Unemployment rate falls, crickets chirp
This morning, all of the regular idiots at CNBC were giddy with pleasure that the unemployment rate was expected to rise as the Bureau of Labor Statistics were scheduled to to release it’s weekly report. How terrible they must feel that unemployment fell back instead;
Employers cut far fewer jobs in April than in recent months and the unemployment rate dropped to 5 percent, a better-than-expected showing that nonetheless reveals strains in the nation’s labor market.
For the fourth month in a row, the economy lost jobs, the Labor Department reported Friday. But in April the losses totaled 20,000, an improvement from the 81,000 reductions in payrolls logged in March. Job losses for both February and March turned out to be a bit deeper than previously reported.
So, let’s recap – as late as last week, all of the “experts” were saying we’re in the middle of a recession (which is defined as two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth), yet the GDP actually increased .6% last quarter (even though growth was anemic, it was still growth) and the unemployment rate falls by .2%. Oh, did I mention that the dollar got stronger yesterday and that oil prices fell (actually, oil prices fell because the dollar got stronger)?
I wonder what they’re saying on CNBC now?
As with your other post about gas and food prices, you are dealing only with half-truths. I fail to see how a few government statistics justifies whether or not we are in a recession.
Do you know how GDP is calculated? It helps that the items used in measuring GDP can be manipulated, don’t include items like oil and groceries, and oh yes, have a huge chunk reserved for government spending. Careful when cheering for GDP figures and tax cuts as you cannot possibly sustain both and enjoy a stronger domestic currency. It’s like a dog chasing his tail (sort of).
You’re mixing two different sets of data. There was a net Loss of jobs- albeit Only 20,000 as opposed to the 70,000 expected. This is clearly still bad.
Where as the unemployment rate (which is derived from a separate process) fell 0.1%
Clearly these 2 numbers don’t jive. The reason is both are miniscule when viewed on a large scale. In effect they were both nearly flat and within the margin of error.
The economy has been buoyed (or more correctly kept just barely flat) by sacrificing the dollar and encouraging inflation.
The long term outlook is still utterly bad.
Wow… You two are a real couple of “glass is half empty” people aren’t ya? I don’t, in any way, speak for John, but I’m guessing these are the exact statistics that CNBC would have crowed over had they gone the other way. The point is media bias, not economics 101.
Isn’t Larry Kudlow’s show on CNBC? He has to be the most blindly biased talking head in media. But at least he’s biased in the direction you agree with.
John,
Here are the top three stories at CNBC:
1. Whiff of Recovery Stirs Hunger for Tech
2. Jobs Report Fuels Hopes Economy Has Hit Bottom
3. Dollar’s Rally, Helped by Fed, Is Expected To Continue
Seems to blow your comments out of the water doesn’t it?
Jonn wrote: Huh? I’m always glad when the media is reporting what they should report. In this case, they are reporting the truth…that’s not always the case. Is it? out of the water? No, not really.
Jonn,
I have to agree with Tom here. CNBC did pretty much the exact opposite of what you said they would.
But actually the media over-reacts to whatever the “now” story is. And every media outlet usually does it in concert. But it works both ways my friend.
Jonn wrote: Yeah, OK, they got me…but when they were anticipating the lower unemployment rate, there were sure some happy faces all around the table.
Reporters fail to cause more unemployment, after failing to talk America into a recession (2 strikes so far) One more and they lose, while America wins.
Maybe they don’t have anybody listening to them anymore, or they’ve lost ALL their credibility.