Economy adds 175,000 jobs

[DiamondDave]

It depends on what period of time you are measuring. But the fact is that spending has declined over several quarters. It is correctly illustrated in the Federal Reserve chart.

You just keep looking at those graphs and I will keep looking at the actual numbers, okay?

Stop with the lies. Partisan hacks are retarded.

2011 spending = $3.603 trillion
2012 spending = $3.537 trillion

That was a decrease. 2013 is only projected. We came in under budget in 2011 & 2012 & will likely do it again in 2013.

Wrong

The 'decrease' projected a month or so ago would ONLY be facilitated if there were no further spending this year... this was shown in another wrongwinger thread before.. I just cannot remember which one

And there was no budget in 2012 and 2011

 

[ScienceRocks]

That is not true. There was actual spending cut that is unprecedented in over 60 years.

2012 spending = $3.537 trillion
2013 spending = $3.685 trillion

The OMB estimates the Federal government will spend $3.685 trillion by the end of FY 2013.
US Federal Government Budget FY 2013 Summary

Read it and weep.

Who the hell is getting that extra $149 trillion from last year and why?

Certainly not
-Infrastructure that has been cut to shit
-Science
-Technology
-Military

I'm guessing China or the big banks?

 

[hunarcy]

Congress is holding back a real recovery

Congress also keeping Japan in the doldrums? What it IS is proof that Keynesian economics doesn't really work. Only on the Left is the idea that you take money from consumers and, after filtering it through government and siphoning some of it away, use it for stimulating the economy a good idea.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I believe that a "mixed" economy is best, so the consumer has enough money to buy stuff and the government has the ability to fund innovation. Most of this innovation will be military, but also for the benefit for the society in general.

Every government in the history of man put resources into advancing the innovation of technology and science. This country should be no different. We must make sure the consumer has more then enough money to built wealth to spend within the economy at the same time....

So it is like a c-sew. It must be balanced.

 

[DiamondDave]

I believe that a "mixed" economy is best, so the consumer has enough money to buy stuff and the government has the ability to fund innovation.

Every government in the history of man put resources into advancing the innovation of technology and science. This country should be no different. We must make sure the consumer has more then enough money to built wealth to spend within the economy at the same time....

So it is like a c-sew. It must be balanced.

Except the government is not constitutionally charged to 'fund innovation'... can it happen thru constitutionally charged actions like the funding of the military for defense?? Yep.. but there is no way that the government should be giving grants etc for pet projects

 

[ScienceRocks]

I believe that a "mixed" economy is best, so the consumer has enough money to buy stuff and the government has the ability to fund innovation.

Every government in the history of man put resources into advancing the innovation of technology and science. This country should be no different. We must make sure the consumer has more then enough money to built wealth to spend within the economy at the same time....

So it is like a c-sew. It must be balanced.

Except the government is not constitutionally charged to 'fund innovation'... can it happen thru constitutionally charged actions like the funding of the military for defense?? Yep.. but there is no way that the government should be giving grants etc for pet projects

I think we'd benefit greatly allowing energy innovation as one of the new mandates given to the federal government. This is something that our founders could of never thought of in 1791 so you can't really say that they'd disagree with this.

I believe we need a couple of constitutional amendments to rewrite the second amendment to write it to be clearer and to broaden the federal governments power to stair "energy" and science innovation. We won't be a super power very long if we tried to follow the constitution as it was written to a "t" 200+ years ago. Same as a Christian believing that the earth was made in 6 days.

It's true that the states should hold most all of the power but through the congress lead by the president should have the ability to drive the direction of national innovation of technology in some way. I believe that things like Asteroids, solar storms and severe weather should be added to the "defense" mandate granted to the federal government. These are serious threats just as deserving of that as a invading army of another nation.

I think some limited powers to hold the federal government within check of monopoly powers of businesses(corperations) and regulations should be defined within a constitution. I say this as this is a reality now and must be defined to limit the power of the federal government.

Society has charged so greatly within the past 200 years that it is dearly needed. I'm not saying this as I want a powerful federal government, but I want it to have defined constitutional limits on its power. We now have to live within the 21st century, not the 18th.

1. We dearly need a fine toning of second amendment. This could put a lot of pain behind us.
2. We live in a much different world where pure capitalism has been found to be corrupt. The charges must be made to favor a mix economic system that works for today.
3. I believe the power of the federal government to spy on you using technology should be "defined" and very limited.

 

[asaratis]

This is better than recent reports, but less than half the net job creation we would have had in a Real Recovery.

180K+ are reentrants to the labor force (after having given up looking - the UI must be running out)...the jobs aren't enough to keep up with them and population growth.

Congress is holding back a real recovery

Yes it is. The Senate, under the "leadership" of sleazy Harry Reid, kills every bill that the House passes....and then claims the Republicans do nothing.

What a goddamned crock!

Here's the word on the "recovery"!
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-06-05-09-31-43

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

And what good jobs they are too!

The industries with the strongest employment growth in the last month were temporary help agencies, which added 26,000 jobs; and food services, which added 38,000 jobs in May and 337,000 over the past year.

Jobs Report: Unemployment Rate Rises to 7.6 Percent as 175,000 Jobs Are Added - ABC News

When companies start hiring temporary help its generally a sign they may be hiring permanent help in the near future.

What's wrong with food service? You tip, don't you? Maybe you expect the economy would only be adding CEO jobs with 7 figure paychecks if the Republicans were in charge?

 

[ScienceRocks]

I say what I say as the overall population and the federal government does it anyways. Why not cap the power and defined it within a constitution.

asratis,

yeah Reid doesn't like anything that comes from the house so he blocks it. He is someone that can't be talked with.

 

[ScienceRocks]

And what good jobs they are too!

The industries with the strongest employment growth in the last month were temporary help agencies, which added 26,000 jobs; and food services, which added 38,000 jobs in May and 337,000 over the past year.

Jobs Report: Unemployment Rate Rises to 7.6 Percent as 175,000 Jobs Are Added - ABC News

When companies start hiring temporary help its generally a sign they may be hiring permanent help in the near future.

What's wrong with food service? You tip, don't you? Maybe you expect the economy would only be adding CEO jobs with 7 figure paychecks if the Republicans were in charge?

Nothing,

but I'd rather see more infrastructure and tech jobs opening up.

 

[asaratis]

And what good jobs they are too!

The industries with the strongest employment growth in the last month were temporary help agencies, which added 26,000 jobs; and food services, which added 38,000 jobs in May and 337,000 over the past year.

Jobs Report: Unemployment Rate Rises to 7.6 Percent as 175,000 Jobs Are Added - ABC News

When companies start hiring temporary help its generally a sign they may be hiring permanent help in the near future.

What's wrong with food service? You tip, don't you? Maybe you expect the economy would only be adding CEO jobs with 7 figure paychecks if the Republicans were in charge?

When companies start hiring temporary help its generally a sign that they temporarily need help...like for Christmas shopping season or serving summer vacationers. If has little if anything to do with permanent jobs.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

And what good jobs they are too!

The industries with the strongest employment growth in the last month were temporary help agencies, which added 26,000 jobs; and food services, which added 38,000 jobs in May and 337,000 over the past year.

Jobs Report: Unemployment Rate Rises to 7.6 Percent as 175,000 Jobs Are Added - ABC News

When companies start hiring temporary help its generally a sign they may be hiring permanent help in the near future.

What's wrong with food service? You tip, don't you? Maybe you expect the economy would only be adding CEO jobs with 7 figure paychecks if the Republicans were in charge?

When companies start hiring temporary help its generally a sign that they temporarily need help...like for Christmas shopping season or serving summer vacationers. If has little if anything to do with permanent jobs.

You are referring to seasonable changes. The data is already seasonally adjusted.
Employment and Earnings Summary Table B

As you can see from the chart, the type of "temporary help" that is being added is a subcategory of "professional and business services". This means business places are hiring secretarial staff, data entry clerks, receptionists, paralegals, etc.

The increase in hospitality jobs is an indication people have more disposable income now.

 

[depotoo]

3 reason the jobs numbers were bleh - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blogTerm Sheet

3 reason the jobs numbers were bleh
By Stephen Gandel, senior editor June 7, 2013: 12:25 PM ET
Email Print The market might have loved the number, but that doesn't mean we should.
FORTUNE -- Good, but not too good. That's what the market wanted, and that's what it got.

In May, U.S. employers had 175,000 more workers on their payrolls than they did the month before. That made May the fourth-best job month for hiring out of the past eight. Any signs that we are headed toward a double dip recession are long gone.

Still, the unemployment rate rose for the first time seven months to 7.6%. So, yeah, whoopee!

But stocks shot up after the government released the May jobs number. What's going on?

Part of it is a hope that the Federal Reserve won't have to end QE anytime soon after all. Part of it is adjusting to the new normal, namely that jobs growth is as good as it can get right now. (Remember when 200,000 was the bar?)

There are even some people still clinging to a Brooklyn Dodgers "Wait till next year!" belief in the economy, even though there are few signs that 2014 will be any better.

But the reality is that it's still pretty ugly out there. There are nearly 12 million people who are out of a job and looking for work. On top of that, there are another nearly 8 million people who have only been able to find part-time gigs.

(cont'd)

 

[Wyatt earp]

Temp forever, thank you Obama care!

Temp staffing jobs hit record as firms dodge ObamaCare costs by Andrew Malcolm - Investors.com

Temporary staffing jobs hit a record 2.68 million in May as employers look to lighten the burden of ObamaCare's regulations and fines for failing to provide full-time workers health coverage

 

[boedicca]

I believe that a "mixed" economy is best, so the consumer has enough money to buy stuff and the government has the ability to fund innovation.

Every government in the history of man put resources into advancing the innovation of technology and science. This country should be no different. We must make sure the consumer has more then enough money to built wealth to spend within the economy at the same time....

So it is like a c-sew. It must be balanced.

Except the government is not constitutionally charged to 'fund innovation'... can it happen thru constitutionally charged actions like the funding of the military for defense?? Yep.. but there is no way that the government should be giving grants etc for pet projects

I think we'd benefit greatly allowing energy innovation as one of the new mandates given to the federal government. This is something that our founders could of never thought of in 1791 so you can't really say that they'd disagree with this.

I believe we need a couple of constitutional amendments to rewrite the second amendment to write it to be clearer and to broaden the federal governments power to stair "energy" and science innovation. We won't be a super power very long if we tried to follow the constitution as it was written to a "t" 200+ years ago. Same as a Christian believing that the earth was made in 6 days.

It's true that the states should hold most all of the power but through the congress lead by the president should have the ability to drive the direction of national innovation of technology in some way. I believe that things like Asteroids, solar storms and severe weather should be added to the "defense" mandate granted to the federal government. These are serious threats just as deserving of that as a invading army of another nation.

I think some limited powers to hold the federal government within check of monopoly powers of businesses(corperations) and regulations should be defined within a constitution. I say this as this is a reality now and must be defined to limit the power of the federal government.

Society has charged so greatly within the past 200 years that it is dearly needed. I'm not saying this as I want a powerful federal government, but I want it to have defined constitutional limits on its power. We now have to live within the 21st century, not the 18th.

1. We dearly need a fine toning of second amendment. This could put a lot of pain behind us.
2. We live in a much different world where pure capitalism has been found to be corrupt. The charges must be made to favor a mix economic system that works for today.
3. I believe the power of the federal government to spy on you using technology should be "defined" and very limited.

I bet you believe in Unicorns and Gum Drop Palaces, too.

Innovation is more often blocked by the government than encouraged. We don't need the government to do innovation...we need the government to get out of the way.

And no thank you for the belief that the governmetn should have a "Defined" power to SPY on us using technology. That's a completely insane and destructive belief - along with the rest of your "beliefs".

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Innovation is more often blocked by the government than encouraged.

Yeah tell that to the private company that built this:

We don't need the government to do innovation...we need the government to get out of the way.

That's a slogan. It doesn't actually mean anything.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Man.......what is it like to wake up each day hoping that you turn on the tube and see bad news?

For too many here....and unfortunately in Washington.....a booming economy is the worst possible scenario. It would mean that your crazed social agenda would never see the light of day.

I can look past the nuttiness on guns and abortion and sexuality and science......but this rooting for the country to NOT RECOVER while the other party is in office is unforgivable. Wanting your fellow Americans to suffer longer than necessary so you can say "I told you so" is what identifies you. You sorry fucks.

 

[boedicca]

Innovation is more often blocked by the government than encouraged.

Yeah tell that to the private company that built this:

We don't need the government to do innovation...we need the government to get out of the way.

That's a slogan. It doesn't actually mean anything.

The government hasn't been involved in anything remotely like that in decades.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Innovation is more often blocked by the government than encouraged.

Yeah tell that to the private company that built this:

We don't need the government to do innovation...we need the government to get out of the way.

That's a slogan. It doesn't actually mean anything.

The government hasn't been involved in anything remotely like that in decades.

so the only way the government can successfully innovate is to send man to the moon? lol.

Did you think government stopped the private company who built this:

 

[LoneLaugher]

Innovation is more often blocked by the government than encouraged.

Yeah tell that to the private company that built this:

We don't need the government to do innovation...we need the government to get out of the way.

That's a slogan. It doesn't actually mean anything.

The government hasn't been involved in anything remotely like that in decades.

???