager of over 100 shopping centers for Kimco (I sold my stock options at 35, stock is now 13,,,,bought it at 7, sold at 12,,,,bought again at 8.50 a few months ago, its a good one to keep an eye on).....you are all forgetting the most important part of the employment situation. Most of you have displaced the tremendous press given at the time of the housing bubble that typical RE employment (brokers, mortgage lenders, housing contractors, etc) was about 5% of the population historically.  That number hit almost 50% during the housing bubble, and much was written about that. Everyone left their jobs and became employed by the housing/construction market. Now all those jobs had to be deleveraged and that is why unemployment remains so high,,,,,you just can't replace those high paying jobs,,,,,,

also, please try to recall that Bush changed the face of the unemployment numbers early in his disgaceful legacy by including fast food jobs, etc, in the employment numbers, enhancing the look of employment forever, despite those jobs having the fastest churn rate in history. Also, the car dealership jobs, including mechanics, salesman etc are also deleveraging, so understand we have had a cardiac arrest in unemployment, and for the numbers to still be as low as I think they are considering the environment of retail sales, we are on track for a recovery. As for green jobs,,,,what bright light has blown out in consideration of the fact that second generation cellulosic biofuels are a reality,,,,see verenium.com and vercipia.com. These rep a joint venture of BP and Verenium making ethanol out of non food crops for a fraction of corn ethanol costs. They already have two prototype plants, their largest shareholder is one of the biggest companies in the world, and they have licensed their technology worldwide. Next year they are opening in 30,000 Acres the first commercial cellulosic biofuel plant in the world, which will produce 36 million gallons of fuel per year, with 10 additional plants in the works. BP has given them 100$ million for the JV partnership, and given them some of their best people to run the venture. Just look at the Board of Verenium.....please try to see the forest through the trees....

Report this comment
#27) On September 29, 2009 at 12:47 PM, leohaas (31.56) wrote:

JFC is very insightful:

"Deej - I think the difference betwee Juback, Deej and the sold called doom and gloomers is whether or not you trust the government for their statistics - BLS and beyond.  Many of us have seen alternative statistics such as what has been provided by Shadow Statistics and get lost as soon as you start quoting the govt propaganda"

Most of the gloom and doomers (alstry-please stop saying you are not one of them...) are the same guys and gals who believe that government statistics are propaganda. They also believe that Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate is false, that Neil Armstrong did not walk on the moon, that a few alien carcasses are hidden in Roswell (NM), that global warming is junk science, and that humans did not evolve from apes. There might be a few who believe the earth is flat.

Report this comment
#28) On September 29, 2009 at 1:14 PM, rofgile (99.32) wrote:

Wow, this is a controversial blog!

 In CAPS, saying the words "Jobs may be added sooner than you think" is like throwing sunlight upon a vampire crypt!

----------------

 This is a good post.  April is too far away for me still, however.

  -Rof

Report this comment
#29) On September 29, 2009 at 1:42 PM, jesusfreakinco (28.92) wrote:

leohaas

Nice attack the messagenger rather than the message argument.  Thanks for trying to obfuscate the issue - which is govt statistics versus those produced by Shadow Stats and several other credible blogs.

BTW -  will agree that global warming is junk science and that humans did not evolve from apes, but those are other topics.  Obama's birth certificate - jury is still out; Neil Armstrong and Roswell - can't quite buy into those theories.  Anything else you want to know?

Caveat - the views expressed in this reply don't necessarily represent the views held by the opinions of the doom and gloom channel or the majority of those that subscribe to the doom and gloom theory of economics.

Report this comment
#30) On September 29, 2009 at 1:44 PM, bigcat1969 (92.59) wrote:

You forgot JFK not being killed by a single gunman, top government leaders in the US and UK trying to provoke Hitler into war with the US and having advance knowledge of a Japanese attack...  Its good to know that you believe the government statements all the time from all administrations, I'm sure Nixon would be pleased.

It is somewhat interesting to watch these boards fragment.  We seem to be at the point where those who don't lead cheers for a recovery are viewed as stupid and evil by not just the posters but also the administration of MF.  There are smart people who think we are deep in a depression and the end is not in sight (and I don't mean me) and they have some good arguments.  There are smart people who think that it is possible that statistics can be made to reflect what the government needs its citizens to believe.  Are these people evil just because they disagree with the PR from your friends at the White House?  Or are you scared that they could be correct?

Report this comment
#31) On September 29, 2009 at 2:26 PM, JaysRage (89.42) wrote:

Let me break down this initial article, because it is flawed in a number of different ways. 

1)  At the current rate of 6% decline --> This is a forecast that there will be a linear decline in the rate of unemployment claims.   There is absolutely no reason to expect a linear decline in this rate.   It has been anything but linear.  

2)  Economists figure from past data that the economy starts to add new jobs when the number of people filing new claims falls to about 400,000 a week. -->   Which past data are they basing their claims upon.   Which recessions/depressions are in their sample, and why do they feel that 400,000 is the break-even number?    And, by the way, which economists?  

If a healthy recovery based on a sustainable consumer economy that was poised to increased healthy debt-free spending had just now started, we would see companies adding jobs as early as April.   Reality is that the current GDP numbers are pumped up with inflation, companies and individuals are saddled with bad debt, and there is no non-government disposable money to stimulate healthy growth.   As soon as the government takes their foot off the monetary policy gas pedal, things are going to hit like a ton of bricks and smash this fake recovery into a brick wall.     Or we go to hyper-inflation.....take your pick.   

Report this comment
#32) On September 29, 2009 at 2:37 PM, bigpeach (28.49) wrote:

JaysRage,

I hate to say it, but your comments are the embodiment of the flawed reasoning people like alstry regularly use. You point out that those not predicting a disaster cannot be sure. This is of course the case, and is true any time someone makes a prediction. Unfortunately, you use this "they cannot be sure" argument to segway into your own purely made up scenario.

Report this comment
#33) On September 29, 2009 at 3:53 PM, JaysRage (89.42) wrote:

bigpeach -- That's fair enough.   However, there have been plenty of charts on these blogs that argue my point, and as a person who uses statistics and forecasting to make my living, I shudder when I see people using extrapolation of a line to predict the future.    It is beyond over-simplification, especially with something as complex as unemployment and hiring.    People need to look beyond things that happen to be moving in the same direction to the causal relationships that move these higher level measures.     

What is the root cause of unemployment....lack of revenue?  The lack of revenue is caused by the lack of purchasing.   What is the root cause of lack of purchasing?   Lack of liquidity (wealth)?   What is the root cause of the lack of wealth?  

1)  Debt -- Consumer debt is still at historically high numbers

2) Housing -- Housing backlogs are still over 9 months, and housing prices are projected to bottom sometime in the 3rd quarter of next year.

3) Toxic Assets -- Banks continue to hold bad debt in the hopes that the recovery will make write-downs unnecessary.   More toxic assets are being produced as more ARM and bubble mortgages come due.   Previously unrisky assets are becoming risky as unemployment increases, taking away the ability of normally stable earners to pay their debt.  

I don't think significant progress has been made to relieve any of the above root causes of our current situation.   Until significant progress has been made on any or all of the above, I do not believe that a healthy recovery can exist.   

Compare the graphs to those of the Great Depression.    Compare the causes.   Compare the policies.   They are all falling right in line.....right along with the "Recession is over" analysis by all of the economists.   

Look at P/E ratios.    Look at unemployment.   Look at earnings.  Look at revenues.    Look at consumer sentiment.   Now try and pick a rock solid stock that is undervalued.    Sure, you can find them, but the pickings are slim.   

I just think there are a lot of people who are buying in at the top of a lot of stocks, and I'd like to do my best to let people know what kind of downside risk they are looking at.   

I short-circuited my logic-chain, but there is grounding in solid, causal analysis of our current economic situation.   

Report this comment
#34) On September 29, 2009 at 4:15 PM, JaysRage (89.42) wrote:

Fresh consumer sentiment numbers.   Not only didn't meet expectations, but declined. 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090929/bs_nm/us_usa_economy_confidence

Report this comment
#35) On September 29, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Mark910 (< 20) wrote:

Deej    "Unlike the more widely publicized unemployment rate, U6 actually seems to have peaked at 16.8% in June of this year.  It has since fallen to 16.5%.  It certainly is not rising at some astronomical rate as you seem to imply with the majority of your posts.

Here's a link to the report that I obtained this data from:

Table A-12. Alternative measures of labor underutilization'

Here is the Seasonally adjusted data from the table.

U6

I believe most use the seasonally adjusted numbers

Report this comment
#36) On September 29, 2009 at 8:26 PM, AvianFlu (34.94) wrote:

Can we at least agree that the consumer price index is now faked?

Why on earth would they leave gasoline and food out of the calculation? It would probably be more accurate if they threw everything else out and only kept gas and food in the calculation!

Of course, if they kept them in they would have to pay out more money for those that own TIPS.

Report this comment
#37) On September 30, 2009 at 12:16 AM, bullnada (< 20) wrote:

One ques.

If we all know that this whole game is fake. What in the world are we doing thinking we can make $ Take it from me I lost 750,000 in the last 2 years in the market.

  I  like this site for the views of you scholars. I can tell you what I have learned. It seems motley fool is like religion. Everyone thinks they have it figured out  and the others are wrong........

 If you are gambling at this point with your money. I ask why? You all know it all till you become insolvent..

Report this comment
#38) On September 30, 2009 at 12:17 PM, JaysRage (89.42) wrote:

Newest information on foreclosures and at risk.     

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090930/bs_nm/us_financial_regulation_mortgages

Report this comment
#39) On October 01, 2009 at 10:55 AM, JaysRage (89.42) wrote:

Jobless claims UP again this week.   Not down 6% as the linear projection would have expected.   

Report this comment
#40) On October 01, 2009 at 12:46 PM, AvianFlu (34.94) wrote:

bullnada:

In answer to your question, I am investing (not gambling) in an attempt to preserve the capital that I have managed to accumulate through my life rather than let it be devalued down to nothing through the ravages of inflation.

I am not trying to make a killing....just trying to avoid catastrophe. Just putting money in a savings account or CD or bond is a recipe for disaster, as we all should know. So far I've dodged all the bullets, but in my view the big bullet is coming up. That would be inflation due to currency devaluation. Everyone should prepare for that eventuality. Don't believe me. Believe Buffet and Bernanke, both of whom have been warning us. You'd have to be deaf to have missed the warnings.

Report this comment
#41) On October 01, 2009 at 12:57 PM, jddubya (< 20) wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/09/30/business/AP-US-Kohls-Jobs.html

Report this comment
#42) On October 01, 2009 at 4:30 PM, JaysRage (89.42) wrote:

http://www.dailyjobcuts.com/

Report this comment
#43) On October 01, 2009 at 4:34 PM, bigcat1969 (92.59) wrote:

Wow interesting site JaysRage, thanks.

Report this comment
#44) On October 04, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Teacherman1 (55.68) wrote:

I agree. We are in a state of flux. Some things will go up, some will go down. Some will go up and down.

When the housing market comes back (not if), the economy will recover for real.

In the mention of jobs lost because of the bubble burst in the housing market, it seems a lot was left out.

When a house is built, there are appliances, pipes, A/C ( at least in my part of the country), heating, carpets, cabinets, hardware, toilets, tubs and sinks, faucets, nails, screws, concrete, fences, sod, trees, light bulbs, windows: not to mention all of the goodies we buy to fill them up.

To a certain extent, the same is true of the automobile.

All of these provide jobs to those who manufacture, supply and install them. They take their wages and buy other goods and services. Those providers in turn take their wages and buy other goods and services.

Available credit helps speed up the process. This is what drives a capitalistic system.

The system did not fail, it was the abuse of the system that caused the failure.

We are not alone in this situation. It is not just a U.S. problem. It is global.

Maybe because I am a bit older (well, probably a lot older) than most here, and have seen and lived through many ups and downs along the way, I am a firm believer in the human spirit and the ability to overcome.

I am optomistic about the future, which is kind of funny, since at my age it is anybody's guess as to how much more of it I have.

It is unlikely that any comments on this blog will change the opinions of anyone reading or posting on it, but at least we all had a chance to vent.

Have a nice Sunday afternoon.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement