Trump was an idiot to rave about a halfway decent jobs report in February because he then owned every subsequent report.
8
It's clear to me, or to anyone with a shred of common sense: It's all Obama's fault, as usual.
2
Don't bla,e Trump? Who then? Obama?
2
"Don't blame Trump"? As if Trump would even accept any responsibility? Hahahahahahahaha!
4
What?
I can't believe my NY Times eyes.
Something isn't Trump's fault???!!??
Is the Times getting soft on Trump???!!!???
I can't believe my NY Times eyes.
Something isn't Trump's fault???!!??
Is the Times getting soft on Trump???!!!???
1
This headline was not indicative of the article. I have a question for Mr. Irwin:How much does morale play into economic growth? When you hear folks having to ask for cost of living wages and, yet, government is all too happy to knock that number to an irresponsible wage for workers, this creates such dysphoria. Should the American people just be happy for the crumbs while those on top just watch as those below scramble for those crumbs. This, I paraphrase from Illinois gubernatorial candidate Ameya Pawar. 45 has not helped to create the positive energy that goes into creating a good work force—people are exhausted. Isn't that a factor into good economic growth?
1
Don't blame Trump. Sure. As if Obama wasn't blamed for every hiccup and hangnail. Really hilarious, intentional, or not.
6
Mr. Trump will tweet that the poor weak job numbers and the rise of the unemployment rate are Obama's fault. Or maybe Hillary Clinton is to blame.
6
Should we still blame Obama , Hillary Clinton or Robert Reich ?
4
He touted 12 million new jobs in ten years, in his tax talk on Wednesday. He didn't connect to the fact that would be a mediocre 100,000 per month. His fans cheered anyway.
3
Sorry Neil. While I agree with your assessment, if Trump can earlier monthly numbers as his doing then these numbers belong too him too. As my mother said to me growing up, "That's the way the cookie crumbles."
voodoo economics and taking credit for everyone else's success and blaming everyone else, always profiting and forcing others to pay for.trump's constant failures and con.
I have long thought that usually a new President is not for the most part responsible for the economy for the first year that he is in office. There are certainly exceptions. FDR within weeks restored confidence in banks, many of which would otherwise have joined the many which had failed, and in the first hundred days had major legislation not just enacted but being implemented. Jackson on the other hand destroyed the banking system and personally caused what some consider America's worst depression.
Trump of course frequently promised immediate and dramatic actions, none of which he has exerted himself to even attempt. We've just been bumping along without his involvement. Soon there may be legislation that makes major economic changes, or of course by inaction (including in the case of Health Care sabotage) Trump could let aspects of the economy go off the rails. His threatened veto of raising the debt ceiling would have immediate catastrophic effects, but he seldom does what he says he will do. Then will be soon enough to point the finger at him.
Trump of course frequently promised immediate and dramatic actions, none of which he has exerted himself to even attempt. We've just been bumping along without his involvement. Soon there may be legislation that makes major economic changes, or of course by inaction (including in the case of Health Care sabotage) Trump could let aspects of the economy go off the rails. His threatened veto of raising the debt ceiling would have immediate catastrophic effects, but he seldom does what he says he will do. Then will be soon enough to point the finger at him.
3
For years now, the NYT has been stubbornly consistent in the way it participates in the monthly ritual of reporting unemployment. The newspaper fixates on the U3 number, which is an undercount by design, unwilling to look several lines down in the BLS A-15 table to the U6 number which is much more accurate because it includes discouraged workers and long-term unemployed.
The NYT also skips the fact that at least 120,000 jobs/month need to be created to keep up with population growth. We are now at over 325 million people, an addition of 15 million just since the 2010 Census.
The NYT also skips the fact that at least 120,000 jobs/month need to be created to keep up with population growth. We are now at over 325 million people, an addition of 15 million just since the 2010 Census.
Goodness gracious!
How many different unemployment figures does BLS publish each month?
Why are so many different numbers needed?
Are the bureaucrats at BLS hiding under their desks so as not to upset the politicos?
Figures can lie, but liars can figure.
How many different unemployment figures does BLS publish each month?
Why are so many different numbers needed?
Are the bureaucrats at BLS hiding under their desks so as not to upset the politicos?
Figures can lie, but liars can figure.
1. Presidents affect jobs slowly (usually after a year or so. Obama might have started a bit quicker with the ARRA very early on).
2. There is a substantial margin of error (usually bigger than the shortfalls or "bumps" we see, so the monthly fluctuations mean little).
3. So these results mean almost nothing about Trump, other than that he hasn't done something terrible to break the economy.
4. We will see if he and the GOP congress do that with their new budget, or the debt ceiling, or "tax reform" in the next few months.
2. There is a substantial margin of error (usually bigger than the shortfalls or "bumps" we see, so the monthly fluctuations mean little).
3. So these results mean almost nothing about Trump, other than that he hasn't done something terrible to break the economy.
4. We will see if he and the GOP congress do that with their new budget, or the debt ceiling, or "tax reform" in the next few months.
Trump has a simple formula: Take credit for the good and blame Obama for the bad. In W. Va he bragged that "we" added over a million jobs in the first 7 months and the MAGA cap crowd went wild. That's true, 1.1 million jobs were added to the economy. Left unsaid was the fact that for the same period in 2016, 1.2 million jobs were added. The MAGA crowd never got the part that 100k more jobs were added in the same period under President Obama.
7
What about the revision down in the previous quarter, when President Trump boasted?
1
This article makes a lot of good points, but it fails terribly in proper acknowledgement of the importance of Presidential optics and general Leadership, which can sway economic figures and the lives of Americans quite heavily. Not everything boils down to legislation, the Fed, etc.
2
And from my standpoint, presidential optics are miserable.
1
Trump has been taking credit for all the stock market rise and jobs growth since Nov 9. He is taking credit for everything that looks good so he also gets the blame for everything that isn't looking good.
Trump and his base don't do nuance. You can't take credit for the good stuff and explain away the not so good stuff.
Trump and his base don't do nuance. You can't take credit for the good stuff and explain away the not so good stuff.
11
Trump didn't say, over and over and over again, that he would create more jobs than any other President EXCEPT the month of August. HE DIDN'T SAY THAT. In fact, he was VERY clear that jobs would #1 priority at all times. Again, Trump didn't mention a SINGLE caveat. Not even one.
So YES, Trump is to blame. He said he would do something that hasn't happened. He shouldn't have promised something that was clearly not possible. That is his fault, not the fault of the month of August or economic anomalies.
So YES, Trump is to blame. He said he would do something that hasn't happened. He shouldn't have promised something that was clearly not possible. That is his fault, not the fault of the month of August or economic anomalies.
13
Politics and statistical noise aside, there is very little real growth or prospect for the regular working folks. The whole economy has been running on credit bubble fumes since Greenspan to Bernanke and now Yellen. All we have is a consumption based economy fed by housing and stock market bubbles. Consumers are squeezed by low wages, high debt burden, low saving for retirement, ever-rising housing, healthcare, food prices while government inflation data officially shows 'low' inflation. Every financial crisis is answered by more credits, the only tool the central bankers have. Savers are hurt by low interest rate forcing people to put their money in higher risk bonds and stocks. Spreads between hi risk junk and gov bonds are the lowest they've ever been. This can only end well.
2
Twilight zone,. Given your analysis, i am sure you meant to end with "This cannot end well" to which I heartily agree!
3
I'd like to remind the author that Trump is the one who promised "yuge" job growth despite the fact that we were approaching full employment. (Thanks Obama). Maybe it isn't Trump's "fault," but he owns it because of his own promises. Besides why shouldn't Trump be judged by the same metrics as Obama? Whether Trump "caused" this or not, he is the President and he is responsible. It's time for the spoiled child in the white house to take responsibility.
24
There are two issues here. The first is whether a President gets credit or blame for the job numbers, and let's accept that he does not. The second issue is whether a President will take credit when the numbers are good, but blame someone or something else when they are not.
10
And let be clear: every President has done so. What makes a Trump different is the her actually believes it.
The President, his spokespersons, and Fox News have been "trumpeting" the wild job success he has brought about in a few short months so blame is appropriate when things head South. One only need to look at the BLS job statistics for last year to see that what has been happening since Trump's inauguration was simply a continuation of a trend that has been in place for several years rather than a magic elixir of the new administration. Alas, president's of both parties have been known to take undeserved credit when the economy is doing well and find scapegoats when it is not. Undoubtedly, to the incumbent the August numbers are the fault of Hillary's emails or the mess Obama left him.
16
Precisely.
The data tell a pretty clear story - and that story is that job and wage growth under Donald Trump(so far) are essentially the same as they were under Barack Obama. Not better, not worse. Statistically indistinguishable.
Anyone who says otherwise hasn't looked at the data, doesn't understand the data, or is attempting to deceive the public.
The data tell a pretty clear story - and that story is that job and wage growth under Donald Trump(so far) are essentially the same as they were under Barack Obama. Not better, not worse. Statistically indistinguishable.
Anyone who says otherwise hasn't looked at the data, doesn't understand the data, or is attempting to deceive the public.
11
In that Trump has claimed the jobs number are "total fiction" they really shouldn't matter. Obviously the real unemployment rate is probably between 18 and 45% and all those retired "baby boomers" aren't even looking for work.
7
Ultimately Trumps chances of a second term will depend on the economy and the economic well being if Americans. If he's able to create millions of good paying jobs like he's said and the majority of Americans are taking home bigger pay checks he'll win a second term. All other issues will be secondary.
1
In my view, starting a nuclear war with Korea wouldn't be called
"secondary"
"secondary"
1
We're still running on the Goldilocks momentum bequeathed by the Obama administration. How unlike February to July 2009. The big question is whether Trump and the Republicans will screw it up.
14
Surely full employment is impossible, and so the closer you get to that, that harder it is to improve.
1
I do not understand why economists and other policy analysts are so perplexed about weak wage growth. Labor unions used to be the chief catalyst for wage growth in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. As their power has waned, so too has wage growth. Major corporations now dictate wages and working conditions. Employees are now afraid to unionize i.e. Nissan. The days of George Meany, Walter Ruther, and Jimmy Hoffa winning wage gains are over.
18
Mike V. I have heard on NPR that unions have not stayed current with their regulations and that many hearken from Eisenhower's time. Well, it's time for an update.
If job numbers and the Dow are the measuring sticks then President Obama is the greatest President of all time. Trump is another rich white guy who finds himself on third base and tells everyone he hit the triple. The main thing holding down the economy and middle class is the big fat GOP elephant sitting on it.
43
We should feel as free and quick to criticize the President for economic mediocrity is he is to boast about excellence that doesn't exist and even if it did, would reflect no credit on him.
20
They were stronger than in July. The early sampling period causes those "strange" things that happen in August. Nothing to see here, sorry, but analysts should know better.
2
Trump made promises he knew he couldn't keep, the voters believed him, and he got into the White House. Same everywhere, sadly.
8
I blame trump for every bad thing that happens. The republicans did it to Obama so it just feels fair that I get to blame trump.
25
Ok I get it. But don't blame Trump? If it was Obama, he'd be blamed. C'mon people lets be logical and realistic. Give Obama his due and give Trump his....ummm whatever you give him....can this country for once start being truly objective!
24
This is news only to the president. Perhaps you could talk him into reading this.
Hahahahahaha! Just kidding.
Hahahahahaha! Just kidding.
8
the good numbers aren't his either.
12
"this early in an administration, things the president does have had little impact on job growth, G.D.P. or unemployment."
Ditto stock prices!
Ditto stock prices!
8
You are right. But if Trump takes credit for the stock prices and the job growth in July then he must get the blame for the lower job growth in August.
20
Clearly the impact of the Trump administration remains to be seen. But the article leaves out a big question that may have a significant impact: the cost of health insurance. The Trump administration's threats to do all it can to undermine the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) -- for example, by refusing to run ads promoting the open enrollment period -- means substantial instability remains in the health insurance marketplace. If insurance companies respond as they normally do to instability -- by raising rates -- then the cost of health insurance could rise substantially over what it would be otherwise. The effect of this could be quite harmful to the economy.
The long-term effects of Hurricane Harvey also could throw a wrinkle, if not a wrench, into the engine of growth. Many homeowners in Houston don't have flood insurance, which will substantially complicate their rebuilding. Normally, a natural disaster can be a boon to the economy, but it's not clear if that will come about in this case.
And then there's the instability in Washington more generally. Markets prefer stability. But with a president who prefers chaos and seems to like the idea that people never know what he's going to do next, businesses that otherwise might be inclined to invest may hold off, hampering growth.
All this means that the future is very cloudy, indeed.
The long-term effects of Hurricane Harvey also could throw a wrinkle, if not a wrench, into the engine of growth. Many homeowners in Houston don't have flood insurance, which will substantially complicate their rebuilding. Normally, a natural disaster can be a boon to the economy, but it's not clear if that will come about in this case.
And then there's the instability in Washington more generally. Markets prefer stability. But with a president who prefers chaos and seems to like the idea that people never know what he's going to do next, businesses that otherwise might be inclined to invest may hold off, hampering growth.
All this means that the future is very cloudy, indeed.
16
Nah, they will get Federal subs. There is no wrinkle. Harvey is overrated. Wages started their spike during the September 2005 Katrina aftermath due to higher gas prices.
Good analysis. Low labor participation is now a legacy of Obama and his self-serving Fed. For 8 years they transferred trillions of tax dollars and lost interest on savings from the middle classes and seniors to Wall Street, suppressing spending, labor participation, and wages for all but the wealthy, while simultaneously increasing income inequality. This policy has become a structural feature of the economy that Trump has not yet addressed. Certainly the 1% hope it is now the "new normal".
6
You didn't notice the low labor force participation during the administration of George W Bush? RC, go look at the numbers. It didn't start with Obama. It peaked with Clinton in 2000, and has trended downwards since. See: https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2016/article/labor-force-participation-what...
Furthermore, you may remember that we had "the worst recession since the Depression in the 1930s" at the end of George W. Bush's time in office. If you had been reading the NY Times columnist Paul Krugman, you might know that Fed Policy did not "suppress spending."
Furthermore, you may remember that we had "the worst recession since the Depression in the 1930s" at the end of George W. Bush's time in office. If you had been reading the NY Times columnist Paul Krugman, you might know that Fed Policy did not "suppress spending."
25
The abnormally high labor participation of between 1980 and 2000 was mostly a result of demographics and the increased participation of women in the work force that resulted from the decline of organized labor and the end of AFDC (welfare). The LPR for men has been steadily declining since 1948 (as far back as easily retrieved records extend). This is mostly due to Social Security, both Old Age and Disability Insurance. For women it peaked in 2000.
No tax dollars were transferred to Wall Street. The Fed emergency programs and TARP transferred borrowed money to banks large and small and got it all back with large profits for the American people. For example, the annualized rate of return on the investment in Goldman Sachs was 22.3%.
Most of the interest earned in this country goes to the top 0.1%. The huge blow to the middle class was the housing bust. Even in the fourth income quintile, home ownership accounts for about 48% of wealth. Low interest rates were designed to help the housing sector to recover. The Fed poured $1.75 trillion into mortgage loans that financed owner-occupied one to four family homes, almost all of them middle class because of caps on the loan amounts. Even over the last year, because Americans move and refinance frequently, the Fed has reinvested $365 billion in new mortgage loans.
No tax dollars were transferred to Wall Street. The Fed emergency programs and TARP transferred borrowed money to banks large and small and got it all back with large profits for the American people. For example, the annualized rate of return on the investment in Goldman Sachs was 22.3%.
Most of the interest earned in this country goes to the top 0.1%. The huge blow to the middle class was the housing bust. Even in the fourth income quintile, home ownership accounts for about 48% of wealth. Low interest rates were designed to help the housing sector to recover. The Fed poured $1.75 trillion into mortgage loans that financed owner-occupied one to four family homes, almost all of them middle class because of caps on the loan amounts. Even over the last year, because Americans move and refinance frequently, the Fed has reinvested $365 billion in new mortgage loans.
3
"Don't blame Trump"?
He took credit when the last release of job numbers were high. However that was due to Obama. Why shouldn't we blame Trump for the weak job numbers now? He's the President and he's to make America great again (after he builds the wall to keep the hoards out!).
He took credit when the last release of job numbers were high. However that was due to Obama. Why shouldn't we blame Trump for the weak job numbers now? He's the President and he's to make America great again (after he builds the wall to keep the hoards out!).
40
I wonder how the US Bureau of Labor Statistics will hand the impact of Hurricane Harvey on the economy in the short and long terms.
Bust while all of the workers are out, and then boom when they rebuild?
One thing is for sure, if we focus on month to month employment numbers, it's exactly like the old adage of the three blind men, each feeling a little piece of the elephant, and unable to determine what the heck they have on their hands.
Bust while all of the workers are out, and then boom when they rebuild?
One thing is for sure, if we focus on month to month employment numbers, it's exactly like the old adage of the three blind men, each feeling a little piece of the elephant, and unable to determine what the heck they have on their hands.
4
A nice try to be fair towards presidents but, after eight years of hearing conservatives disparaging Obama as a job-killing president, don't expect anything different for Trump. Trump, after all, was an active participant in that disparagement.
I do wonder about the lower numbers for the 25-54 year old group. That is prime family rearing time and it would be interesting to see if one spouse is choosing to stay home to raise the kids. With wages so low and day care so expensive, it could be the economics no longer work for both spouses to work unless they are fortunate enough to have higher paying jobs.
I do wonder about the lower numbers for the 25-54 year old group. That is prime family rearing time and it would be interesting to see if one spouse is choosing to stay home to raise the kids. With wages so low and day care so expensive, it could be the economics no longer work for both spouses to work unless they are fortunate enough to have higher paying jobs.
26
Its demographics. The Boomers began pulling out of this index in 2001 and the peak generational top of the Boomers occurred in 1953.
I understand that affects the overall job market, but I was referring to this:
"(The single worst piece of news in the August numbers is that the proportion of those 25 to 54 working actually fell by 0.3 of a percentage point, to 78.4 percent.)"
This age group continues to be weak in job participation.
"(The single worst piece of news in the August numbers is that the proportion of those 25 to 54 working actually fell by 0.3 of a percentage point, to 78.4 percent.)"
This age group continues to be weak in job participation.
The headline U-3 unemployment only counts those actively seeking work as in the labor force and unemployed. If the labor force participation rate, especially for prime working-age males ages 25-54, had followed its typical cyclical pattern, the unemployment rate would now be well above 5.0%. See: http://seekingalpha.com/article/3342635 historically labor force participation has behaved cyclically in the midst of a slightly declining trend. Participation tends to fall during recessions and rise during recoveries as job prospects improve. But in the current economic cycle the participation rate fell during the recession and has mostly continued falling throughout the recovery to date.
Dubious and fraudulent disability claims have vastly increased the number of those collecting disability with commensurate decreases in labor force participation and the unemployment rate. A segment on CBS "60 Minutes" last season quoted employees of the Social Security Administration and administrative law judges who asserted that lawyers are recruiting millions of people to make fraudulent disability claims. One such judge said "if the American public knew what was going on in our system half would be outraged and the other half would apply for benefits"..."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3776156
Dubious and fraudulent disability claims have vastly increased the number of those collecting disability with commensurate decreases in labor force participation and the unemployment rate. A segment on CBS "60 Minutes" last season quoted employees of the Social Security Administration and administrative law judges who asserted that lawyers are recruiting millions of people to make fraudulent disability claims. One such judge said "if the American public knew what was going on in our system half would be outraged and the other half would apply for benefits"..."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3776156
2
Funny how conservatives all wanted to talk about the "participation rate" when Obama was presiding over job growth, but now that Trump is president, "participation rate" has magically become irrelevant.
You can't have it both ways - if you give Trump credit for a half-year of job growth after he inherited an expanding economy, you can't deny Obama credit for seven years of job growth after he inherited an imploding economy.
Same with the Dow - if Trump gets credit for a 10 percent increase during his presidency so far, then Obama gets credit for the 150 percent increase during his presidency.
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
You can't have it both ways - if you give Trump credit for a half-year of job growth after he inherited an expanding economy, you can't deny Obama credit for seven years of job growth after he inherited an imploding economy.
Same with the Dow - if Trump gets credit for a 10 percent increase during his presidency so far, then Obama gets credit for the 150 percent increase during his presidency.
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
72
"Could it be the Congress for failing to pass tax cuts on average Americans?"
Answer: While a few dollars more per month for a struggling family would certainly be welcome in the short run, that won't solve the structural Macro Problem of extreme income disparity. Plus, those "tax cut" dollars will be taken from critically necessary infrastructure and public works projects, which in turn reduces decent pay jobs.
"Could it be the illegal immigrants?"
Answer: If anyone can prove that immigrants, legal or otherwise, are stealing jobs that existent Americans truly want to do, I will wait right here for your data.
We just had our pool completely refurbished. Those workers were all Mexican immigrants. They labored in the blazing hot Arizona sun each day, in a dirty, dusty environment. I was in awe of their work ethic.
I know that existent Americans also have a strong work ethic, although I personally cannot name one who would work that hard, under those conditions, for more than a few days.
"or those on unemployment benefits who see no advantage in having a job that does not improve their situation by much if they get a low paying job"
Answer: Obviously, you are ignorant of the fact that Unemployment Insurance is time limited, and that recipients must document job seeking every week that those meager, subsistence payments are made.
There are zero "career" recipients of Unemployment benefits.
Answer: While a few dollars more per month for a struggling family would certainly be welcome in the short run, that won't solve the structural Macro Problem of extreme income disparity. Plus, those "tax cut" dollars will be taken from critically necessary infrastructure and public works projects, which in turn reduces decent pay jobs.
"Could it be the illegal immigrants?"
Answer: If anyone can prove that immigrants, legal or otherwise, are stealing jobs that existent Americans truly want to do, I will wait right here for your data.
We just had our pool completely refurbished. Those workers were all Mexican immigrants. They labored in the blazing hot Arizona sun each day, in a dirty, dusty environment. I was in awe of their work ethic.
I know that existent Americans also have a strong work ethic, although I personally cannot name one who would work that hard, under those conditions, for more than a few days.
"or those on unemployment benefits who see no advantage in having a job that does not improve their situation by much if they get a low paying job"
Answer: Obviously, you are ignorant of the fact that Unemployment Insurance is time limited, and that recipients must document job seeking every week that those meager, subsistence payments are made.
There are zero "career" recipients of Unemployment benefits.
18
Illegal immigrants take many jobs that Americans could do. Many of them are folding towels at gyms, or mopping the men's room floor. Somewhat higher wages could attract unskilled American workers into these jobs.
"Somewhat higher wages could attract unskilled American workers into these jobs" Bingo! It's the employers who refuse to pay a penny more than needed for the cheapest labor who are more to blame. Employers who know full well the status of those they employ. WIthout cheap immigrant labor hot, dirty jobs just don't get done.
8
And somehow, though they are breaking the law, we see scant reports of arrests and detention of those employers. As it's often the case, follow the money. We're spending millions to detain people who would have less incentive to be in the country if the employment laws were enforced. But that goes against the GOP base and doesn't make headline-grabbing stories.
1
I think it might be possible to attain 3% growth if we could just return to 3-5% annual merit raises for employees. I don't know what happened to those raises, especially when so many corporations are flush. Much of corporate profit used to be rotated back into investing in the business. Now I don't know what happens to it - CEO bonuses and raises?
26
Stick buybacks, too.
4
Greedy hedge funders and corporate investors who benefit from "maximizing shareholder value." Employees have no voice at the table, of course the 1% will continue to look out for the 1%.
1
With the credit also goes the debit. Trump is more than eager to float when it suits him, so why not take the lumps?
5
Wait a sec--Trump "violated a rule?" Naaah, he'd never do that!
7
This article doesn't go far enough. The US economy is private-sector driven, full stop. Employers don't hire when an election goes their way (or against them). They hire when demand stretches their capacity to the point that they cannot effectively fill orders. (That is also why job growth lags economic growth.) The White House's (governments', et al) influence on any of those factors is much more limited than this presumes. They can screw things up for sure, but there is little evidence they have the ability to fine tune the economy to dial up hiring and wage growth in the way reporting often suggests.
4
The evidence is the reporting.
I would agree President's and their Administration don't have too much to do with the economy in the early months. Nor do they long term if they just muddle along. But if they enact legislation that adversely affects it that's another matter. Tax cuts for the wealthiest do nothing to help growth, actually hurt it. Deporting millions of hard working immigrants doesn't help, a ballooning military budget doesn't help, ignoring climate change doesn't help, tariffs on other countries doesn't help, isolationist mentality doesn't help, and so forth.
When I think of the this Republican Administration and where we're headed, Governor Brownback of Kansas comes to mind. Under his governance and their Republican Congress they have just about bankrupt the State.
When I think of the this Republican Administration and where we're headed, Governor Brownback of Kansas comes to mind. Under his governance and their Republican Congress they have just about bankrupt the State.
34
If not Trump to blame than who for weak August job numbers? Could it be the Congress for failing to pass tax cuts on average Americans? Could it be the illegal immigrants? Could it be the trading partners with which we have high trade deficits? or could it be Americans who are not finding the right jobs with the right pay or those on unemployment benefits who see no advantage in having a job that does not improve their situation by much if they get a low paying job? Also in some sectors there are probably plenty of jobs but not sufficient right fit of skills for those job. Could reducing the work permits and permanent visas be the answer? So many factors are in play that there is no simple explanation.
4
The important number is absent in this article: How many jobs need to be created each month to keep even with population growth?
10
I appreciate the solid academics of this article, as well as the intelligent commentary following.
Please allow me to submit my Phoenix Working Class neighborhood data:
Counting clockwise around our cul du sac,
Elderly Widow, Retired//Couple, 40 hour accounting job home based sales business (that's us)//Elderly female, retired after corporate layoff at age 62//Middle aged couple, one full time, one home based sales business//Middle aged couple, both work small landscape business//30 something couple, one full time Union job, one does part time bookkeeping//Middle aged couple, one full time state govt job, one unemployable (male) due to alcoholism//Middle aged couple//One part time store clerk, one unlicensed "odd job" plumber//Middle aged divorcée, two part time jobs//Middle aged divorcée, full time store clerk//30 something couple, one full time security guard, one part time medical office clerk//
My point: the USA has morphed into an extremely fragmented labor force by necessity, not by choice.
Capitalism in its current form is failing the regular folks.
The former model of one family member working (usually the male) is dead and gone. Half of America is struggling to survive every day.
That, my friends, is precisely why an otherwise objectionable ogre such as Drumpf was able to inhabit our White House.
The "Regular People" are scared. They fear tomorrow because it promises to be even worse for "them" than today.
Please allow me to submit my Phoenix Working Class neighborhood data:
Counting clockwise around our cul du sac,
Elderly Widow, Retired//Couple, 40 hour accounting job home based sales business (that's us)//Elderly female, retired after corporate layoff at age 62//Middle aged couple, one full time, one home based sales business//Middle aged couple, both work small landscape business//30 something couple, one full time Union job, one does part time bookkeeping//Middle aged couple, one full time state govt job, one unemployable (male) due to alcoholism//Middle aged couple//One part time store clerk, one unlicensed "odd job" plumber//Middle aged divorcée, two part time jobs//Middle aged divorcée, full time store clerk//30 something couple, one full time security guard, one part time medical office clerk//
My point: the USA has morphed into an extremely fragmented labor force by necessity, not by choice.
Capitalism in its current form is failing the regular folks.
The former model of one family member working (usually the male) is dead and gone. Half of America is struggling to survive every day.
That, my friends, is precisely why an otherwise objectionable ogre such as Drumpf was able to inhabit our White House.
The "Regular People" are scared. They fear tomorrow because it promises to be even worse for "them" than today.
59
Exactly, and yet they voted against the party that really cared about all of these things because Elmer Gantry came to town and set up a tent full of red hats made in China and told them he was bringing back their jobs...just not the ones made by his or his daughter's companies.
8
Dear Cactus Bill, Well said. The same is true in many neighborhoods in Seattle despite our booming I.T. economy.
What the congress has yet to realize is that the anger out here is very, very real and in large part is due to congress having become part of the "elite crowd" in our democracy. And the elite are very good at taking care of their own.
We've been left out by our own government.
What the congress has yet to realize is that the anger out here is very, very real and in large part is due to congress having become part of the "elite crowd" in our democracy. And the elite are very good at taking care of their own.
We've been left out by our own government.
12
Well, what better jobs in the current economy are these people qualified to do? As things are now, few workers with minimal skills can find much of a job.
2
Au contraire mon frère, the amazing, stupendous wonderful man (he told us so) with the best brain (he told us so) is decidedly responsible for job creation. And lest you think the August jobs numbers are weak, think again.
Donald created 300,000 jobs in August (wait for the tweet), but fake news like the NYT isn't reporting that! And they aren't reporting alternative facts which would explain the discrepancy between the 300,000 jobs created and what is being reported to the public.
The economy has been going gang busters since Donald's inauguration, but crooked Hillary has been deleting the data! And if that's not enough, Obama has Kenyan Muslims working undercover inside the Department of Labor. Only FOX reports these facts!
Donald's supporters know the truth first hand (someone please explain what "first hand" means to Donald). Since February they have been getting so many coal mine job offers in the mail that they burn the offers and envelopes in their potbelly stoves to heat their homes. They don't bother responding to these offers because they are already happily employed, getting pay raises every week and will add to a travel industry boom when they can decide whether to take a cruise around the world or build a vacation home in Hawaii.
Who knew that Donald would deliver on his promises!
Donald created 300,000 jobs in August (wait for the tweet), but fake news like the NYT isn't reporting that! And they aren't reporting alternative facts which would explain the discrepancy between the 300,000 jobs created and what is being reported to the public.
The economy has been going gang busters since Donald's inauguration, but crooked Hillary has been deleting the data! And if that's not enough, Obama has Kenyan Muslims working undercover inside the Department of Labor. Only FOX reports these facts!
Donald's supporters know the truth first hand (someone please explain what "first hand" means to Donald). Since February they have been getting so many coal mine job offers in the mail that they burn the offers and envelopes in their potbelly stoves to heat their homes. They don't bother responding to these offers because they are already happily employed, getting pay raises every week and will add to a travel industry boom when they can decide whether to take a cruise around the world or build a vacation home in Hawaii.
Who knew that Donald would deliver on his promises!
52
Job numbers are always reported in the same way. You will note that not only did Trump not create 300,000 jobs, 41,000 were deducted as is always done in the month following the numbers, either up or down, and his went down. When Trump delivers on a promise you think he made to you specifically, let us know.
6
@Beaz
I think he was kidding. @Jabarry, perhaps a tag? ;)
I think he was kidding. @Jabarry, perhaps a tag? ;)
1
It is absolutely incredible that conservative pundit Neil Irwin refuses to give credit for the economy's successes to Barack Obama. Irwin claims that "presidents in general have less control over the economy than headlines tend to suggest." But President Obama did, indeed, have a major influence on the economy, and quickly. He saved the American auto industry, propped up the banking system, and pushed through the federal stimulus bill, saving the American economy in the process.
Thanks to his economic policies, Obama left office with the longest string of consecutive months of job growth in history. President Obama did make a major impact on the economy. How very sad that Neil Irwin refuses to give him credit.
Thanks to his economic policies, Obama left office with the longest string of consecutive months of job growth in history. President Obama did make a major impact on the economy. How very sad that Neil Irwin refuses to give him credit.
102
Rather than look at some deep analytical reasoning for the ebb and flow of such data, I tend to look at things such as huge banners on external factory walls stating "Now Hiring!" And, if I have to choke on analytics, I tend to look at what is happening with respect to the unemployment rate in my local area and the scramble to re-create vocational programs aimed at trades occupations which are in a world of hurt due to a lack of employable people. And finally, I believe that the business with the banner is able to hire due to a call for its products as opposed to any politician, anywhere, taking credit for the business's economic improvement.
4
My favorite toy is the U-6 unemployment indicator. If one ignores the noise, the general trend is still downward. Looking back of the last 30 or so years, you can see that it generally takes several months (6 or so) to determine whether a recession (indicated by a steady increase in unemployment) has started. I may be a cynic about human behavior, but I think this is generally beyond many people's attention spans. However, not being a fan of the conservative plan to dismantle the government for fun and profit, I'd certainly advocate beating them over the heads with it.
23
You are defintely not a cynic. My guess is that the average attention span of a typical American is 60 seconds.
For true blue American patriots: 15 seconds
Donald Trump : 5 seconds
For true blue American patriots: 15 seconds
Donald Trump : 5 seconds
3
Trump blamed Obama when the jobs created numbers were weak, or even when they were far stronger than now. Trump has been in office for 7+ months. He is responsible for these job numbers and low wage growth since he has done nothing to create new jobs or increase wages as he promised.
24
If we don't blame Trump for low job numbers, we shouldn't give him credit for high job numbers. Right?
53
Lowering corporate tax rates would not result in any significant additional hiring or growth in wages or output. The entire incidence of a corporate income tax falls on the owners of the corporation, to the extent they are pension funds or other institutions the incidence falls on them. If a corporate income tax is a percentage of pre-tax income, none of the corporate income tax can ever be passed on to employees or customers. That is because any hiring, wage or price decision that maximizes pre-tax profits would also maximize after-tax profits.
If a profit-maximizing rational corporation is charging $10 for an item, that is because it is more profitable to charge $10 than $9.99 or $10.01 taking into account market demand and competitive pressures. Thus, $10 is the price at which pre-tax profits are maximized. If a corporate income tax is levied or changed as a percent of pre-tax profits, $10 is still the price that maximizes both pre-tax and after-tax profits. Thus, the tax change can not cause any change in the price and is not passed on to consumers. The same applies to a corporation that is paying a wage that maximized its pretax profits, which is also the wage that maximizes its after-tax profits. Likewise, the level of output or number of employees that maximizes pretax profits is also the level of output or number of employees that maximize after-tax profits..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4102235
If a profit-maximizing rational corporation is charging $10 for an item, that is because it is more profitable to charge $10 than $9.99 or $10.01 taking into account market demand and competitive pressures. Thus, $10 is the price at which pre-tax profits are maximized. If a corporate income tax is levied or changed as a percent of pre-tax profits, $10 is still the price that maximizes both pre-tax and after-tax profits. Thus, the tax change can not cause any change in the price and is not passed on to consumers. The same applies to a corporation that is paying a wage that maximized its pretax profits, which is also the wage that maximizes its after-tax profits. Likewise, the level of output or number of employees that maximizes pretax profits is also the level of output or number of employees that maximize after-tax profits..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4102235
3
Excellent writing as usual. I agree that the trend of past employment gains continues, but am puzzled Like Irwin by the 0.1 percent increase in wages and the 0.3 percentage point drop in the share of 25-54 year old working. So annually wages are rising by 1.2 percent while inflation chugs along at 1.6 percent so real wages continue to fall. I understand that we baby boomers are retiring/leaving in droves from employment, but not those 25-54 years old? I think the economy has reached a point of stability and stagnation and that the degree of un or underemployment is much much higher than appreciated. A big stimulus program on public infrastructure is needed as is continued low interest rates and stimulative monetary policy. None of which will likely happen.
15
These long thoughtful intellectual discussions are accurate and insightful. But they are not going to win the Democrats any votes when Trump, Rove, et. al. proved that the American populace needs simple declaratives, even if profoundly false. The Democrats should do what the Republicans would do if the situation were reversed: Loudly proclaim the President's failure.
29
Rove? Wasn't he an important political figure in the late twentieth century?
Nope. Rove was Bush's brain, and Bush was president 2001-2009, 21st century all the way, including the wars we're still stuck in and the Great Recession that tanked the economy. Those effects are certainly this century - and we're still pouring billions into Afghanistan. The shadow of Rove is very much alive, as is the man himself.
1
Good article. Remember, however, that a sudden increase in economic activity due to Presidential action could easily be a negative sign. In particular, huge deficits caused by unfunded tax cuts or government spending would be a bad sign, even though it would be very popular for a while. So would a return to the unregulated financial business practices that led up to the last crash.
34