Free Markets, Free People


“Unexpectedly”, we’re back at 9.2% unemployment

urea am glad we wasted all the money on Stimulus so we could stay below the promised 8% aren’t you?

U.S. employment growth ground to a halt in June, with employers hiring the fewest number of workers in nine months, dousing hopes the economy would regain momentum in the second half of the year.

Nonfarm payrolls rose only 18,000, the weakest reading since September, the Labor Department said on Friday, well below economists’ expectations for a 90,000 rise.

The unemployment rate climbed to a six-month high of 9.2 percent, even as jobseekers left the labor force in droves, from 9.1 percent in May.

So here we are in Recovery Summer II, huh?   You know, I’d go through all the reasons for this but I think you know them pretty well by now.

The results, however, should be reviewed, because we’re suffering them because of this administration’s cluelessness, the Fed’s cluelessness, and the government’s over-regulation and war on business – not to mention the mounting debt.  Oh, wait, I just went through all the reasons again, didn’t I?

"The message on the economy is ongoing stagnation," said Pierre Ellis, senior economist at Decision economics in New York. "Income growth is marginal so there’s no indication of momentum.

Gee, wish we’d been saying that for the last few months/years.  As Dale has said for quite some time on our podcast, we’re looking stagflation directly in the eye and in the process of recreating the Japanese “lost decade” – except it is possible this may linger for more than a decade given our debt.

The report shattered expectations the economy was starting to accelerate after a soft patch in the first half of the year. It could prompt calls for the Federal Reserve to consider further action to help the economy, but Fed officials have set a high bar.

The U.S. central bank wrapped up a $600 billion bond-buying program last week designed to spur lending and stimulate growth.

"This confirms our view that the Fed will continue to keep rates on hold into 2012 and if weak employment continues it will be pushed out even further," said Tom Purcell, chief economist, RBC Capital Markets in New York.

Classic, obviously predictable (I mean, we did it) and inevitable given the way the problem was tackled.

Oh, btw, 10% is not at all impossible, given the continued policies of this administration.

Just saying’, so it won’t be considered “unexpected” if it happens.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

22 Responses to “Unexpectedly”, we’re back at 9.2% unemployment

  • White House says unemployment won’t be a key issue in 2012 election.

    /sarc
    So, take that you racist gun clutching conservatives!  The moonpony king will triumph again!
    /sarcoff


    Man, I want whatever they’re smoking over there.

    • As the economy gets better many discouraged workers will go back to looking again which will, at least temporarily, make the unemployment numbers go up. I’m sure that Team Obama is hoping that today’s numbers are that beginning, but nothing would make anybody take that notion seriously.

      • Uh, the jobs created were small and those let go were larger this time. It was not because more people were looking for work in this case.

  • The Japanese lost decade is pretty much working on its second decade.  So given the reasons listed this could be what passes for normal.

  • start the talking points
    “We’ve always known that we’d have ups and downs on our way back from this recession.  And over the past few months, the economy has experienced some tough headwinds — from natural disasters, to spikes in gas prices, to state and local budget cuts that have cost tens of thousands of cops and firefighters and teachers their jobs.

    State and local budget cuts are to blame, reckless budget cuts are the reason unemployment is up, and they’ve put cops, firefighters, and teachers out of work (tens. of. thousands! which jeopardizes our children, our homes, our lives, are you listening?).

    Wait and see if that’s not what gets play from the usual talking heads to explain the unexpected.

    Read it all – his ‘middle class tax cut’ is there, the shovel ready projects are there, the government spending control is there, living within our means while increasing spending under the euphemism ‘investing’ is there, and the ever popular rolling up his sleeves.

    I would think after all the sleeve rolling he’s done over the last couple years, his sleeves would be bunched up under his armpits by now.
     

      • Mind you, this is ‘unexpected’.

        I’m feeling real good about the quality of an Ivy League education right now if they couldn’t
        manage to ‘expect’ that people were going to become unemployed at the state level as a result of budget cuts.

    • About 3:45 into the FoxNews video, Obama says there are things we can do right now.  There are a million construction workers out of work because of the housing slump.  He suggests we put them to work building roads and bridges and infrastructure.  Has Obama ever seen a house or a road being built?  It would be funny if he weren’t carrying the nuclear codes.

      • Has Obama ever seen a house or a road being built?”

        Building a house, building a road, almost exactly the same.  He’s seen em both being built as he whisks from one spot to another.  Construction involves trucks, and men, and equipment, and tool belts and even hard hats.  There are guys carrying things from the trucks and placing them in places that aren’t on the trucks.  There are cranes, and bulldozers, and cement.  They use lumber on the forms for highways, and they use lumber on houses.  Sometimes the guys doing the work aren’t working, they’re resting, and he’s noticed they generally don’t work before sunrise or after sunset.

        Really, it’s all the same Arch, and he knows, because he’s Barack Obama, S-U-P-E-R G-E-N-I-U-S.
        It even says that on his cards.  And those projects? They’re shovel ready.  If only Congress, the Republicans in particular, would get off their undermining keisters and help him get the country moving again by agreeing to whatever he wants.

    • State and local budget cuts are to blame
      The “stimulus” was supposed to “bridge” these budgets, but now the money is running out with no recovery in sight.

      • Whoops. Romer’s predictions weren’t correct. PhD economist was not correct, and their stimulus policy also went against her own research. I’d like her to write a tell-all book. But Democrats apparently don’t do that. I wonder why? Maybe there is no safe media that will laud them, or maybe they will lose all chance of advancement. You know there’s a story there…”I wanted to say 9.5% unemployment, but the political people said that wasn’t bullish enough.” “They promises shovel ready but it all went to the states to pay for public sector employees. Obama seemed distant and didn’t really care. He wanted to get past the economy and onto health care.”

  • I heard today on Rush that the Stimulus bill paid for the Fast and Furious operation. Your tax money devalued savings at work.

  • Given that everything economic since The Lightworker took office has been “unexpected” I’m shocked that nobody has bothered to ask just we the he** do we need “experts” for since all they’ve done is get every prediction wrong?

  • The only way for Obama to stimulate the enormous private sector job growth needed to ensure Obama’s reelection is for Obama to announce he is not running for reelection, which would unleash a wave of investment and economic activity not seen since the Great Depression.

    –Jacobson @ Legal Insurrection

    • Rags, TAO isn’t the least bit worried about his re-election.
      If nothing else, ten million dead people will guarantee his next fours years.

    • I wonder if the Team Obama braintrust thought of the idea of floating a trial balloon that he isn’t running, then have Obama drop in at Iowa.

  • Believe it or not, June’s 9.2% unemployment rate is nearly a point BETTER than for the same time during Reagan’s first term:
    http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate.jsp?fromYear=1981&toYear=1990
    Of course, we were down to 7.2% by Election Day 1984 and 5.4% when Reagan left office in January 1989.
    If we can match those last two numbers, I’ll vote for Obama again in 2012 and lobby to repeal the 22nd Amendment by 2016.

    • Yes, that’s true, but only if you put aside the fact that they changed the way the numbers are calculated. Based on the changes, it appears that the true unemployment rate under Reagan, while pretty high, was at or below today’s.

      The raw number also doesn’t tell us much about the future. Reagan’s high figures came as the result of tight money policy used to fight inflation (which Obama has not had to contend with). Obama’s are due to more systemic problems in the financial system, uncertainties about health policies, and a host of regulatory constraints.

      Thus Reagan had a plan to deal with a specific issue, his solution comported with understood economic principles, and thus he expected (and got) the longer term results he wanted after suffering short term reversals. It’s not clear that Obama’s policies for dealing with economic problems are based on anything more than political expediency, paying off special interest groups, and leftist fanatasies about how economics works. So we don’t really have any idea what the long term results will be (charitably speaking, because I think they’re going to be rather negative), but there’s no sign they’re going to get better any time soon.

  • Twenty years from now they’ll be telling us that our mirroring of Japan since 1989 is “unexpected”.
    Prosperity is just around the corner, but that corner is six light-years away.

    • This is the thing. Maybe no politician could break this recession. Japan tried massive spending – they are at 235% of GDP in debt, and still have problems. (Then again they also have bad demographics.)  They tried some deregulation, too. That sort of helped. It may be that we have to endure pain for a while, regardless of who is in the white house.
      Now, that said, you can always pour salt into the wounds, by passing a carbon tax, or doing Obamacare or whatever.

       

  • In the heady early days of his regime, Captain Bullsh*t was favorably compared to FDR by MiniTru.  How apt: he took a bad economic situation and made it CHRONICALLY WORSE by continuing and extending the meddlesome, interventionist policies of his GOP predecessor.

    Can somebody ask the Germans or the Japanese if they’d like to try again?  ‘cuz that’s the only thing that got us out of the Keynesian / democrat mess the last time.