That 80,000 job loss number for released by the Labor Department earlier this morning represents the biggest decline in jobs in five years, although it's only slightly worse than the 76,000 jobs lost in each of January and February. If we needed any more evidence that we're in a recession, well here it is.
Comments
3
Posted by guest, Apr 04, 2008 10:28AM
List of things that don't have anything to do with what markets do, no matter what Bloomberg's headline writers think:
1. Monthly employment numbers
2. Purchasing managers' index
3. Testimony to Congress
4. GDP figures
5. Surveys of economists
The market is a future discounting mechanism, people. Last month's employment number is really fucking irrelevant to decisions you make today.
5
Posted by guest, Apr 04, 2008 10:38AM
@10:28 - to know where you are going, it can be very useful to know where you've come from and the direction you've recently been traveling in. A crystal ball is better but apparently most people don't have them.
6
Posted by Anonymous, Apr 04, 2008 10:47AM
I"m surprised at how little discussion there is on the American Axle impact to these numbers.
7
Posted by guest, Apr 04, 2008 10:56AM
@10:28 - a future discounting mechanism based on what information set? Today's...
8
Posted by diablo, Apr 04, 2008 11:43AM
Nothing to see here. Move on, Carney continue your vacation:
Lazear Says He `Doesn't Focus Too Much' on U.S. Jobless Rate
By Betty Liu and Shobhana Chandra
April 4 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush's chief economist said he's not paying too much attention lately to the U.S. unemployment rate.
``I don't focus too much on the monthly unemployment rate because it has been a bit volatile,'' Edward Lazear, chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, said in a Bloomberg Television interview.
Lazear's comments followed a Labor Department report earlier today that showed U.S. employers cut 80,000 jobs in March and unemployment rose to 5.1 percent, from 4.8 percent a month earlier. By historical standards, Lazear said joblessness isn't that high compared with past recessions.
``Even at 5.1 percent, I would point out that that is still a historically low rate of unemployment, well below the average for the 90s, which was 5.8 percent, so we still have a decent labor market,'' he said.
He added, ``obviously we don't like to see negative job growth.''
Lazear, a Stanford University labor market economist, said the Bush administration's forecast for the economy to accelerate in the second half of the year is on target.
More Favorite Reads
Sep 17, 2008, 9:16am
A Long-Expected Takeover
We cannot say we're shocked that the Federal Reserve and...
More »Sep 09, 2008, 3:20pm
Lehman Brothers Wants To Sell Half Of Neuberger Berman
The deal under consideration at Lehman Brothers is a sale...
More »
Posted by guest, Apr 04, 2008 9:34AM
You certainly didn't have to come back from vacation for this.