Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on November 07, 2003, 07:55:22 AM
-
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a76voWWYDv7g&refer=news_index
U.S. October Payrolls Rise 126,000; Jobless Rate Falls to 6%
Nov. 7 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. economy gained jobs for a third month in October, and the unemployment rate fell to 6 percent, giving fuel to a recovery that started two years ago.
Payrolls rose by 126,000 last month, almost twice as much as expected, the Labor Department said in Washington. Revisions raised the number of jobs gained in September to 125,000, and August changed from a decline to a 35,000 gain. The jobless rate fell from 6.1 percent, the first decline since August.
The fastest pace of economic expansion in 19 years, rising productivity and profit gains have positioned companies to start hiring again. The increased payrolls may also encourage more household spending after consumers used up tax refunds and the proceeds from refinancing mortgages.
``All the pieces of a typical expansion are falling into place,'' said Louis Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP LLC, in Jersey City, New Jersey, before the report. ``We are using up other available resources very quickly at this point, so that will lead to a need for increased labor.''
Payrolls in services, the largest part of the economy, rose. Manufacturing employment had the smallest decline in more than three years.
The job numbers, after more than a week of favorable reports on manufacturing, services and consumer sentiment, may also help President George W. Bush fight criticism about his handling of the economy going into next year's election.
Expectations
Economists had expected payrolls would rise by 65,000 last month after a previously reported increase of 57,000 in September, according to the median of 68 forecasts in a Bloomberg News survey. Forecasts had ranged from no gain to 150,000 jobs added. Economists had projected the unemployment rate would hold at 6.1 percent.
Services accounted for all the gains.
Employment in service-producing industries, which include retailers, banks and government agencies, rose by 143,000 last month after gaining by 138,000 the previous month. The increase was led by a 56,000 rise in education and health services employment. A 43,000 rise in business and professional services, which include temporary employment agencies, contributed to the rise as well.
Average weekly hours worked for all employees rose to 33.8 hours in October from 33.7 the prior month. Economists had expected hours would rise to 33.8 hours, according to the Bloomberg News survey.
A longer workweek may be a precursor to future hiring, economists said.
Jobs `Revival'
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said yesterday he expects hiring to increase as companies begin rebuilding inventories depleted during the July-September quarter, when the 7.2 growth pace for the economy was the fastest in 19 years.
The economy has lost more than 1 million jobs since the last recession ended in November 2001, and more than 2.6 million since Bush took office in January 2001, based on Labor Department figures before today's release.
``The odds, however, do increasingly favor a revival of job creation,'' Greenspan told the Securities Industry Association yesterday in a televised speech.
Factory employment declined for a 39th month. Manufacturers shed 24,000 jobs last month, the fewest since July 2000, the last time there was an increase. Factory job losses have averaged 53,000 a month for the previous 12 months.
The manufacturing workweek held at 40.5 hours. Overtime held at 4.2 hours.
Incomes increased last month. Workers' average hourly earnings rose 0.1 percent, or 1 cent, after no change the previous month. Economists had expected a 0.2 percent increase in hourly wages. Average weekly earnings rose to $522.55 last month from $520.67 in September.
Economic Growth
Consumer spending grew the most in six years during the third quarter, while business investment in equipment and software rose at the fastest pace since the first quarter of 2000, Commerce Department figures showed last week.
The economy is expected to grow at a 4 percent annual rate this quarter and maintain that pace next year, according to the median estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News this month. The U.S., the world's biggest economy, grew at an average 3.6 percent pace during the record 10-year expansion from 1991 to 2001.
``We are looking forward to that acceleration in the economy in our business area, so we are actually hiring at a fairly strong clip right now,'' said Irwin Jacobs, chief executive of Qualcomm Inc., in a radio interview with Bloomberg News yesterday. ``We are having to do more research and development, and we have been adding people to do that.''
Claims
San Diego-based Qualcomm, a maker of mobile-telephone technology, said fiscal fourth-quarter net income rose 53 percent. The company raised the forecast for first-quarter sales.
Gains in payrolls may be accelerating this month. First-time claims for unemployment insurance benefits dropped to the fewest since January 2001, which was two months before the economy slumped into recession, the Labor Department reported yesterday.
If claims stay close to that level, ``we will probably be revising up our expectations of job growth over the next quarter or two,'' said Robert Mellman, an economist at J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. in New York, before the report. J.P. Morgan economists are currently projecting an average of 75,000 jobs will be created a month in the next couple of quarters.
``We are currently actively hiring,'' said Alfred Mockett, chief executive officer of American Management Systems Inc., a Fairfax, Virginia, provider of consulting services to government agencies and businesses, in an interview Tuesday. ``Just based on our current backlog and pipeline, we are going to have to step up our hiring as we go into next year. I can foresee a situation where the whole industry is going to get into recruitment mode next year.''
Productivity
Mockett said he would like to see the economy grow in the 4 percent to 5 percent range this quarter to be more certain the recovery is sustainable. American Management announced in July that it was cutting jobs amid a decline in second-quarter revenue.
Companies are adding workers after reaching the limit of what they can obtain from their present staff. Productivity surged to an 8.1 percent annual rate of growth last quarter after a 7 percent gain in the previous three months, the Labor Department reported yesterday.
``The combination of faster growth in demand and slowing productivity growth should lead, in the next few quarters, to increased hiring,'' Fed Governor Ben Bernanke told participants in an investment outlook conference in Pittsburgh yesterday.
Profits
Productivity has grown at a 7 percent annual pace or higher during 27 quarters since the end of World War II. In the subsequent three-month periods, it dropped to an average of 1.9 percent growth while companies hired an average of 462,000 workers. Hiring declined in just four instances, the last being the third quarter of this year.
Companies are more open to the possibility of taking on staff because earnings are rebounding. Of the 430 S&P 500 members that have reported third-quarter results so far, profits rose an average of 21.4 percent, according to Thomson Financial. Profits will swell 21.8 percent in the fourth quarter and 12.4 percent in 2004, according to analysts surveyed by the company.
``Companies are posting sales positions,'' said Jeff Taylor, founder and chief executive of Monster Worldwide Inc.'s Monster.com, the biggest U.S. Internet site for employment advertising, in a television interview with Bloomberg News yesterday. ``This is critical because it means companies have confidence in the future. We see a heavy amount of small- and medium-sized company postings.''
Blacks, Teenagers
Among blacks, the unemployment rate rose to 11.5 percent from 11.2 percent in September. The jobless rate for Hispanics decreased to 7.2 percent from 7.5 percent and for whites fell to 5.1 percent from 5.3 percent.
For teenagers, unemployment dropped to 17.1 percent last month from 17.5 percent. The jobless rate for women fell to 5.2 percent from 5.3 percent. The jobless rate for men decreased to 5.6 percent from 5.7 percent.
The optimism among employers isn't uniform.
``Most companies are going to wait to see if this is sustainable'' before hiring in earnest, said John Chambers, chief executive of Cisco Systems Inc., the world's largest maker of equipment to link computers, in an interview this week.
They will start by spending more on equipment and software and ``then they are going to start spending on their hiring'' a couple of quarters later, he said. Sales at Cisco, based in San Jose, California, were the highest in almost three years.''
-
I need to know when we will be carrying bags of money around begging for food.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
I need to know when we will be carrying bags of money around begging for food.
You don't like good news about our economy? :confused: you'd think this would be one area that all political affiliations could come together and agree its a good thing.
-
It flew right over ur head rip
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
It flew right over ur head rip
:eek:
(http://www.jach.hawaii.edu/JAClocal/images/clipart/Transportation/f15.gif)
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
It flew right over ur head rip
Oh! You mean like some of the European welfare states! :p
-
lol, carrying bags of money around while begging for food was mentioned on this BB by someone predicting doom on the US economy.
Carry on.
-
Rip, Sixpense was referring to my posts about the difference between true sustainable increase in production and credit-expanasion induced unsustainable increase that will end in bust like those before.
The Fed dumped a lot of money into the economy. Low interests and easy loans make many business projects seem more attractive than before. So the companies borrow money to invest resources into the economy.
Of course the resources were not saved and made available for investment y the american public, so unless the foreign savings help us, the increased money quantity will spread through the economy and drive the price of the resourses up. At that point the companies will find out that their projects are not profitable any more and will fold them.
miko
-
Hooked him, although I was expecting a longer post;)
-
Reel that baby in Six!!!
Yeah!
-
EASY ON THE DRAG MAN!!
You dont want to try to turn him untill hes winded, he will just break off.
:rofl
-
Sixpence: Hooked him, although I was expecting a longer post;)
:) The ones who are hooked are those who finance the wrong kind of jobs creation with their forced savings.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Sixpence: Hooked him, although I was expecting a longer post;)
:) The ones who are hooked are those who finance the wrong kind of jobs creation with their forced savings.
miko
He's fighting ya....
*damn, I wish I knew more fishing terms*
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
He's fighting ya....
*damn, I wish I knew more fishing terms*
sounding, rolling. leaping. throw the hook, chumed up, thrashing, spooled, drag smoking, broke off, backing down, turned in, spent, gaffed, taged, boated,
;)
-
That article is nothing but propaganda. The short term increase as described is nothing but the Fed dumping money into the system. Its a short term fix to a short term problem, only we dont have a short term problem. We, america, have a long term problem mainly added to this year in the form of a record deficit. (3rd yr straight) 490Billion I think are some of the low end estimates... The budget is like your checkbook/personal finance. How long can you make it spending more than you make?
k
AoM
-
Record deficit.... And you talk about propaganda... In terms of % of GDP this deficit is much smaller than others we have had in the past...
-
It's still a deficit, and still spending more than is earned.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a76voWWYDv7g&refer=news_index
We'll see next quarter if it's sustainable.
So far Big Pharma is not hiring or expanding.
Sonly just laid off 20,000. Rumors are other large companies will be laying off 10 of thousands by 2nd quarter next year.
And the lies by the Bush administration are being exposed by the Intelligence committy... :rofl
Neo-nazi Conservative believers are deluded bastards... the truth is coming out and you still are in denial.
Oh yah let's go save Iraq.. .the Iraqi people are oppressed they'll welcome the liberation...
Iraq is a freaking vietnam!
Haliburton is getting all the contracts - in violation of US law. They might as well just go to the treasury with dump trucks and fill them up with the money they are stealing from the American public.
-
Originally posted by DmdNexus
We'll see next quarter if it's sustainable.
So far Big Pharma is not hiring or expanding.
Sonly just laid off 20,000. Rumors are other large companies will be laying off 10 of thousands by 2nd quarter next year.
And the lies by the Bush administration are being exposed by the Intelligence committy... :rofl
Neo-nazi Conservative believers are deluded bastards... the truth is coming out and you still are in denial.
Oh yah let's go save Iraq.. .the Iraqi people are oppressed they'll welcome the liberation...
Iraq is a freaking vietnam!
Haliburton is getting all the contracts - in violation of US law. They might as well just go to the treasury with dump trucks and fill them up with the money they are stealing from the American public.
Yeah!
-
quick, trade all your worthless US paper money for GOLD before the neo-cons put everyone back to work and ruin the US economy by driving up labor costs. :rolleyes:
-
I would not call the official statistics a propaganda - the numbers do reflect real measurements. The issue is what those measurements signify if they are meaningfull at all. Moot is going a bit overboard here.
GRUNHERZ: Record deficit.... And you talk about propaganda... In terms of % of GDP this deficit is much smaller than others we have had in the past...
There are several points of contention here. A case can be made that GDP increase overestimates the real growth in domestic value-generation.
Also, having deficit at a time when baby-boomers were entering their most productive years is not the same as having it just before they retire.
A young person with low income incures debts in order to finance his productivity increase - education, equipment, etc. An older person at his earning peak must be having surpluses - saved and invested into younger people's productivity increase - in order to finance his upcoming retirement.
Also, during the previous deficits we stil had american industrial and manufacuring production. In fact those deficits financed by foreigners caused us to lose our manufacturing competitivness and the manufacturing sector.
There are many diferences between the past and the present conditions. There are only two outcomes for the balace - surplus of deficit. The conditions that cause one of those two outcomes are infinite.
miko
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Record deficit.... And you talk about propaganda... In terms of % of GDP this deficit is much smaller than others we have had in the past...
That is a lie.. Back it up
Money borrowed is money owed. Does not matter what the GDP is. You wanna be economist (like myself, although I do hold a degree in it) wanna garble figures with all sorts of other numbers, GDP, %unemployment, stock market, economies of scale, whatever, but the bottom line is the goverments budget is not so unlike your own. Over spend and you go under eventually. Sure maybe our debt may be different percentage wise to GDP than that of FDR's new deal or of Nixon's or Reagan term for that matter. The difference here is we are not starting from a clean plate of debt, we are adding to it... Faster than ever the last few years.. Adding to a debt that exceeds some $7 trillion now??
k
AoM
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Record deficit.... And you talk about propaganda... In terms of % of GDP this deficit is much smaller than others we have had in the past...
I love non-sense ratios like this...
"The deficit is ok because if you devide the deficent by the GDP it's less of a number than it ever has been"
Ok if you divide the deficit by the tons of watermelon people produce each year... and compare it to the tons of watermelon people produced 20 years ago yah... it's smaller... because there are more people producing watermelon today then they were 20 years ago.
And I am literally talking about raw sewage tonnage...
I swear neo-con's are stupid.
-
I'm saying what's the situation with no spin and am overboard?
Do what you want with your economy, but it won't be considered done and over with till you're over the negative.
-
DmdNexus: So far Big Pharma is not hiring or expanding.
You must be joking, right?
"Big Pharma" was killed this summer. I've seen the huge sign on a nation-wide chain drugstore "RE-IMPORTED DRUGS COMING SOON".
It is a common knowlege that the prices for medicines in the countries that impose price controls do not cover the R&D expenses, only manufacturing costs.
With drugs selling cheap in US, their R&D will not be sustainable and once their patents expire, they will be no different than any company selling generic drugs for miniscule profit.
john9001: ...ruin the US economy by driving up labor costs.
That's a good example. A spread of unsustainable .com projects fueled by credit expansion drove the salary of the programmers up about six-fold during the 90s. Because there was no saving and investmant going on in software professionals education.
Good companies like Sun or Lucent lost both money and good people - and infrastructure was established to create software jobs abroad.
Obviously those .com original business plans did not forsee having to pay $250K for a programmer with a two-year experience or $150K for a girl who finished 4-months VB classes. They compared the cost of credit with the future profit, forgetting that the very monetary expansion would drive their costs up.
miko
-
Miko, you're a "glass is half empty" kinda guy, eh?
;)
-
Drugs cheap in the US? We have a city that is buying it's drugs from canada. The FDA is stepping in and calling the drugs unsafe and threatening legal action.
http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/diseases/articles/2003/11/07/fda_mulls_drug_import_action/
-
Originally posted by majic
Miko, you're a "glass is half empty" kinda guy, eh?
;)
I think he's more of a
"The glass is full of a deadly toxin placed there by the goons of the government who are trying to silence my message of economic revolution"
kind of guy.
-
"DmdNexus: So far Big Pharma is not hiring or expanding."
Maybe all the pharmys will go outta business. Then perhaps money will be spent on trying to cure something instead of treating the symptoms. I mean really, how many decades has it been since we have actually cured anything?? This country has been 'treating' so long, the bugs are catching up and sometimes passing us on the evolutionary scale...... They too evolve..... Was it Polio that was last on the list? That was long ago....
k
AoM
sorry for the hijack
-
majic: Miko, you're a "glass is half empty" kinda guy, eh?
No, I am just knowlegeable in economics.
Living good because your previous savings and investments increased your income is different from living good by taking a loan. The first is sustainable, the second is temporary and harmfull long-term.
kappa: Maybe all the pharmys will go outta business. Then perhaps money will be spent on trying to cure something instead of treating the symptoms.
Which money? Are you saving and investing resources into such development? American public surely doesn't.
miko
-
Originally posted by Scootter
sounding, rolling. leaping. throw the hook, chumed up, thrashing, spooled, drag smoking, broke off, backing down, turned in, spent, gaffed, taged, boated,
;)
Sheesh no need to show off!!
-
Originally posted by miko2d
DmdNexus: So far Big Pharma is not hiring or expanding.
You must be joking, right?
"Big Pharma" was killed this summer. I've seen the huge sign on a nation-wide chain drugstore "RE-IMPORTED DRUGS COMING SOON".
It is a common knowlege that the prices for medicines in the countries that impose price controls do not cover the R&D expenses, only manufacturing costs.
With drugs selling cheap in US, their R&D will not be sustainable and once their patents expire, they will be no different than any company selling generic drugs for miniscule profit.
john9001: ...ruin the US economy by driving up labor costs.
That's a good example. A spread of unsustainable .com projects fueled by credit expansion drove the salary of the programmers up about six-fold during the 90s. Because there was no saving and investmant going on in software professionals education.
Good companies like Sun or Lucent lost both money and good people - and infrastructure was established to create software jobs abroad.
Obviously those .com original business plans did not forsee having to pay $250K for a programmer with a two-year experience or $150K for a girl who finished 4-months VB classes. They compared the cost of credit with the future profit, forgetting that the very monetary expansion would drive their costs up.
miko
Hey we agree! :) I was just gonna mention the same thing about why Canadian drug prices are so magically low...
Isnt it better then when we fight? :)
BTW you nailed the .com salary thing too. I remember my father, an experienced programmer and then manager for years, telling me that kids outta college, who knew nothing, earned as much entry salaryas he had as a manager only a few years before the boom..
-
There's profit in treatment, not in the cure.
-
Rude: There's profit in treatment, not in the cure.
Profit is in selling what the customers are williing to buy, provided the price they are willing to pay covers your expenses - and the government allows you to charge that price.
The state of science/technology today does not allow us to find cures for most afflictions. To have a cure we must know a cause and we are just beginning the research in that direction.
But if the cure was conceivable, it is only a government intervention that would prevent producing it - by imposing price controls.
If there is one thing that is sure it is that the government will step in and not allow the company charge the price that teh cure is worth, thus dissuading others from investing capital in finding cures.
Just like it is now opposed to charging $800 for a box of pills that saves a person the costs of a $20,000 operation, $10,000 hospital stay and 3 month of lost work.
Plenty of treaments for severe but uncommon diseases are not developed today because there is too high a burden of the FDA approval which makes it unprofitable to bother - even theugh the affected people would agree to buy drugs after less stringent approval process.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
[ But if the cure was conceivable, it is only a government intervention that would prevent producing it - by imposing price controls.
If there is one thing that is sure it is that the government will step in and not allow the company charge the price that teh cure is worth, thus dissuading others from investing capital in finding cures.
miko [/B]
Really? How much is the polio vaccine? Or the shot for the mumps/measles? How about the chicken pocs? Rabbies (sp)?? If a cure was found, the only reason the Gov. would step in would be the result of phamy companies buying the goverment's vote... Not unlike the last 50yrs or so..........
k
AoM