Seeking Alpha

Apr. Nonfarm Payrolls: +115K vs. consensus of +165K, prior 120K. Unemployment 8.1% vs 8.2%...

Apr. Nonfarm Payrolls: +115K vs. consensus of +165K, prior 120K. Unemployment 8.1% vs 8.2% expected. Average workweek 34.5 in-line with expectations
Comments (48)
  • Stoploss
    , contributor
    Comments (1727) | Send Message
     
    :)))))))

     

    Look at NIL
    4 May 2012, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    It probably needed to be below 100k to push the 10yr below 1.90.
    4 May 2012, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    Well. How about that. It did go below 1.90. Maybe 1.85 will be the target after all. I doubt it. It would help me too much.
    4 May 2012, 01:36 PM Reply Like
  • Angel Martin
    , contributor
    Comments (1311) | Send Message
     
    not the disaster it could have been, but not good, household survey employment down 170K (volatile series though)
    4 May 2012, 08:42 AM Reply Like
  • srspa77
    , contributor
    Comments (326) | Send Message
     
    Yes. I knew we created a lot of jobs. DOW 15000
    4 May 2012, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • Peter Tchir
    , contributor
    Comments (1260) | Send Message
     
    this is bad...mkt will weaken throughout the day:

     

    1) upward revisions mean slowdown is worse than feared
    2) upward revsision and headline number and rate means QE NOT likely
    3) all the change to get to 8.1 was a decrease in particpation rate
    4) hourly earnings weak

     

    and Europe likely to fade into the close on election fears.
    4 May 2012, 08:45 AM Reply Like
  • Stoploss
    , contributor
    Comments (1727) | Send Message
     
    Your Like button has disappeared.

     

    +1000!
    4 May 2012, 09:11 AM Reply Like
  • franztch
    , contributor
    Comments (6) | Send Message
     
    I agree. There is too much Weakness in Europe: 1°) political (lack of leadership), 2°) Institutional; 3°) social. There is a big gap on Fiscal and Monetary policy; there are not the right instruments. BCE is not like FED. German austerity policy is very dangerous, not only for Europe, but for the whole world economy. In Europe we hope: Obama's second mandate; Hollande's election; Mr. Monti's policy (in Italy); and finally that in Germany Angela Merkel shall lose the general election next year.
    4 May 2012, 10:43 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9854) | Send Message
     
    For those who want a negative look ,,,the year over year change in private payrolls has declining momentum....something to watch...
    for those who want a positive look the temporary help service number
    is well above its 12 month moving average....
    4 May 2012, 08:46 AM Reply Like
  • mickmars
    , contributor
    Comments (1323) | Send Message
     
    58.4% of the civilian population was employed in April. That's down from 58.5% in March....and down from 58.6% in February. There is no positive other than "It could be even worse".
    4 May 2012, 10:30 AM Reply Like
  • shild
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
     
    Yep -- we lose jobs and unemployment rate fall to 8.1% (yes, we all know the official answers to this question ...) so this is all political, so-as Obama can say the unemploymen rate is only 8.1% and who out there doesnt know that the unemploment rate (even for guys looking for a job exclusively) is over 15% really and that the real unemployment is above 18% if you consider all the people out there without jobs.Just wait until November elections are over when the unemployment rate is going to go back to 10% ++
    4 May 2012, 08:47 AM Reply Like
  • youngman442002
    , contributor
    Comments (5131) | Send Message
     
    the UE rate WILL be below 8% for the election..that is a fact...its in the cards...they will just say no one is working anymore..and that might be true...
    Watch Europe...all of their leading Economic indicators are down..some big...big misses too....
    4 May 2012, 08:49 AM Reply Like
  • davidingeorgia
    , contributor
    Comments (2713) | Send Message
     
    Well, if we can just get the rest of those looking for jobs to stop bothering and go onto food stamps, we can get the headline rate down to 0.0%...Obamanomics works its magic!
    4 May 2012, 08:54 AM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10472) | Send Message
     
    Someone help me out here.

     

    1. We'll get job new numbers of 115,000 for the MONTH. Slightly less than necessary to absorb 1% population growth.
    2. We'll get first time unemployment claims of 380,000 for the WEEK.

     

    How does UE go down?

     

    Aren't we going backward with unemployment 9x more than new job creation every month?
    4 May 2012, 08:55 AM Reply Like
  • jwbrewer
    , contributor
    Comments (317) | Send Message
     
    Participation rate is your key - the lowest since 1981. Even Washington Post's lefty Ezra Klein noted last month that if participation had been the same when Barry took office U3 would be about 11%. He is concern that Obama's economic chickens will come home to roost. Conversely, if the recovery was producing the same amount of jobs as the Reagan recovey did at this point, and with todays participation rate, U3 would probably be closer to 4%. Either way, this is a jobless and income less recovery.
    4 May 2012, 09:08 AM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10472) | Send Message
     
    Pretty soon our 19-25 employment rates will look like Spain.
    4 May 2012, 09:52 AM Reply Like
  • Stoploss
    , contributor
    Comments (1727) | Send Message
     
    Now you see what the issue is. You have hard data every week, (people asking for money from the UIB, and it is documented).

     

    The B/D is a guesstimate based on approximations, NOT documentation.

     

    So, if you are not creating more job's PER WEEK to offset the documented claims, you are moving backwards.

     

    4 weeks of 300k initial claims is 1.2M a month in job losses. Documented.

     

    Therefore, you must create 1.2M a month, DOCUMENTED, not guessed at,job's to break even.
    4 May 2012, 10:02 AM Reply Like
  • Atraktiv25
    , contributor
    Comments (22) | Send Message
     
    'experts' and 'economists' are somewhat like weather forcasters... they are pretty much always wrong (well, the weather people are pretty good, by and by) but people follow them as if they were oracles. It's a shame that we (the market) react to them every day. It's not *investing* anymore, it's the data of the day.

     

    Dave
    4 May 2012, 09:01 AM Reply Like
  • atlantis43
    , contributor
    Comments (34) | Send Message
     
    forecasters atleast have a lrg amt of science behind them these days. Can't be said for the others.
    4 May 2012, 01:36 PM Reply Like
  • DOGS THAT BARK
    , contributor
    Comments (136) | Send Message
     
    a little on the participation factor........

     

    The participation rate, which indicates the share of working-age people in the labor force, fell to 63.6 percent, the lowest since December 1981. :(
    4 May 2012, 09:01 AM Reply Like
  • shild
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
     
    And thats what Obama and his cohorts want: the rich should support all the rest of the population and the participation rate should be lower and lower, in other words its called socialism, and like europe a greater % of the population doesnt work & lives on government either taken from the rich that 50% tax rates (as in the US the rate is 35% going to 42.5% next year plus state taxes in NY and CA of 10% +) and borrowing from China.
    4 May 2012, 09:21 AM Reply Like
  • Roadstar Biker
    , contributor
    Comments (66) | Send Message
     
    It would help the UE numbers if we reverse the public sector job losses. But that would run contrary wishes of the growth-through-austerity cult currently in vogue.

     

    We continue to promote capital stagnation in the coffers of the top end of the economic scale and continue to choke off cash flow to the middle class. Consumer demand suffers, and stagnation continues. When are we going to finally admit that trickle down economics is a failed theory?
    4 May 2012, 09:33 AM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    "When are we going to finally admit that trickle down economics is a failed theory? "

     

    When Cuba's GDP is twice that of the US.
    4 May 2012, 09:36 AM Reply Like
  • jwbrewer
    , contributor
    Comments (317) | Send Message
     
    RB .
    ..as opposed to the great economic powerhouse that is socialist Europe? Or did they just do socialism wrong, LOL? Even China saw the hand writing on the wall...before it suffer the same fate as East Europe and USSR.
    4 May 2012, 10:05 AM Reply Like
  • Akaralph
    , contributor
    Comments (1886) | Send Message
     
    When are we going to admit that the current administration has been at best a total failure!
    4 May 2012, 10:25 AM Reply Like
  • atlantis43
    , contributor
    Comments (34) | Send Message
     
    always puzzles me when people criticize 'trickle-down' econ. Isn't all private business really 'trickle down'? Only direct gov't employment is not of that category, and we all know how well Keynes is currently working. Maybe I'm missing something.
    4 May 2012, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • Charliehbryan
    , contributor
    Comments (115) | Send Message
     
    I've been saying trickle-down is failed theory since before David Stockmann conceded it in the Atlantic Monthly, 6 years after the worst recession since the Great Depression.

     

    The idea that cutting taxes on the rich (who can and will save rather than spend) would somehow create growth is flim-flammery of the worst sort but there's a sucker born every minute.
    4 May 2012, 02:30 PM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    You can't spend your way to wealth. You can only produce your way to wealth. That requires capital that allows for time to innovate. The spend your way to wealth flim-flammery needs to go the way of Marx.

     

    Its time for freedom to store your capital so we can have exponential prosperity.
    4 May 2012, 06:58 PM Reply Like
  • Charliehbryan
    , contributor
    Comments (115) | Send Message
     
    Someone who was obviously either sick or truant on the days they discussed MacroEconomics 101 (or the general equation GDP = G + C + B + (X-M), where G = government spending, C = personal consumption, B = Business investment, X = exports and I = imports). Yes, JHooper, you can 'spend' your way to wealth.

     

    Or will you turn your nose up at 75 years of economic consensus that government spending is an integral part of GDP?
    5 May 2012, 10:31 AM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    GDP is like evaluating wealth creation by looking at a company as a worthy investment by looking at expenses only. I guess you missed Reality 101.

     

    Don't get suckered in by semantics. Consensus is not science, just like the consensus was the earth was flat or the slave was subhuman. Having gov spend just for the sake of spending leads to capital erosion which will lead to a lower standard of living.

     

    Just because the consensus used to be that the state should run the church and as such you should be forced to pay a tithe did not mean that that was the truth.
    5 May 2012, 10:37 AM Reply Like
  • Charliehbryan
    , contributor
    Comments (115) | Send Message
     
    So you ARE turning your nose up at 75 years of consensus among economists that GDP (pka 'GNP') is the truest measure of an economy's output (its 'wealth,' if you will) and that government spending is an integral component of that self-same GDP.

     

    I fail to see how the general macroeconomic equation I cited above qualifies as 'semantics'. In my book, it is math (about as far from semantics as one can get).
    6 May 2012, 09:35 AM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    Its not completely useless, but it can certainly be misleading. Clearly misleading as based on the fact it has misled you.
    6 May 2012, 11:41 AM Reply Like
  • Peter Tchir
    , contributor
    Comments (1260) | Send Message
     
    you can spend your way to increased GDP. Without a doubt. The quarter you spend the money. That isn't the same as wealth.

     

    Wealth would mean a recurring boost to GDP, not a one time affect.

     

    Wealth would also account for the debt created to get that GDP boost.
    7 May 2012, 08:07 AM Reply Like
  • Peter Tchir
    , contributor
    Comments (1260) | Send Message
     
    consensus among economists as an argument - now that made me smile :)
    7 May 2012, 08:08 AM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3531) | Send Message
     
    It's going to be a long, hot summer. Sell in May?
    4 May 2012, 09:37 AM Reply Like
  • Rhianni32
    , contributor
    Comments (2044) | Send Message
     
    So pretty much the same as every other report or news article...
    if you are already bearish this is vindication that everything will collapse
    if you are already bullish this is vindication that we are going to Dow 30,000
    4 May 2012, 10:05 AM Reply Like
  • yitmoore
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
     
    The only ones benefitting from this recovery are large corporations. In a normal economy, these earnings levels would have the S&P over 1500, but investors know the corporate earnings are not because of consumer strength but rather at the expense of the consumer. Not healthy at all.
    4 May 2012, 11:05 AM Reply Like
  • Hubert Biagi
    , contributor
    Comments (703) | Send Message
     
    After three and half years of Obama attacking the energy, healthcare, and financial sectors, is it any surprise the recovery is so tepid?
    4 May 2012, 12:11 PM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2198) | Send Message
     
    The participation decline is nothing new.... It began in May of 2000. Demographics and technological advancement (efficiency, less workers needed)...will make this trend continue.
    4 May 2012, 12:36 PM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    Don't forget higher fixed costs from gov price blind regulations that make the returns on economic opportunity so high that bringing competition online is just too risky.
    4 May 2012, 01:08 PM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2198) | Send Message
     
    @jh...one of many headwinds. Demographics is key...the one thing no one in the govt will address. Baby boomer population pales in comparison to the 40-54 yr old cohort which is almost twice the size of BB population.
    4 May 2012, 04:57 PM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    Interesting. SS needs younger workers to support it, but SS is a disincentive for children. Its a little like eating your own flesh to get healthy.
    4 May 2012, 06:59 PM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2198) | Send Message
     
    @jh...true.
    4 May 2012, 10:31 PM Reply Like
  • Econdoc
    , contributor
    Comments (2944) | Send Message
     
    Keep your heads...this series has an error margin on it of about 50 to 100k

     

    so this number could be +15 to +215k

     

    missing consensus by 50k is meaningless

     

    the best you can do here is say that last month the US - added jobs for the nth month in a row

     

    if you invest based on this number you are better off going to Churchill Downs tomorrow and laying it on the 10 to 1 shot.

     

    E
    4 May 2012, 09:27 PM Reply Like
  • Peter Tchir
    , contributor
    Comments (1260) | Send Message
     
    it is amazing how in this electronic age we continue to have such bad data. this is just one example, but how hard is it in this electronic world to get better, more accurate, and timely data?

     

    I also don't understand why they attempt such a 'precise' number. Why not just publish 100k-150k with 95% confidence, or something? publish something that is more reflective of the accuracy. They seem to use "too many signficant" figures in the actual report.

     

    also, all the adjustments distort the data. the adjustments are often bigger than the final number, which again seems weird

     

    on the other hand you can't just ignore the data. after the NFP (or other reports) we have more information.
    5 May 2012, 07:01 AM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3531) | Send Message
     
    "Why not just publish 100k-150k with 95% confidence, or something? publish something that is more reflective of the accuracy."

     

    Second the motion.
    5 May 2012, 11:14 AM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2198) | Send Message
     
    I don't think it was the consensus miss that has people worried. Its the NILF increasing by over 500K and the participation rate now at 1981 levels.
    5 May 2012, 11:17 AM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (6057) | Send Message
     
    Why have the gov measure the economy at all? Doesn't that imply that the gov could do something if there is a problem? Doesn't that imply that the gov would even recognize the problem? Of course if they knew what it looked like, then they could just head it off at the pass. And how will they head it off at the pass?

     

    The only way to make an economy grow is via new knowledge about how to produce things. Now think about that. If people in the gov had some secret store of new knowledge about production that they could just release whenever the economy needed it, why not just release it now and improve all of our standards of living overnight? Or, if the gov had some secret store of new production knowledge, do you have any idea how much that information would be worth? It would be worth trillions and trillions. Granted a gov compensation package is worth millions, but millions is not trillions, so why would gov employees accept millions when they have access to knowledge that is worth trillions?

     

    The answer is quite clear. They don't have this knowledge, and as such there is no reason gov employees can improve an economy, and as such there is no reason for gov to measure it. Because even if there were problems and even if they could recognize them, they couldn't do anything anyways.

     

    Its all a big fraud, but there are lots and lots of people that believe in this fraud, so they will react certain ways when the gov data is released, and if you recognize that, you can take advantage of it.
    5 May 2012, 11:24 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector