Seeking Alpha

Dec. Nonfarm Payrolls: -85K vs. -10K expected, +4K in Nov. (revised from -11K). Unemployment 10%...

Dec. Nonfarm Payrolls: -85K vs. -10K expected, +4K in Nov. (revised from -11K). Unemployment 10% vs. 10.1% expected, 10% prior. Avg. hourly earnings +$0.03 to $18.80. Workweek flat at 33.2 hours.
Comments (50)
  • Ryu Mei Co
    , contributor
    Comments (222) | Send Message
     
    Terrible! How will the market going to spin this one?
    8 Jan 2010, 08:35 AM Reply Like
  • Harry Tuttle
    , contributor
    Comments (2221) | Send Message
     
    "this is unusual", "nobody could have foreseen this weakness", etc.

     

    The talking heads get paid millions of dollars for extrapolating linear regression models.

     

    Good luck with that!
    8 Jan 2010, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • Jason Tillberg
    , contributor
    Comments (1236) | Send Message
     
    I see 589,000 less people employed in America in December from November.

     

    This is becoming a major crisis of jobs.

     

    stats.bls.gov/news.rel...
    8 Jan 2010, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • jpiretti
    , contributor
    Comments (710) | Send Message
     
    I believe what you are citing is the net change in labor force. This is a function of changes in demographics as opposed to short term economic forces.
    8 Jan 2010, 08:56 AM Reply Like
  • CautiousInvestor
    , contributor
    Comments (3029) | Send Message
     
    I have not read the report but I heard on the news that the household survey shows that the labor force is contracting.........ha... consistent with an expanding economy. Maybe this will renew appreciation that recovery from a financial crisis is different than recovering from an inventory correction.
    8 Jan 2010, 08:40 AM Reply Like
  • Machiavelli999
    , contributor
    Comments (829) | Send Message
     
    Quick comment. I am a realist and I am not going to spin this. It's a bad number.

     

    But I love it how SA readers (a.k.a. doom & gloomers) use all the government data that support their narrative of doom, but all the data that is against them is just a big conspiracy theory.
    8 Jan 2010, 08:41 AM Reply Like
  • jpiretti
    , contributor
    Comments (710) | Send Message
     
    Well said and painfully obvious.
    8 Jan 2010, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • Harry Tuttle
    , contributor
    Comments (2221) | Send Message
     
    The Administration's policies are a big success. All the leading indicators are up.

     

    If you want, you can also say when banker's bonuses go up a recovery ensues.

     

    Lies, damn lies and statistics.

     

    The fact remains that a lot of people are unemployed and NOBODY can explain what they are going to do in the next 24 months.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • a fat panda
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    "But I love it how SA readers (a.k.a. doom & gloomers) use all the government data that support their narrative of doom, but all the data that is against them is just a big conspiracy theory. "

     

    First, I am not sure what data points to a recovery.

     

    That aside, the doom and gloomers are going to tell you that you are simply kicking the can down the road, or borrowing prosperity from the future. All of the data suggests that government is accomplishing exactly that.

     

    The doom and gloom that I see comes from these reports. Look at where the job growth is, government. Every public jobs comes at the price of making our private sector less competitive in the world market. I don't think that the answer to our problems is lowering our competitiveness.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • jpiretti
    , contributor
    Comments (710) | Send Message
     
    Here are the govt. employment figures taken from the BLS report
    22,484| p22,488| p22,467|
    Oct Nov. Dec.
    Why would you make that statement without evidence?
    8 Jan 2010, 09:30 AM Reply Like
  • a fat panda
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    The BLS defintion of government and reality are somewhat separated because it can't separate private businesses which are dedicated to government work. There are industries like healthcare and education which are largely government run. There are industries like banking and autos which have massive government support.

     

    Here is a specific case, but it illustrates the problem. My neighbor is counted in construction because he owns a construction business. He has gone from 0% government contracts to 100% over the past 2 years. If you think that he isn't a government worker, then government work is stagnant. I think he is a government worker. I think most of education is a government worker. A great deal of healthcare is government work.

     

    You can't increase the size of the budget the way we have and not see an increase in government jobs. That isn't BLS that is common sense.
    8 Jan 2010, 10:25 AM Reply Like
  • Angel Martin
    , contributor
    Comments (1299) | Send Message
     
    This is not that surprising. In the initial months of employment growth the monthly employment numbers often bounce from positive to negative before going to a consistent positive trend.

     

    This happened in 1991, 1983 and 1975, and maybe others as well.

     

    November was revised up to a (small positive). That's 8 months after the stock market hit bottom, which is right on the average for previous recoveries.

     

    It's not different this time, in fact it is remarkably the same.
    8 Jan 2010, 10:29 AM Reply Like
  • TeresaE
    , contributor
    Comments (3041) | Send Message
     
    Well what IS different, is that WE had manufacturing jobs back then.

     

    Not anymore.
    8 Jan 2010, 05:07 PM Reply Like
  • logicalman
    , contributor
    Comments (763) | Send Message
     
    again i agree totally...doom & gloomers will be right some day, but in the meantime ( 9-10 months and counting ) they have missed out big-time...and it only gets worse for them as we will surely see s&p at 1200 soon..after??? might be a time to stand aside, or even to lighten up!!!
    10 Jan 2010, 06:33 PM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9467) | Send Message
     
    Positive job growth next month.....
    8 Jan 2010, 08:42 AM Reply Like
  • MarketGuy
    , contributor
    Comments (3983) | Send Message
     
    you said that last month...and the month before. You'll be right some day.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:13 AM Reply Like
  • a fat panda
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    "you said that last month...and the month before. You'll be right some day."

     

    And on that day, the-I-told-you-so will be heard round the website.
    8 Jan 2010, 10:29 AM Reply Like
  • MarketGuy
    , contributor
    Comments (3983) | Send Message
     
    Two definites from this data:

     

    1) Bernanke has more firepower to keep rates at 0% in order to help Goldma...I mean the economy.

     

    2) Tim Geithner is still confused.
    8 Jan 2010, 08:44 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9467) | Send Message
     
    the 3 month moving average of the monthly nonfarm payroll change
    continues to improve....so does the 12 month moving average of
    ratio of nonfarm payrolls to jobless claims....both are indicative of
    positive job growth in the future.....
    8 Jan 2010, 08:50 AM Reply Like
  • BPYHO
    , contributor
    Comments (230) | Send Message
     
    No WAY we have positive growth next month, Jan will be bad! Im just curious how the media will spin this... Maybe they can revise their predictions and say they were expecting a 300-400k loss, then they will have a big beat!
    8 Jan 2010, 08:51 AM Reply Like
  • jpiretti
    , contributor
    Comments (710) | Send Message
     
    Temporary workers +47 (leading indicator)...avg weekly hours trending higher (leading indicator) Nov. first positive month in 23 months....how will you spin this?
    8 Jan 2010, 09:00 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9467) | Send Message
     
    Way....
    8 Jan 2010, 09:01 AM Reply Like
  • TeresaE
    , contributor
    Comments (3041) | Send Message
     
    November's turn to positive territory, was accompanied by an October revision down below the difference.

     

    We didn't "add" jobs, no matter how hard you wish it to be true.

     

    The hours did not budge. Payroll taxes went down.

     

    And the percentage of EMPLOYED fell AGAIN.

     

    Spin that.
    8 Jan 2010, 05:00 PM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2195) | Send Message
     
    Here is the big key numbers.

     

    Size of Labor force -661,000 vs -272,000 (revised down) last month....huge!!!!

     

    No Longer in Labor Force +843,000 vs +326,000 (revised up) last month....this is really huge....
    In the last 3 months 1.162 MILLION workers are gone...no longer counted!!!!!

     

    U6 is now 17.3% +0.1%
    8 Jan 2010, 08:51 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9467) | Send Message
     
    Household survey can be very erratic....do you promise to highlight the jobs created when they come in the next couple of months????
    8 Jan 2010, 09:00 AM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2195) | Send Message
     
    Amazingly you chided people for not believing the stats...now you say you think they are erratic? Which is it?

     

    Like I said the key numbers are the size of the workforce (decreasing) and the trend of the N.I.L.F. (increasing). This trend has not stopped and has actually accelerated.

     

    We need 100,000 jobs increase a month just to break even. I do not see any reason for there to be a jobs increase...there is no demand to cause an increase.

     

    - UPS just announced they are laying off 1800 people.
    -Macy's are closing stores in the midwest....
    -We haven't even seen the impact of CRE's yet.
    -33 states are raising their unemployment insurance tax between 100-1000%....that makes hiring new people too expensive.

     

    Absolutely...I will celebrate if things turn around...that means less suffering, recovering economy, and more $$ for people....but I don't see it.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • doubleguns
    , contributor
    Comments (7939) | Send Message
     
    Emergency unemployment compensation (EUC) up over 40% in December from November to keep up with that huge loss of 1.1 million missing workers. They are on EUC not unemployment so I guess the govt thinks they don't count.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:15 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13445) | Send Message
     
    Elections have consequences...

     

    One of the consequences is the power to control the counting methodology.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:38 AM Reply Like
  • youngman442002
    , contributor
    Comments (5131) | Send Message
     
    This is the new Green economy....you have no job..so you don't polllute...
    8 Jan 2010, 08:53 AM Reply Like
  • Duude
    , contributor
    Comments (3368) | Send Message
     
    I fear this will only embolden the government to put out another so-called stimulus plan. I'm sure the special interests are already lining up with their bank accounts.
    8 Jan 2010, 08:53 AM Reply Like
  • TeresaE
    , contributor
    Comments (3041) | Send Message
     
    You win the prize!

     

    Shock! The new stimulus, 'er "Jobs Bill" is coming!

     

    Prosperity here we come!
    28 Jan 2010, 08:20 PM Reply Like
  • youngman442002
    , contributor
    Comments (5131) | Send Message
     
    Obama is supposed to announce one today...for green jobs...
    8 Jan 2010, 08:55 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13445) | Send Message
     
    Correct. About $179-180billion Porkzilla IV, er, "Jobs" stimbill.

     

    Doubtless some more "shovel ready" projects no one will ever see.

     

    Welfare for state governments, PC corporations researching how to power airliners with moonbeams, and billions for favored pets like ACORN.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:04 AM Reply Like
  • jpiretti
    , contributor
    Comments (710) | Send Message
     
    Quick question...What is the annual govt. contract worth to ACORN per year?...you might be surprised.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13445) | Send Message
     
    Per State Government? Between $100,000 and $700,000, per contract (of course, they sometimes have multiple contracts with each State Government). From local city and county Governments? No one really knows, they move the money through their network of shell corporations with great agility. Directly from the Federal Government? Some millions per year, though of course that is old news, PO (pre-Obama). Looking forward, the billions contained within things like the StimBill loom ahead, as well as the ACORN portion of the Census, etc, etc.

     

    $53mm since 2004 is the nonsense number reported for one sub-sub-sub-section of ACORN where they receive relatively trackable money from the taxpayers. In their recent successful lawsuit to get their direct federal funding in the new budget restored, their lawyer predicted they would soon see "...millions of dollars per week..." flowing to their accounts very soon.

     

    LOL, of course, ACORN is not alone (they have as I said earlier a complex network of fellow organizations sharing the same file drawer where they all live).

     

    spectator.org/archives...
    8 Jan 2010, 09:26 AM Reply Like
  • jpiretti
    , contributor
    Comments (710) | Send Message
     
    3.5 million per year comes directly from the GAO. Keep reading the American Spectator and you will be able to keep saying "nobody really knows"
    8 Jan 2010, 09:56 AM Reply Like
  • jpiretti
    , contributor
    Comments (710) | Send Message
     
    Correction: 16 million since 1997. They have an operating budget of 37 million per year. You can access their audited financials if your interested.
    8 Jan 2010, 10:31 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13445) | Send Message
     
    Keep trying. Three or 4 more posts and you'll pull even with the $53mill. Where did the first number come from? The second? The GAO citation would be handy.
    9 Jan 2010, 11:41 AM Reply Like
  • jpiretti
    , contributor
    Comments (710) | Send Message
     
    voices.washingtonpost....

     

    That's 50 million since 1994 or 3.125 million per year...according to Senate Republicans on the investigating committee. Your scholarship is as faulty as your politics.
    27 Jan 2010, 09:41 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9467) | Send Message
     
    Monthly average of jobless claims in 400,000 to 450,000....
    job growth averages +65,000....

     

    8 Jan 2010, 09:05 AM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2195) | Send Message
     
    Lets check some numbers we need to overcome....

     

    Dec 2008:
    6.6 million people were unemployed 14 weeks or less
    4.3 million people were unemployed 15 weeks or more
    Total: 10.9 Million

     

    Now you claim job growth is coming so lets look at Dec 2009:
    6.2 million people were unemployed 14 weeks or less
    8.5 million people were unemployed 15 weeks or more
    Total: 14.7 Million
    (from BLS Table A-9)

     

    We need +100,000 a month just to break even. It's going to take alot more than +65,000 to get things rolling....we are sinking (though not as fast) to a point where 'recovery' will be flat at best.
    8 Jan 2010, 10:16 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9467) | Send Message
     
    Agreed....it is going to a long slog...but even 1.5 million new jobs
    will help GDP Nominal growth to prevent a double dip....then next
    year you create 2.5 million jobs...then the next year 3 million jobs
    8 Jan 2010, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • Papaswamp
    , contributor
    Comments (2195) | Send Message
     
    I don't see any job creation or demand to cause job creation.

     

    Instead I see in the last 3 days:
    -Macey's closing stores in the midwest
    -UPS cutting 1800 middle management jobs
    -ITT is condensing down to 3 biz units (layoffs not announced yet)
    -Foot Locker just announced it's closing 117 stores (ouch!)

     

    I see continued reduction and consolidation....thats not growth.
    8 Jan 2010, 11:07 AM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4263) | Send Message
     
    Hurricane Katrina increased GDP, but I don't think that was very positive. At this rate the jobless rate will be 12% before it starts getting better - or even breaking even.
    8 Jan 2010, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • youngman442002
    , contributor
    Comments (5131) | Send Message
     
    Anyway you look at ti..it will take years to get back to 4.5%...years....
    8 Jan 2010, 09:48 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13445) | Send Message
     
    ...Decades.

     

    Maybe never. One thing that socialist governments do very well is create dependence on them.

     

    5% more workers permanently tethered to the federal dole will just about guarantee enough self-interested votes to maintain the cycle.
    8 Jan 2010, 09:59 AM Reply Like
  • youngman442002
    , contributor
    Comments (5131) | Send Message
     
    In November of 2009, we processed 22,222 new applicants. Just two years earlier, that monthly average was only about 11,100."

     

    Colorado is borrowing hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government to keep afloat its unemployment-insurance fund, which will go broke in two weeks without the cash infusion.

     

    Read more: www.denverpost.com/ci_...
    This a not good.......
    8 Jan 2010, 09:50 AM Reply Like
  • TeresaE
    , contributor
    Comments (3041) | Send Message
     
    Don't worry too much about it, Michigan has gone back to the feds numerous times to refund.

     

    Just because it now equates to a $21 a year fine per employee paid to the fed for last year, PLUS a $42 each this year, AND 10% unemployment taxes, shouldn't concern you.

     

    It surely doesn't seem to concern Washington at all.
    8 Jan 2010, 05:04 PM Reply Like
  • Greater fool
    , contributor
    Comments (22) | Send Message
     
    Something else to consider.. a lot (I think the estimate is 2/3) of Fed stimulus money spent so far went to state govts who used it to backfill aid to local schools and municipal govts.. avoiding layoffs at the local level. That aid money is slated to go away in 2012.. then what? States will all be back in the black by then?

     

    So far what has been done is simply preserving the status quo with newly printed money, instead of taking serious steps to reform spending, kicking the can down the road. This is not a recipe for lasting recovery.
    8 Jan 2010, 10:09 AM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4263) | Send Message
     
    Dec included a lot of temp and holiday jobs, and dozens of companies have announced layoffs and closings recently, so I expect the Jan numbers to be one of the worst since last summer.
    8 Jan 2010, 01:55 PM 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

Next headline on your portfolio:

|