Advertise On This Page!
Click here to inquire.
Even though jobless claims remain elevated, estimates for Friday's employment report are getting more bullish by the day. As of 6/2, economists are expecting non farm payrolls for the month of May to increase by over 510K. If these forecasts are accurate, it would be the largest single month increase in jobs since 1983!
So how would this type of increase affect the unemployment rate? Assuming that the size of the labor force remains constant (a big if), a 510K increase in jobs would take the unemployment rate from 9.9% down to 9.5% (see table to the right). To get the rate below 9%, and once again assuming that the size of the labor force remains constant, we would need to see an increase of 1,415K jobs.
Inevitably though, an improved labor market also brings people out of the woodwork and back into the labor force looking for work (hence last month's increase in the unemployment rate even though 290K jobs were created). Taking these figures into account, economists are therefore only expecting the unemployment rate to show a modest decline of 0.1% from 9.9% down to 9.8% even after the creation of 500K+ jobs.
Want actionable advice from Bespoke? Subscribe to Bespoke Premium today.
Back out census hiring, back out ALL temporary hiring(it's time for permanent employment to put up or shut up) and back out anypositive impact from the birth/death model(the 'assumed' number translates to about 70-75% of same into the final payroll number).That final # needs to be at least 350,000-and that needs to be the minimum monthly number for at least six straight months. Also, hoursworked and hourly wages need to be up by over 3% annually per month; again, for every month going forward. Anything short of the above minimums indicates continued fundamental failure of the US economy and its' institutions. Also, the US labor force is far larger than in 1983,temp employment was a much smaller piece of employment, the census wasn't going on and the birth/death model was over 15 years from initial introduction. So, to match '83 as a proportion of the labor force, the 'net' payroll number stated above needs to be around 750,000.
I concur with the first response to this post. The author of the blog entry is clearly clueless as to what these numbers mean. These numbers include 400K temporary Census workers scouring the country now. those jobs will be gone in two months.
Subtract the number of these temporary jobs and it drops down into the 150K range. That's not even enough new hires to keep up with the growth of new workers entering the work force.
You can certainly count on many of the idiots in blogland, journalmalism and elsewhere--including the Obama administration--- to crow about the numbers. Idiots and propagandists all.
Read Full Article »