Unemployment still 8.2% in June 2012 !

Still 8.2%

Only 80,000 net jobs !!

Average Weekly Hours Worked: 34.5 hours

Very weak again.

Sideways donkey economy

Now what ?

U.S. payrolls expanded by 80,000 net positions in June as the unemployment rate remained unchanged at 8.2 percent, new data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows.

Below, key output from the report.

Net Change: +80K

Private Payroll Change: +84K

Manufacturing Change: +11K

Unemployment Rate: 8.2 percent

Average Hourly Earnings (MoM): +0.3 percent

Average Weekly Hours Worked: 34.5 hours

source

from CNBC

The U.S. economy created just 80,000 jobs in June and the unemployment rate held steady at 8.2 percent, reflecting continued slow growth in the economy with the presidential election just four months away.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics said private payrolls increased 84,000, while the government lost 4,000 jobs. Economists expected job growth of about 100,000 and the unemployment rate to be unchanged, though many had increased their forecasts based on some recent indicators.

With yet another month of weak employment growth, the second quarter marks the weakest three-month period in two years.

May's weak initial 69,000 report was revised upward to 77,000, which made the June number essentially flat.

CNBC article


But wait !! ..... the "good news"...

There were a few bright spots: The overall work week edged higher by 0.1 hour to 34.5 hours and average hourly earnings grew 6 cents to $23.50.

WOW !!!!

And while they may have revised May 2012 numbers from +69,000 to +77,000, I love how they failed to mention that April 2012 numbers were revised from +77,000 to +68,000.

Now throw in the fact that 130,191 people were laid off in May 2012 and it all means squat. I bet when the June 2012 mass layoff report comes out at the end of the month, the number of layoffs will be even higher than May.

reply to post by jutes


Stop spamming every thread with your 1 line url.

reply to post by xuenchen


It looks like Obama - stagnation - is here to stay.

ObamaCare uncertainty is like a dark cloud hovering over the Fortune 500.

Originally posted by Deetermined
And while they may have revised May 2012 numbers from +69,000 to +77,000, I love how they failed to mention that April 2012 numbers were revised from +77,000 to +68,000.

Now throw in the fact that 130,191 people were laid off in May 2012 and it all means squat. I bet when the June 2012 mass layoff report comes out at the end of the month, the number of layoffs will be even higher than May.

Yes, now everyone is expecting - another - revision to this job report.

Obamas economic policies have failed.

It's hard to put lipstick on this pig.

Keeping in mind that the number would be ever INCREASING if not for the fact that the administration continues to drop people from the pool of employable adults. I'm not exactly certain of the number, but believe it to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 million working adults no longer being counted as part of the labor pool during the past year!

I believe that president asshat claimed that if he couldn't turn this ship around in 3 years, it would be a one-term proposition. here's hoping this is the one promise he keeps!

Originally posted by kozmo
Keeping in mind that the number would be ever INCREASING if not for the fact that the administration continues to drop people from the pool of employable adults. I'm not exactly certain of the number, but believe it to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 million working adults no longer being counted as part of the labor pool during the past year!

I believe that president asshat claimed that if he couldn't turn this ship around in 3 years, it would be a one-term proposition. here's hoping this is the one promise he keeps!

It's looking good for Mitt Romney.

Rasmussen has him ahead:

Romney 47%

Obama 44%

The undecided usually vote for the challenger - Mitt Romney

Originally posted by kozmo
Keeping in mind that the number would be ever INCREASING if not for the fact that the administration continues to drop people from the pool of employable adults. I'm not exactly certain of the number, but believe it to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 million working adults no longer being counted as part of the labor pool during the past year!

I believe that president asshat claimed that if he couldn't turn this ship around in 3 years, it would be a one-term proposition. here's hoping this is the one promise he keeps!

The BLS has other unemployment rates ---

The "official" one is the U3 @ 8.2%

BLS

June 2012


U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)
8.2


U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers
8.7


U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force
9.7


U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force
14.9


NOTE: Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

you can create charts here:
BLS chart maker

reply to post by xuenchen


According to government statistics if the same number of people in 2007 were

seeking work today, then the unemployment rate would be around 11%.

Millions of Americans have simply given up and dropped out of the workforce.

And the sad part is that its not that most of the companies that "could" hire have no money. Its that people are afraid to spend it with the economy the way it is. For instance, I worked for a large gas processing company in a engineering group. We did a huge lay off in 2008 and it was mainly because our customers who had ordered plants, or that we had bids out to decided not to build right now. They wanted to wait till the economy got better to spend that money. They still have the money, just no spending right now so everyone depending on that is laid off. As soon as we see a real turn around. Not a fabricated one for the news sources I think the pocket books will open back up and we will see it come back quickly. We are still a great nation and the money isnt gone. Its just in a holding pattern waiting. Lets just hope if we can get the stagnant water out of the white house soon that turn around will happen. Because frankly, it is starting to smell.

Originally posted by TheTardis
And the sad part is that its not that most of the companies that "could" hire have no money. Its that people are afraid to spend it with the economy the way it is. For instance, I worked for a large gas processing company in a engineering group. We did a huge lay off in 2008 and it was mainly because our customers who had ordered plants, or that we had bids out to decided not to build right now. They wanted to wait till the economy got better to spend that money. They still have the money, just no spending right now so everyone depending on that is laid off. As soon as we see a real turn around. Not a fabricated one for the news sources I think the pocket books will open back up and we will see it come back quickly. We are still a great nation and the money isnt gone. Its just in a holding pattern waiting. Lets just hope if we can get the stagnant water out of the white house soon that turn around will happen. Because frankly, it is starting to smell.

Welcome to Obama stagnation.

Who wants 4 more years of this ???

Originally posted by xuenchen

Originally posted by kozmo
Keeping in mind that the number would be ever INCREASING if not for the fact that the administration continues to drop people from the pool of employable adults. I'm not exactly certain of the number, but believe it to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 million working adults no longer being counted as part of the labor pool during the past year!

I believe that president asshat claimed that if he couldn't turn this ship around in 3 years, it would be a one-term proposition. here's hoping this is the one promise he keeps!

The BLS has other unemployment rates ---

The "official" one is the U3 @ 8.2%

BLS

June 2012


U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)
8.2


U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers
8.7


U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force
9.7


U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force
14.9


NOTE: Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

you can create charts here:
BLS chart maker

I'm osrry you haven't kept up with my other posts, but I am intimately familiar with the BLS system for calculating unemployment. The BLS number is based on the pool of available working adults - that is the CORE number BLS uses for calucating it's U-x rates. Do you know where that number comes from? Hint: NOT the BLS, but the DOL.

Hence, when the DOL REDUCES the overall pool of working adults at the SAME RATE as job losses, the U-x numbers stay the same; hence this RIDICULOUS 8.2% number! If you added those adults, who still exist and want jobs, back into the labor pool, the U-3 number would be much closer to 12%!!! But alas, Odumbass certainly couldn't afford to honestly admit that he has provided over the MOST job losses of ANY president EVER, now could he - especially not during an election year!? For Pete's sake... even our job gains have not kept up with population growth which would mean an ever increasing unemployment number if net losses were ZERO - and they haven't been.

If you begin with the premise: "Number (Statistics) are like prisoners... you can get them to tell you anything if you torture them enough!"

reply to post by kozmo


Expect a - revision - to the numbers on Thursday.

The Bureau of Labor is working overtime in 2012 cooking the books.

(It's not doing any good)

I expect that 80,000 number to be revised down to 73,000 on Thursday. Lets

just see how close i am.

Originally posted by xuenchen
Still 8.2%

Only 80,000 net jobs !!

Average Weekly Hours Worked: 34.5 hours

Very weak again.

Sideways donkey economy

Now what ?

Well it's on par with the UK and better than most of the European Union and it is a hell of an improvement from where this "Great Recession" bottomed out.

How about we elect the party that was responsible for the recession in the first place and thier nominee who governed Massachusetts into 47th place in the nation for job growth?

That should speed things up!!

Or maybe we should shout the sky is falling in hopes that Americans will forget the misery that the GOP caused and elect a bankers puppet?

It's a "recovery" and by any economists measure we are "recovering". Doesn't mean we are going to dance the Fandango this month, but we are getting better...

...now on to "Oh no! The Sky is fallling!! Mitt Romney...Will you save us?"

Romney: "I will save you!...but you must promise to never ask that "gotcha question"...ya know, like..."how?"

Anyone who thinks the current economic downturn in the US is at the hands of just one party is a buffoon of partisan proportions. This is all by design. The US economy has been running on one bubble or another since the mid 90's. Never-ending economic expansion has an end. We reached it in about 96. Everything since then has been based on bubble speculation like the dotcom market under clinton or the housing bubble under bush. Thsi wont change under Romney. Heck, even if Paul were elected, his policies would largely destroy what is left of the us economy. There is no solution.

And we will just keep adding more service jobs, and not enuff innovative research and development.
We are now a nation of Walmart greeters in more or less words. We pretty much just market the product from other countries to make money off their sales. And what little we do make here, is either too costly per how and what it's made of that Americans can hardly afford it.

We need to have another industrial revolution, or we will just turn into the convenient store of the world.

America has more useless jobs per person than any other country in the world, and yes certain jobs are completely and utterly useless yet pay insanely well, and then you have the jobs that if no one did would drive a locale to a halt but pay about the same as a Mcdonald's manager.

To me, it's not a matter of jobs, but a matter of how everything is valued / paid for / worked for.

If you naturally get results based on how much hardwork and skill is done, than a job should do the same.

All boils down to the cost of living, if you could actually support yourself from a minimum wage job, then we wouldn't have much to complain about then would we.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, the unemployment rate is going to be "re-branded" as the new normal.

Is high unemployment the 'new normal' even in a recovery?

www.mcclatchydc.com...

High Unemployment the New Normal

www.ncpa.org...

Is High Unemployment the New Normal?

seekingalpha.com...

As economy struggles, is high unemployment the new normal?

wraltechwire.com...