Friday, December 2, 2011

Signs of Hope? Unemployment Lingers Near 9 Percent as Obama Depression Drags On

The MFM is putting the most positive gloss on the job numbers, at New York Times, for example, "Signs of Hope in Jobs Report; Unemployment Drops to 8.6%."

The RNC isn't settling for the left's economic whitewash: "Republicans throw cold water on unemployment numbers."

And see Maggie's Farm, "More MSM Cheerleading." Plus, from James Pethokoukis, "November jobs report: 7 reasons why it’s better but still terrible."

And more at the Heritage Foundation, "Morning Bell: America Needs More Job Creation":

The question is whether this improvement is real and enduring or a fluke. The economy is growing, but there’s little evidence of the real strength the report suggests, and there’s a lot in the report to suggest something’s amiss with the numbers–something likely to be corrected in the next report. For example, is it likely the labor market strengthened as much as the job number suggests at the same time so many people abandoned the workforce? And this is only one of the anomalies in the report.

The White House would therefore be wise to trumpet today’s news with soft notes. The fact remains that under President Barack Obama’s watch, the U.S. unemployment rate remains high because America just isn’t creating enough new jobs. And if the only way the Obama Administration can get the unemployment rate to drop is by convincing people to quit looking for work, that’s bad news for the American economy. Or to quote liberal blogger Matt Yglesias, ”Decreasing unemployment by shrinking the labor force is not exactly winning the future.”

It goes without saying that if the U.S. economy loses more jobs than it creates, the unemployment rate goes up. If job losses are low but few new jobs are created, then the unemployment rate treads water and remains high, with occasional dips and rises–and that’s what we’re seeing today.
Still more from John Hayward, "Unemployment Rate Falls Due To Workforce Contraction."

2 comments:

  1. I'm wondering why no one includes the holiday hiring of temp workers.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Not for the 320,000 unemployed who gave up their job hunting and are not considered in the "unemployment" rate.

    ReplyDelete