Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Shock Us Job Figures Threaten Recovery Hopes

Recommended Posts

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jul/08/shock-us-job-figures-threaten-recovery-hopes

US employers hired the fewest workers in nearly two years last month, pushing up the jobless rate and rattling financial markets.

Crushing hopes of a turnaround in the jobs market, companies became increasingly cautious about hiring new staff amid the continuing economic uncertainty and added just 18,000 jobs in June, the US labour department said, well below the consensus forecast of 90,000 to 120,000, and the weakest reading since September 2010.

The shock figures pushed the US unemployment rate up from 9.1% to 9.2% – the highest level since December 2010, when it stood at 9.4%.

We can't derail the jobless recovery can we. I though this would be good news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's as I said for a while now.

We aren't out of the recession. The numbers have been manipulated through artificial stimulus to show "we are out of recession hoorah" but in reality the short term investments and supports have all been just short term.

Better to raise interest rates, suffer pain for a year and then truly be out of this stupid mess.

And a few banks need to go to the wall too if they still haven't got their affairs in order. They ought to have given they received three years of support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jul/08/shock-us-job-figures-threaten-recovery-hopes

We can't derail the jobless recovery can we. I though this would be good news.

Its much worse than that. If you count in the 272,000 who became 'inactive' and gave up looking for a job, then it wasn't 18K jobs created but rather 254K jobs lost.

Viva a la recovery!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These official numbers seem at odds with other surveys earlier in the week

Is it possible they're being fiddled to justify QE3?

The reasons given seem reasonable. Rising gas prices. Ever declining housing market. Falling consumer confidence. Reduced production/supply chain problems with products from Japan . . . The disasters in Japan must be having a knock-on effect by now, not only in the US.

Time to put the US on 'outlook negative', I'd have thought, with a warning of a downgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given our population grew by 500k last year, the US is six times larger than us, and historically has more immigration, shouldnt this be growing by several 100 thousand each and every month just to stand still?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reasons given seem reasonable. Rising gas prices. Ever declining housing market. Falling consumer confidence. Reduced production/supply chain problems with products from Japan . . . The disasters in Japan must be having a knock-on effect by now, not only in the US.

Japan seems to have recovered way back in May, I can't see the effects taking more than a month to cross the Pacific.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/29/japan-economy-idUSL3E7HS07V20110629

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given our population grew by 500k last year, the US is six times larger than us, and historically has more immigration, shouldnt this be growing by several 100 thousand each and every month just to stand still?

Between 1991 and 2008 roughly 1 million legal immigrants settled in the US each year. Of course that's legal immigrants - counting illegal immigrants is obviously very difficult. Also, I can't find any figures for emigration from the US, so I've had no luck working out net migration. On Jan 1 2008 the population of the US was estimated as 302,785,808 and on Jan 1 2009 as 305,529,237.

As for the UK, 567,000 people arrived to live here in 2009, and 590,000 in 2008. 368,000 people left in 2009 and 427,000 in 2008. So that gives net (in-)migration of 198,000 in 2009 and 163,000 in 2008. Again, that's the people that were actually counted. The UK population was estimated at 61,393,000 in 2008 and 61,792,000 in 2009.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Between 1991 and 2008 roughly 1 million legal immigrants settled in the US each year. Of course that's legal immigrants - counting illegal immigrants is obviously very difficult. Also, I can't find any figures for emigration from the US, so I've had no luck working out net migration. On Jan 1 2008 the population of the US was estimated as 302,785,808 and on Jan 1 2009 as 305,529,237.

As for the UK, 567,000 people arrived to live here in 2009, and 590,000 in 2008. 368,000 people left in 2009 and 427,000 in 2008. So that gives net (in-)migration of 198,000 in 2009 and 163,000 in 2008. Again, that's the people that were actually counted. The UK population was estimated at 61,393,000 in 2008 and 61,792,000 in 2009.

So regardless of whether you take most or least conservative population estimates, actual unemployment is on the up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.