As it turns out, they were worse than anyone expected. While projections showed the U.S. economy adding about 80,000 jobs in September, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported this morning that the economy actually lost 33,000 jobs in September.
It’s important to emphasize that these totals were heavily affected by Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, which depressed hiring. That said, the new job numbers still fell short of low expectations. What’s more, the combined job totals from July and August were revised down, and that can’t be attributed to hurricanes.
This is the first time the U.S. economy has lost jobs since September 2010 – seven years ago. It interrupts the longest streak on record of consecutive months in which the economy added jobs.
Providing some additional context, the U.S. added 2.14 million over the first nine months of 2014, 1.89 million over the first nine months of 2015, 1.79 million over the first nine months of 2016, and 1.33 million over the first nine months of 2017.
Of course it is. Why do you think porkies are embracing fascism?
There were 60,000 months added in August right? And there were was a contraction of 30,000 jobs in September? Does this technically count as 90k less jobs, considering that based on the job growth rate another month of somewhere in the neighborhood of 60k new jobs was expected? What causes such a massive inversion so quickly?🤔
Retail-chains are dropping like flies and the remaining stores are shedding their labor-force and inventory. Retail and consumer-goods industry is almost always hit first during the first phase of a recession but the flip-side being that retail and consumer goods is often the first sector to recover from a crisis.
Holla Forums has been saying their is an economic crash right around the corner since as long as I can remember
Eh retail is suffering, true, but going from 60k(+) to 30k(-) in one month is huge, technically retail (at least what is left of it) should be hiring a lot now for the Christmas season anyway.
greetings fellow socialists.
They'd be in serious trouble if they lied about federal stats like this.
Isn't the actual source the Bureau of Labor Statistics?
Don't jump to conclusions. A lot of it has to do with the destruction caused by the hurricanes.
I mostly kid, but it's not unreasonable to chide people for posting unreliable sources. If it's in a BLS report, that should be linked.
idk, the emphasis universally made on the correlation of hurricane damage and job losses seems a little silly so far
nah, msnbc and most mainstream bourgie media usually get basic news like this right, obviously except for leftism and leftist views.
Holla Forums did too, remember shemitah?
The jobs figure is very likely heavily related to the storms, however the declining growth that follows might be enough to pop a few of the economic bubbles that are floating the sense of normalcy in the economy right now.
I don't much trust their reporting on anything Trump tbh, they've been hysterical ever since RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA.
If you keep saying it long enough, you'll eventually be right.
I'm too much of a brainlet to understand what this image means, pls explain.
In the 90s there was the .com bubble - tech was a hot commodity and prices for companies and services was heavily inflated. When the bubble popped a lot of tech businesses collapsed or were bought-out for cheap by larger competitors, but essentially times were good financially for the US in this time (surplus) and then the bubble popped, markets readjusted to reflect something closer to the actual value of these companies and then times weren't as good.
Similar in 2008 with the recession - I'm just going to grab the headline from wikipedia for this- "It began in 2007 with a crisis in the subprime mortgage market in the US, and developed into a full-blown international banking crisis with the collapse of the investment bank Lehman Brothers on September 15, 2008. Excessive risk-taking by banks such as Lehman Brothers helped to magnify the financial impact globally. Massive bail-outs of financial institutions and other palliative monetary and fiscal policies were employed to prevent a possible collapse of the world financial system. The crisis was nonetheless followed by a global economic downturn, the Great Recession. The European debt crisis, a crisis in the banking system of the European countries using the euro, followed later." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007–2008
What we are seeing now is an inflation of multiple markets - from housing/real estate, to car loans, college debt, the QE money that the bankers got flooded with is propping up the stock market but real production/ material value has been shrinking, and the infograph I posted doesn't discuss this but Citi, HSBC and (I believe) the IEA have all talked about an oil shortage coming up in the next couple years (varies by source). Along with that you see companies like Exxon which have had their debt increase by something like 8x in the last ten years while their profits have been shrinking to like a quarter of what they were back then-
Basically, the 2008 crash was massive, but it was just essentially due to sub-prime mortgage fraud and the only way to keep the global economy going after Lehman Brothers fell was to print and give the remaining banks 1.2 trillion dollars a month for something like two years after the crash. What we are seeing now is the culmination of multiple markets on the verge of collapse, papered over by the bail outs, and the popping of one bubble will likely preclude the fall of the rest.
promote* not preclude on that final senTENTS.
From what I understand, it is saying there is a lot of speculation occurring. I'm not an economist™ though. People (or companies) are putting more and more of their money into shit they expect to appreciate, like financial assets and real estate. The money is chasing profit, and it is landing in a bunch of debt and weird speculative shit like buttcoin and exploding real estate prices.
Yes, all a ruse by MSNBC. Capitalism is actually going just fine and no crashes are eminent. Jesus do you retards ever think before commenting or do you just scan for buzzwords and "bad names"?
Did you not read the OP? It's literally addressed right there
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand this as basically companies feeling forced to put their money somewhere to grow by the normal mechanisms of the market and our monetary policy, but global markets (or maybe specifically domestic in some cases? I know that big companies are basically unhindered in their ability to be international, but labor isn't as free so I don't know if this restraint on labor and their access to wages can ironically effect the ability of big companies to expand their markets?) haven't adequately expanded in some new way. Because of this, money is just blindly falling into speculation in some cases. The banks, big businesses and uber capitalists may not even want to be putting all of their money into risky shit, but it has nowhere else to go to make money basically, and so some financial assets that promise a return or growing real estate prices are the only thing anybody knows to put money into.
This board is being swarmed with poison pill shills that make pretend to be dumber than they are to keep shit hyper polarized and divorced from reality. It is a known internet psyops method.
No need to apologize, you are correct. Due to the decline in the rate of profit in productive industries, capital shifts to a focus on simple rent and interest.
Indeed, finance and capital is very much global at this point whereas labor can only ever really be local. This when combined with increasing populations, increasing automation, declining resources and a warmer world will lead to regional conflicts which will have a large impact on global trade and the global flow of capital, which will also exacerbate the problems the global South will be facing this century.
That's a good way of putting it. The inertia of the old system is keeping it going in a similar direction that it always has despite the impending realities of the limits to growth within a finite system. I think they just don't want to admit that the party might finally be over, because capitalism can't really handle degrowth the way that humanity needs to handle degrowth if it wants to survive.
They're blaming the hurricanes for it. I guess we'll have to wait for next months data
it's a bullshit metric unfit for its name since clinton or whoever's administration allowed it to change anyway tbh. are there other indicative measures to look at, dumbass?
So 2 years? You know that's generally around the corner in economic terms
The improving employment rate and employment numbers are more than good enough to pull the floor from the entire spin and unfounded hysteria the article and OP tried to pull out of job numbers to bullshit some naive or lazy people who didnt read the actual report.
Wait, do you think OP wrote the article?
As surely as the economy and government have become utterly debt-ridden, as surely as the big private banks have consolidated to pose and even greater systemic risk to the economy before, the next depression is coming. It's only a matter of time.
jesus christ. they are government jobs because of the hurricanes, stop overreacting you retarded fucks
There literally always is, that's the cyclical nature of capitalism.
Since 2008 but if you use google botnet it won't became a feature since June 5 2017.
The last economic crash never ended.
The economic system is flawed. That's why more extreme forms of the left and right are rising.
The growth is not really growth. Well the growth certainly doesn't go to its citizens and is more a product of extremely low interest rates. With low interest rates overall due to the government making regulations for taking a mortgage more strict its natural that house prices will rise. Since less people will be able to get a mortgage to get a house. So house prices will naturally go up due to this.
The problem is, this growth in housing prices is still added to the overall growth of the economy even though its not really growth but more of a byproduct of government policies. Then you also have the derivatives market that's more or less doing what has caused the crisis in 2008. But when the next crisis hits, western economies will not be able to withstand it like in 2008. What happened after 2008? Well USA took on 25% extra debt to GDP and the EU overall took on 20% debt to GDP (with some countries more affected than others). France and Italy have huge debts. Southern Europe (Spain Portugal and Greece) will be devastated in a next crisis. When the US gets hit with another 20-30% of debt to GDP it'll be around 130-40%. That's never going to be paid back so some of it would need to be cut, same for EU as a whole or you will get multiple first world countries needing to default on debt.
Only people who see the system for what it is, flawed, consider the idea of an economic crisis. The liberal or general conservative would never really want to hear anything about a crisis or similar views that explain that the system is flawed. The system is working for that person so he sees it as good, only when the foundation of that system, the economy, crumbles will that person ever consider an alternative view.
Labor is not local. Isn't the point that labor and capital are connected? Creating information, arrangements of words, and having them beamed to computers throughout the world is a way in which labor can have global impact. Of course it operates through capital, but labor always has- down to the human body itself, capital in the sense of being the reified dead labor of one's parents and caretakers in the time before quasi-self-sufficiency.
You're neglecting the question of what forms of global labor may already be able to make an impact- I'm in the same neglectful boat as you, but it doesn't stop me from seeing the possibility of establishing a correct form and content able to make good on the promise of self-conscious socialization. We are lost in endless disagreement, and for good reason, but at the same time you have to admit the pieces of our success are all around us. It's simply that we can't see how the pieces fit together. Have I gone wrong?