Seeking Alpha

Aug. Nonfarm Payrolls: Unchanged vs. +75K expected, +85K prior (revised from +117K)....

Aug. Nonfarm Payrolls: Unchanged vs. +75K expected, +85K prior (revised from +117K). Unemployment remains at 9.1%, as expected. June growth was also revised to +20K from +46K.
Comments (43)
  • BlueOkie
    , contributor
    Comments (7051) | Send Message
     
    I think the gov't should sue corporations for not hiring enough people. They have sued just about everyone else. 9.1% is a joke. It is probably more like 17 or 18%. For young blacks closer to 45%
    2 Sep 2011, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • sam niceday
    , contributor
    Comments (30) | Send Message
     
    There is only one problem with suing the Banks: all good on the table workers are getting sc... in their 401K (sorry 200.5K). Be careful, don't give them more ideas.... I don't want to wake up and see that now I have 100.25K.
    5 Sep 2011, 08:00 AM Reply Like
  • Sanitylost
    , contributor
    Comments (476) | Send Message
     
    QE3?
    2 Sep 2011, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • jwbrewer
    , contributor
    Comments (317) | Send Message
     
    Oh well...maybe next month John Keynes, followed by fairies and unicorns spouting rainbows from their butts, will show up and lead us into the Star Trek utopian promise land...after a few trillion dollars more. Anyway, Perry (or fill in blank with any republican presidential hopeful) can't do any better(sarcasm).
    2 Sep 2011, 08:44 AM Reply Like
  • Conventional Wisdumb
    , contributor
    Comments (1802) | Send Message
     
    I think the re-Recession started in July.
    2 Sep 2011, 08:45 AM Reply Like
  • davidingeorgia
    , contributor
    Comments (2713) | Send Message
     
    Funny how the past set of numbers always gets revised downward. Almost as though the government cooks the initial report to look as good as possible.

     

    And, even with all that lipstick, the pig is still ugly as hell. The Recovery - NOT! marches onward! Hope and change, baby, hope and change.

     

    When is President Petulant's next vacation? Right after his "jobs" speech next Thursday, you say? That "fiercely urgent" speech we just waited through another 2 weeks of vacation to hear? Yeah, that's the one.
    2 Sep 2011, 08:55 AM Reply Like
  • jwbrewer
    , contributor
    Comments (317) | Send Message
     
    You joke, however, I think he is going to Bali at some point after the speech. Official business of course...or golf course.
    2 Sep 2011, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • BlueOkie
    , contributor
    Comments (7051) | Send Message
     
    His speech better not interfere with Thursday night NFL game
    5 Sep 2011, 08:39 AM Reply Like
  • The Last Boomer
    , contributor
    Comments (998) | Send Message
     
    About a trillion dollars worth of stimulus faded and were not replaced with anything: no consumer demand, no investment demand. When you take that much money out of the system, the economy must sink. It is simple accounting. Left on its own devices, this economy will further deteriorate. We need some positive external shocks: Europe solution, Chinese growth acceleration, mortgage relief that will put money in consumers' pockets ... something. Unfortunately I don't think anything like this will happen. The global economy is slowing down significantly and internally we have one major party that is opposed to doing anything to help the economy. My medium-term investment perspective is gloomy, very gloomy.
    2 Sep 2011, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • tobi0040
    , contributor
    Comments (11) | Send Message
     
    Both political parties have done a great job creating uncertainty for businesses. Democrats through regulation and Republicans through the debt ceiling debate and other acts aimed at hurting the economy.
    2 Sep 2011, 09:32 AM Reply Like
  • coddy0
    , contributor
    Comments (1182) | Send Message
     
    tobi0040
    the debt ceiling debate and other acts aimed at hurting the economy.
    ======================...
    Unemployment was 9.1 before debate and remains 9.1 after debate

     

    Could you be more specific about other acts by Republicans aimed at hurting the economy
    3 Sep 2011, 12:17 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    How about saying no to everything. Even those things they previously said yes to.

     

    Coddy, I know your going to want a list, but, if you don't know what I'm talking about, a list won't help you get out from under the rock you've been under for nearly three years.
    4 Sep 2011, 03:52 AM Reply Like
  • coddy0
    , contributor
    Comments (1182) | Send Message
     
    Monngie
    Coddy, I know your going to want a list, but, if you don't know what I'm talking about .........
    ======================...
    It is hard to catch a black cat in a dark room especially if cat is not there
    In other words, I don't know what you talking about, precisely because you don't know either
    4 Sep 2011, 09:28 PM Reply Like
  • BlueOkie
    , contributor
    Comments (7051) | Send Message
     
    How about two years of overwhelming majority in Congress and WhiteHouse, yet they blamed Bush.
    5 Sep 2011, 08:41 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    Coddy,

     

    In this case its one of those glow in the dark cats that can be seen by anyone that has eyes. But, I'll throw one out for you. How about the Republicans were swept into office because they were going to create jobs. The haven't done Dick S#!+!!!!! And they won't. Because even though it hurts the country, doing nothing helps them accomplish the number one priority, make President Obama a one term President. They don't give a S#!+ what they have to do, or not do to accomplish that and they don't care how it hurts the country. A vibrant economy is what they don't want going into 2012 and they're doing it by making a debt crisis where there wasn't one. Tell me that little jewel was good for the country. It was pure BS.

     

    Coddy your a big boy. Go out there, use Google or Bing and you'll find the truth and that glow in the dark cat.
    5 Sep 2011, 10:50 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    BlueOkie......another lie. Overwhelming majority they did not have. The Republicans tied up every initiative with threats of filibuster and actual filibuster. Senate rule number 22 states that a filibuster can be overridden only by a vote of 60 of the 100 senators. The Democrats didn't have a large enough majority to overcome the filibuster. Hence, the Republicans are now known as the party of NO. They even prevented legislation they express support for because it might make the Democrats look good.
    5 Sep 2011, 10:59 PM Reply Like
  • BlueOkie
    , contributor
    Comments (7051) | Send Message
     
    Well the Republicans screwed up then because the let ObamaCare pass.
    23 Dec 2011, 11:03 AM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14449) | Send Message
     
    As investors and citizens we must be truly nuts if we actually expected that corporations would be hiring anybody in August, while they were being told that the country was about to default on its debts and/or raise taxes to fund its deficits. I'd be more worried if they had hired people because, then, it would be the corporate managers, who were nuts and not the idiots who somehow seem hysterical over today's numbers and want to extrapolate them into a trend.
    2 Sep 2011, 01:56 PM Reply Like
  • bkpark
    , contributor
    Comments (325) | Send Message
     
    So ... you would have reconsidered your long equity positions had the employment numbers been good and market rallied today?

     

    You can't have it both ways; or you are just deluding yourself.
    2 Sep 2011, 03:42 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14449) | Send Message
     
    bk:

     

    I didn't say anything about long or short positions, just that anybody expecting hiring to advance in August must have been/be delusional.

     

    I am far more concerned with the Government's own capricious actions, suing the banks and considering drastic changes to REIT regulations, than with any market-driven statistics related to hiring. In fact, I consider hiring a complete red herring for this stage of the recovery because it can't happen while the Government makes the environment so inhospitable for companies to add employees.
    2 Sep 2011, 03:48 PM Reply Like
  • bkpark
    , contributor
    Comments (325) | Send Message
     
    I'm sorry, but the professionals have a word for what you are doing now: rationalization.

     

    Truth is, numbers are worse than expected. You are right in one thing: various people were expecting weaker job numbers in August than in July, just because of the dynamics you mentioned; that's why the expectation had been for +70k, not +100k like July. The number we saw was worse than the worst estimates (the number from Goldman-Sachs yesterday, around +20k).

     

    One can take your delusion argument to extreme: i.e. anyone expecting employment numbers better than, I don't know, -100k today was "delusional", because August was going to be apocalyptic (at least if you listen to mainstream media). At some point, there has to be concrete number, and the non-delusional expectation that most analysts had simply wasn't met by hard numbers today.
    2 Sep 2011, 04:06 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14449) | Send Message
     
    bk:

     

    Regardless of today's numbers, I have been saying for many months that the delta in employment was insignificant to the economic recovery at this point because the economy would be determined by the spending habits of those with money and with jobs. So far, that's turned out to be exactly correct, as spending has increase dmonth after month, even though the market gets hysterical each time the hiring numbers are released, as if that somehow portends what spending will be this or next month. In fact, it has little bearing, as we've seen.

     

    That's not to say that more hiring wouldn't be nice because it would suggest that more demand is forming, but the economy could keep rolling along with 9% unemployment for months or years, and it would have little effect on the behavior of the remainder of the employed workforce. Europe has had much higher endemic levels of unemployment for decades, and it's economy has performed reasonably well, and in some cases outstanding.

     

    Hiring is the last effect of demand formation, not a leading indicator, although you'd never know it from reactions.
    2 Sep 2011, 04:35 PM Reply Like
  • bkpark
    , contributor
    Comments (325) | Send Message
     
    You are right it's the lagging indicator of recovery. Or, put it the other way, if you don't think economy have really recovered (and hence you were bearish despite the market rallies either in the long term (2010 to 2011) or short term (some days since Aug. 9th) ), bad unemployment numbers like today would simply *confirm* your pre-existing view (and the better employment numbers like the one in July would've caused you to re-consider your position---maybe).

     

    OTOH, if one was still bullish on the markets (especially in the short-to-intermediate term of one or two months), he already ignored a bunch of leading indicators flashing warning signs (mostly sentiments; not hard numbers), so I'm guessing such a person would be inclined to ignore just one more sign that contradicts his pre-existing view.

     

    But anyways. That's what capitulation day is about (if one is still ahead of us, rather than behind us): some last lagging indicator of ailing economy will convince the remaining of the bulls that better days *aren't* ahead of us, and many of them will exit the market---at the worst possible time.

     

    BTW, it's true that the French had learned to live with constant 8-10% unemployment and the Japanese learned to live with a deflationary economy; I'm not sure if Americans could become so complacent with the "new normal".
    2 Sep 2011, 04:54 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14449) | Send Message
     
    bk:

     

    I assume from the underlying tone of your remarks that you're bearish. Now, of course, there are ample reasons to be bearish, given our clueless Administration in DC, but, in fact, the corporate reports, retail numbers, auto sales and manufacturing orders don't suggest recession, presently. They, too, of course, could prove to be trailing indicators, if everybody gets pessimistic and just gives up on spending. So far, that's not occurring, as spending has been advancing each month.

     

    The biggest inhibitor to employment is that the Government has made it extremely unattractive to hire full-time employees. Aside from any demand issues, this is contributing to the growth of an underground economy, where people are paid as documented temporary workers, or even in cash, completely anonymously. There are small businesses that have literally fired all their employees and are paying them in cash. That's what onerous legislation engenders.

     

    If DC would stand aside and do absolutely nothing, now, and make a blood promise not to surprise us with some other new folly (like the banks suits or REIT reviews), then, this market and the economy could find a footing. There's absolutely no endemic reason why things must go south, rather than north. It's all expectations.
    2 Sep 2011, 05:22 PM Reply Like
  • bkpark
    , contributor
    Comments (325) | Send Message
     
    You don't have to assume. I told you in the other thread I go where the market goes. I see a bearish reversal pattern; I turn bearish. When I see a bullish reversal (hopefully somewhere above the technical bottom formed last month) I turn bullish.

     

    I'm not arrogant enough to assume that I know better than the experts whose jobs are to crunch all these numbers; I just follow the trends I see. The only thing I feel confident enough doing is managing my risk, since that's the *one* thing I can do that no one else can.

     

    As far as what goes in D.C. goes, I've decided that the whole thing is just a big distraction (none of the unicorns and ponies you are asking are going to arrive before 2013; and the only voice I am going to have ('don't know about you) is the one I have in November 2012). As the saying goes, market discounts everything; people who are smarter than me already discounted it into the prices they are willing to pay; it's not worthwhile for me to independently worry about it and get distracted from what is going on in reality.
    2 Sep 2011, 06:02 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14449) | Send Message
     
    bk:

     

    You're a trader; I'm a value investor. And, yes, I'm "arrogant" enough to think I know better than the experts because I've managed to outperform the market by several percentage points, on average, for over 15 years. Otherwise, I guess I'm just damn lucky.
    2 Sep 2011, 07:06 PM Reply Like
  • bkpark
    , contributor
    Comments (325) | Send Message
     
    Which is fine enough if all you want to do is outperform the market.

     

    As for me, I've seen market's performance (i.e. what you would've gotten by being long-only in a broad index) over last 10 years, and I decided that simply outperforming it by a few percentage points a year isn't worth the time-value of my money.
    2 Sep 2011, 07:30 PM Reply Like
  • sam niceday
    , contributor
    Comments (30) | Send Message
     
    Sorry to say: but Americans don't do their share to be more employable. They have low standards in education which creates luck of ability to compete in the global economy. I teach high level Math. and see no good will from most students to “waste time” on learning. They are in college for fun and the result is unprepared work force.
    America will have to change its attitude to learning and education otherwise this will be the new normal and worst because in other countries, students are in college to learn.
    5 Sep 2011, 07:57 AM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3533) | Send Message
     
    Agreed. But we have too many colleges and too much pressure to send everyone to college. I went to night school for my bachelor's and master's after finishing my tour in the Army so I was surrounded by self motivated people. In the business world I found out many had a piece of paper but no idea of what it was meant for. Their college years were for fun.
    5 Sep 2011, 04:52 PM Reply Like
  • sam niceday
    , contributor
    Comments (30) | Send Message
     
    You right. There are too many students and the weak ones takes too many resources. We spend lots of money of time on the weak but not pay too much attention to the future leaders which are the best and the talented.
    This economy is a good example why being a roofer, electrician and a plumber is MUCH better unless you are very talented. The blue collar professional jobs are always in demand and you can’t call a plumber from China. .
    6 Sep 2011, 07:44 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4034) | Send Message
     
    "...contributing to the growth of an underground economy, where people are paid as documented temporary workers, or even in cash, completely anonymously."

     

    This is more true than people want to believe. And many of those in the 'underground economy' are not only working for cash, but also collecting UEI and food stamps at the same time.
    2 Sep 2011, 06:03 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14449) | Send Message
     
    John:

     

    Absolutely.

     

    Decades ago, I recall an old southern senator (I wish I could remember who) speaking in Congress against the further extension (probably from a week to two weeks, then [laugh]) of UI benefits, and he said, "where I come from (a farm state), when you subsidize somethin', you get more of it."

     

    That says it all.
    2 Sep 2011, 07:09 PM Reply Like
  • sam niceday
    , contributor
    Comments (30) | Send Message
     
    Why the economists don't see what everyone see?
    Economists become famous for the conclusion that more UEI cause more unemployment. Isn't that clear?
    Everyone see that there is under the table cash job market, why the economists don't?
    If this i sthe Harward, Princeton education, we are in bad shape and will never recover.
    5 Sep 2011, 07:48 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    That's sooooo true Tack. But, it should be noted that there are some things you want more of and others you don't. The important thing is to subsidize the things you want. Space and Aerospace come to mind as some you want. It's been heavily subsidized for 70 or 80 years and helped put us on top of the world. There are a lot of successes out there. Plenty of failures. You'd think by now we would have learned from out successes and failures. But, I don't think we have.
    5 Sep 2011, 11:07 PM Reply Like
  • Josh ODonnell
    , contributor
    Comments (229) | Send Message
     
    Will see negative GDP and negative job growth in the next couple of months
    2 Sep 2011, 07:27 PM Reply Like
  • sam niceday
    , contributor
    Comments (30) | Send Message
     
    1. The market always get into disaster because of luck of logic and skewed data. Example: Why take employment numbers in the month of Aug? People without jobs will not start to work when their kids are at home and many companies also have mandatory vacation on Aug.
    2. Not to suggest that this number was otherwise be good: there is no reason to go to work (see unemployment benefits), only for cash and under the table pay and no reason to employ full time worker (no benefits like health care, danger of unionize). Conclusion: the numbers are not the real story and you like me know many who just do fine with the new ”black employment market”.
    5 Sep 2011, 07:38 AM Reply Like
  • BlueOkie
    , contributor
    Comments (7051) | Send Message
     
    "ARE YOU BETTER NOW than YOU WERE 4 YEARS", revised compaign speech.
    5 Sep 2011, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    Let's see. Four years ago. Isn't that when the ecomony just started going off the cliff with GW drive the vehicle?

     

    The answer is NO. And YES I'm still blaming GW and the NOT SO FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE REPUBLICANS.
    5 Sep 2011, 11:11 PM Reply Like
  • sam niceday
    , contributor
    Comments (30) | Send Message
     
    A reminder: in the Clinton days the banks and mortgage companies were force to give out subprime mortgages, which were illegal before, so please, let's not hate Busch to the avalanche that happened to occur as a result during his presidency. The first snow ball that cause all that was a Democratic creation.
    Please learn the facts before you are like many people, I know become “Democratic” and “Blame Busch” fanatic.
    6 Sep 2011, 07:57 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    So........ You have to go back 15 years to hang this on the Democrats? That is desperate!!!!!! Just doesn't pass the old smell test with Republicans controlling the government for most of that period.

     

    From 1995-2001, Republicans had control of the House and Senate and maintained control with the exception of the Senate in 2001&2002. From 2001 until 2006, they owned the House, Senate and the Presidency. For the entire period of Republican rule they did not pass any legislation regulating subprime loans. As for disliking Bush, what's not to dislike???Tell me one thing this idiot did that pushed this country forward. I mean other than that last little push off the cliff.

     

    7 Sep 2011, 11:33 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4034) | Send Message
     
    He had a <same-party controlled> Congress that passed a budget. Does Bammy have that? Could he have?
    7 Sep 2011, 11:38 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    Jeez johnbinTN, this comment is a little incoherent. Snap out of it!!!!
    9 Sep 2011, 02:58 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4034) | Send Message
     
    Sorry, was late.... You had asked for one thing Bush did that "pushed this country forward". As an example, I stated that he, along with a Republican House and Senate actually DID pass a budget.

     

    Does Obama have the same 'bragging rights'? No, he doesn't. Could he also say that under his administration, the politicians actually did their job in passing a budget? No, he can't say that.

     

    Could he have said that? Yes, he could have, had his administration actually proposed a budget and passed it when they had control of both the House and the Senate.

     

    As for subprime loans, I think there's a bit more blame to be assigned on the Democrat side versus the Republican. But neither are 'innocent'.
    9 Sep 2011, 07:14 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs