Trump Economy creates 263,000 jobs in April, unemployment falls to 3.6%

[McRocket]

Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.

Wage growth, very nice.

Nice, nice, nice.
.

What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?

Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.

If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.

No offense intended...just sayin’.

 

[mikegriffith1]

More great economic news. The Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics just released its jobs report for April, and the numbers are great! Here you go:

* The economy added a whopping 263,000 jobs in April.

* Unemployment dropped to 3.6% in April, the lowest figure since 1969. So it's been 50 years since the unemployment rate was this low.

* Wages continued to grow far faster than they grew under the previous administration. Over the last year, wages have grown by 3.2%, the highest one year-year increase in over 10 years.

* Hispanic and black unemployment remain at all-time lows. 4.2% for Hispanics and 6.7% for blacks.

* Female unemployment is now at just 3.1%, another all-time low. In fact, under the previous administration, female unemployment never dropped below 4.5% and was as high as 8.0% even during the previous recovery.

* Asian unemployment is now at 2.2%! Wow!

* The U-6 unemployment rate, commonly viewed as a wider measurement of employment because it considers "underemployment" (people who work fewer hours than they would like to work), held at 7.3%, the lowest level in nearly 20 years. For four years of the Obama recovery, the U-6 was between 11% and 16%! Yet, all the while liberals were screaming that Obama's recovery was wonderful, marvelous, etc.

Only in the last three months of 2015, after Obama had made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent, after the Republicans had taken control of both chambers of Congress, after Obama signed the compromise budget deal that included $700 billion in tax breaks--only then did the U-6 drop below 10%, and it didn't drop to 9.2% until December 2016. For Obama's last three years in office, it stayed between 9.2% and 11.3%.

Again, the U-6 is now at 7.3%. It has dropped over 2 percentage points in the 26 months Trump has been in office and has not been at 9% for nearly two years now.

U6 Unemployment Rate | Portal Seven

* The April jobs report also revised the jobs numbers for the February and March reports. The result? "Employment gains in February and March combined were 16,000 more than previously reported."

Here's the report: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

 

[BluesLegend]

Trump getting rid of a lot of the regulations has strengthened our economy.

Have they? By how much?

One dollar? 10 Trillion? There is no way to know wtf we are talking about here without some sort of volume estimate.

By the way, unemployment is down to 3.6%
263,000 new jobs, inflation is at .9%, and wages up 3%.
Have a good day, anton.

ANY president Dem or Rep would be thrilled with those numbers.

Yet Trump having those numbers gets him 42 percent approval

We don't know what Trump's approval is because the liberal controlled media spin even this negative.

 

[Rambunctious]

But the dems said we will never get those jobs back....

 

[Jitss617]

3.6 percent unemployment

Why isn’t Trump more popular?

99% of the media is fake news

99 percent of what comes out of Trumps mouth is fake

Like what name something?

 

[Mac1958]

Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.

Wage growth, very nice.

Nice, nice, nice.
.

What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?

Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.

If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.

No offense intended...just sayin’.

As I point out regularly, economic data is virtually always mixed. Anyone who understands this stuff knows that.

I'm only thankful I'm not going through life hoping for the worst for my country, downplaying any good news, just because of politics. That must be awful. I'm happy to celebrate any good news.

And by the way, I have never claimed to be an expert. Not once. Ever.

So you're a liar, too.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Maybe something horrible will happen to our economy soon.

No doubt some here would celebrate that.

 

[Mac1958]

And let's look back to this same "labor force participation" rate argument used by the GOP when Obama was in office.

Wingers, left and right: Peas in a pod. Opposite sides of the same silly coin. Look for the worst in any good news.
.

 

[Papageorgio]

I’ve seen that trend before? Where was it? Starting in 2009?

Too bad wages haven’t gone up as unemployments gone down. But Republicans feel that only billionaires deserve to get paid good money. No matter what happens as long as we are paying billionaires things are OK.

Wages went up 3.2% the most since 2008.

 

[Zorro!]

Those are good numbers to be sure, but It is very puzzling why the Fed has flipped their policy direction. Makes you wonder what they see and think beyond these numbers.

Despite all this growth, there is relatively no inflation. Money supply is nicely balanced with production of goods and services. In light of this, what would you have the Fed do otherwise?


US Unemployment Rate Falls to 3.6% – a 50 Year Low! 263,000 New Jobs In April – Trump Economy Is ON FIRE!

 

[McRocket]

Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.

Wage growth, very nice.

Nice, nice, nice.
.

What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?

Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.

If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.

No offense intended...just sayin’.

As I point out regularly, economic data is virtually always mixed. Anyone who understands this stuff knows that.

I'm only thankful I'm not going through life hoping for the worst for my country, downplaying any good news, just because of politics. That must be awful. I'm happy to celebrate any good news.

And by the way, I have never claimed to be an expert. Not once. Ever.

So you're a liar, too.
.

So you never claimed that your profession is to manage portfolios for clients? Yes or no?
And would it be wrong to assume someone making that claim thinks they are an expert? Yes or no?

Since you usually run away from tough conversations - I will take you not answering the above questions as ‘yes’ to both of them.

And if you ARE managing portfolios for others and you are not an expert - then you should not be managing their portfolios.

Also I suggest you learn what words mean. To ‘lie’ means ‘to intend to deceive’. Since you do not know me and have no idea what my intent was - it is impossible to know whether I was lying or not.
That would make your statement potentially libellous.
Just sayin’.


And what good news? You are cherry picking. You praise the U-3 yet COMPLETELY ignore the negative numbers of the survey it is based on.

IMO, you have to be macroeconically ignorant and/or delusional to call a loss of weekly revenues and a drop in total employed in the Household Survey as a ‘nice, nice, nice’ jobs report.

Finally, when the jobs report is truly good - I call it as such.
I just call ‘em as I see ‘em and am not blinded by political biases and/or a need for ‘happy thoughts’.
I prefer the truth and reality.

 

[Mac1958]

Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.

Wage growth, very nice.

Nice, nice, nice.
.

What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?

Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.

If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.

No offense intended...just sayin’.

As I point out regularly, economic data is virtually always mixed. Anyone who understands this stuff knows that.

I'm only thankful I'm not going through life hoping for the worst for my country, downplaying any good news, just because of politics. That must be awful. I'm happy to celebrate any good news.

And by the way, I have never claimed to be an expert. Not once. Ever.

So you're a liar, too.
.

So you never claimed that your profession is to manage portfolios for clients? Yes or no?
And would it be wrong to assume someone making that claim thinks they are an expert? Yes or no?

Since you usually run away from tough conversations - I will take you not answering the above questions as ‘yes’ to both of them.

And if you ARE managing portfolios for others and you are not an expert - then you should not be managing their portfolios.

Also I suggest you learn what words mean. To ‘lie’ means ‘to intend to deceive’. Since you do not know me and have no idea what my intent was - it is impossible to know whether I was lying or not.
That would make your statement potentially libellous.
Just sayin’.


And what good news? You are cherry picking. You praise the U-3 yet COMPLETELY ignore the negative numbers of the survey is based on.

You have to be macroeconically ignorant and/or delusional to call a loss of weekly revenues and a drop in total employed in the Household Survey as a ‘nice, nice, nice’ jobs report.

I never claimed to be an expert. You're a liar.

I'm happy to celebrate any good data. Data is always mixed.

You can continue to downplay it and hope for the worst. Not my problem.

Oh, and you're a liar.
.

 

[McRocket]

Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.

Wage growth, very nice.

Nice, nice, nice.
.

What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?

Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.

If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.

No offense intended...just sayin’.

As I point out regularly, economic data is virtually always mixed. Anyone who understands this stuff knows that.

I'm only thankful I'm not going through life hoping for the worst for my country, downplaying any good news, just because of politics. That must be awful. I'm happy to celebrate any good news.

And by the way, I have never claimed to be an expert. Not once. Ever.

So you're a liar, too.
.

So you never claimed that your profession is to manage portfolios for clients? Yes or no?
And would it be wrong to assume someone making that claim thinks they are an expert? Yes or no?

Since you usually run away from tough conversations - I will take you not answering the above questions as ‘yes’ to both of them.

And if you ARE managing portfolios for others and you are not an expert - then you should not be managing their portfolios.

Also I suggest you learn what words mean. To ‘lie’ means ‘to intend to deceive’. Since you do not know me and have no idea what my intent was - it is impossible to know whether I was lying or not.
That would make your statement potentially libellous.
Just sayin’.


And what good news? You are cherry picking. You praise the U-3 yet COMPLETELY ignore the negative numbers of the survey is based on.

You have to be macroeconically ignorant and/or delusional to call a loss of weekly revenues and a drop in total employed in the Household Survey as a ‘nice, nice, nice’ jobs report.

I never claimed to be an expert. You're a liar.

I'm happy to celebrate any good data. Data is always mixed.

You can continue to downplay it and hope for the worst. Not my problem.

Oh, and you're a liar.
.

LOL.

You know, when I first encountered you on this board? I thought you were bright and generally reasonable.

Now, the more you post - the more you seem weak, petty and desperate for attention.


And the fact you ran away from answering my two simple questions just further confirms that the answer to both are ‘yes’.


But - in future - I will be happy to no longer assume you have anything more then a slightly above-average knowledge on macroeconomic matters (which means - almost nothing as most people are virtually clueless on the economy).

Have a nice day.

 

[Mac1958]

Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.

Wage growth, very nice.

Nice, nice, nice.
.

What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?

Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.

If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.

No offense intended...just sayin’.

As I point out regularly, economic data is virtually always mixed. Anyone who understands this stuff knows that.

I'm only thankful I'm not going through life hoping for the worst for my country, downplaying any good news, just because of politics. That must be awful. I'm happy to celebrate any good news.

And by the way, I have never claimed to be an expert. Not once. Ever.

So you're a liar, too.
.

So you never claimed that your profession is to manage portfolios for clients? Yes or no?
And would it be wrong to assume someone making that claim thinks they are an expert? Yes or no?

Since you usually run away from tough conversations - I will take you not answering the above questions as ‘yes’ to both of them.

And if you ARE managing portfolios for others and you are not an expert - then you should not be managing their portfolios.

Also I suggest you learn what words mean. To ‘lie’ means ‘to intend to deceive’. Since you do not know me and have no idea what my intent was - it is impossible to know whether I was lying or not.
That would make your statement potentially libellous.
Just sayin’.


And what good news? You are cherry picking. You praise the U-3 yet COMPLETELY ignore the negative numbers of the survey is based on.

You have to be macroeconically ignorant and/or delusional to call a loss of weekly revenues and a drop in total employed in the Household Survey as a ‘nice, nice, nice’ jobs report.

I never claimed to be an expert. You're a liar.

I'm happy to celebrate any good data. Data is always mixed.

You can continue to downplay it and hope for the worst. Not my problem.

Oh, and you're a liar.
.

LOL.

You know, when I first encountered you on this board? I thought you were bright and generally reasonable.

Now, the more you post - the more you seem weak, petty and desperate for attention.


And the fact you ran away from answering my two simple questions just further confirms that the answer to both are ‘yes’.


But - in future - I will be happy to no longer assume you have anything more then a slightly above-average knowledge on macroeconomic matters (which means - almost nothing as most people are virtually clueless on the economy).

Have a nice day.

You're a liar. Have a nice day.
.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The man is a fucking business GENIUS....Eat your heart out Surrender Monkey and ABNORMAL HATERS!

The economy generated a stronger than expected 263,000 new jobs in April, helping to drive down the unemployment rate to a 49-year low of 3.6%. The increase in new jobs easily topped the 217,000 MarketWatch forecast. The jobless rate slid from 3.8% in March to hit the lowest level since December 1969. The average wage paid to American workers rose 6 cents, or 0.2%, to $27.77 an hour. The 12-month rate of hourly wage gains was unchanged at 3.2%. Hours worked each week fell 0.1 hour in April to 34.4. The government revised the increase in new jobs in March to 189,000 from a preliminary 196,000. February's gain was raised to 56,000 from 33,000.

U.S. creates 263,000 jobs in April, unemployment falls to 3.6%

That this is happening on Trumps watch does not make it the Trump economy . This is despite Trump and his stupid trade wars.

 

[McRocket]

More great economic news. The Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics just released its jobs report for April, and the numbers are great! Here you go:

* The economy added a whopping 263,000 jobs in April.

* Unemployment dropped to 3.6% in April, the lowest figure since 1969. So it's been 50 years since the unemployment rate was this low.

* Wages continued to grow far faster than they grew under the previous administration. Over the last year, wages have grown by 3.2%, the highest one year-year increase in over 10 years.

* Hispanic and black unemployment remain at all-time lows. 4.2% for Hispanics and 6.7% for blacks.

* Female unemployment is now at just 3.1%, another all-time low. In fact, under the previous administration, female unemployment never dropped below 4.5% and was as high as 8.0% even during the previous recovery.

* Asian unemployment is now at 2.2%! Wow!

* The U-6 unemployment rate, commonly viewed as a wider measurement of employment because it considers "underemployment" (people who work fewer hours than they would like to work), held at 7.3%, the lowest level in nearly 20 years. For four years of the Obama recovery, the U-6 was between 11% and 16%! Yet, all the while liberals were screaming that Obama's recovery was wonderful, marvelous, etc.

Only in the last three months of 2015, after Obama had made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent, after the Republicans had taken control of both chambers of Congress, after Obama signed the compromise budget deal that included $700 billion in tax breaks--only then did the U-6 drop below 10%, and it didn't drop to 9.2% until December 2016. For Obama's last three years in office, it stayed between 9.2% and 11.3%.

Again, the U-6 is now at 7.3%. It has dropped over 2 percentage points in the 26 months Trump has been in office and has not been at 9% for nearly two years now.

U6 Unemployment Rate | Portal Seven

* The April jobs report also revised the jobs numbers for the February and March reports. The result? "Employment gains in February and March combined were 16,000 more than previously reported."

Here's the report: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

So....a drop in weekly wages and a drop in the Household Survey (the very same survey the unemployment rate is based on) of over 100,000 people employed is ‘great’ news to you?

I would not talk so much about the economy - were I you.
Because clearly you do not fully understand the statistics you are quoting from.

 

[McRocket]

3.6 percent unemployment

Why isn’t Trump more popular?

99% of the media is fake news

99 percent of what comes out of Trumps mouth is fake

Like what name something?

Like what name something?

Another incoherent sentence from Jitss617.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Unemployment is two thirds lower than it was under Obama who had some rates OVER 10 per cent, well into two figures.

This is bad news for the libs, tanking the Triumphant Trump Economy and the Donald's tremendous Trumponomics program is becoming very urgent.

Perhaps so but only because T-Rump supporters are to stupid to understand that it is despite him and not because of anything that he has actually done.

 

[McRocket]

What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?

Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.

If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.

No offense intended...just sayin’.

As I point out regularly, economic data is virtually always mixed. Anyone who understands this stuff knows that.

I'm only thankful I'm not going through life hoping for the worst for my country, downplaying any good news, just because of politics. That must be awful. I'm happy to celebrate any good news.

And by the way, I have never claimed to be an expert. Not once. Ever.

So you're a liar, too.
.

So you never claimed that your profession is to manage portfolios for clients? Yes or no?
And would it be wrong to assume someone making that claim thinks they are an expert? Yes or no?

Since you usually run away from tough conversations - I will take you not answering the above questions as ‘yes’ to both of them.

And if you ARE managing portfolios for others and you are not an expert - then you should not be managing their portfolios.

Also I suggest you learn what words mean. To ‘lie’ means ‘to intend to deceive’. Since you do not know me and have no idea what my intent was - it is impossible to know whether I was lying or not.
That would make your statement potentially libellous.
Just sayin’.


And what good news? You are cherry picking. You praise the U-3 yet COMPLETELY ignore the negative numbers of the survey is based on.

You have to be macroeconically ignorant and/or delusional to call a loss of weekly revenues and a drop in total employed in the Household Survey as a ‘nice, nice, nice’ jobs report.

I never claimed to be an expert. You're a liar.

I'm happy to celebrate any good data. Data is always mixed.

You can continue to downplay it and hope for the worst. Not my problem.

Oh, and you're a liar.
.

LOL.

You know, when I first encountered you on this board? I thought you were bright and generally reasonable.

Now, the more you post - the more you seem weak, petty and desperate for attention.


And the fact you ran away from answering my two simple questions just further confirms that the answer to both are ‘yes’.


But - in future - I will be happy to no longer assume you have anything more then a slightly above-average knowledge on macroeconomic matters (which means - almost nothing as most people are virtually clueless on the economy).

Have a nice day.

You're a liar. Have a nice day.
.

LOL...my my...you are thin-skinned, aren’t you.

BTW - calling me a liar does not bother me in the slightest.
It just advertises the fact that you don’t even know what the word means. Which makes you look uneducated. Which makes me smile as you come across as OH SO WISE/CONDESCENDING (or at least - that is the persona you seem to try to peddle).

I would find another insult if you are trying to ‘get my goat’.
But if you like ‘liar’? Please...continue and advertise your ignorance.

Have a wonderful day.

 

[Polishprince]

Unemployment is two thirds lower than it was under Obama who had some rates OVER 10 per cent, well into two figures.

This is bad news for the libs, tanking the Triumphant Trump Economy and the Donald's tremendous Trumponomics program is becoming very urgent.

Perhaps so but only because T-Rump supporters are to stupid to understand that it is despite him and not because of anything that he has actually done.

A lot of people don't understand economics, doesn't make them stupid.

But the people did hear B. Hussein O, as well as liberal economic gurus like the Paul "El Doofus" Krugman and the evil Midget Robert Reich predict economic cataclysm during a Trump Presidency.

The lib predictions came to naught.

So they figure the current lib complaints about The Trumpster are bullshit too