It's morning in Obama's America

[citizen k]

Will Romney's only talking point vanish?

Unemployment near three-year low

WASHINGTON (Reuters)   U.S. employment growth accelerated last month and the jobless rate dropped to a near three-year low of 8.5 percent, the strongest evidence yet the economic recovery is gaining steam.

Nonfarm payrolls increased 200,000 in December, the Labor Department said on Friday. It was the biggest rise in three months and beat economists' expectations for a 150,000 gain.

The unemployment rate fell from a revised 8.7 percent in November to its lowest level since February 2009, a heartening sign for President Barack Obama whose re-election hopes could hinge on the state of the labor market.

"The labor market is healing, but we still have a long way to go to recoup the losses we have endured. We may be close to a tipping point where gains can become more self-feeding," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial in Chicago.

A string of better-than-expected U.S. data in recent weeks has highlighted a contrast between the recovery in the world's biggest economy and Europe, where the economy is widely believed to be contracting.

The jobs data was overshadowed in financial markets by concerns over Europe's debt crisis. U.S. stocks ended mostly down, while Treasury debt prices rose on safe-haven bids.

The dollar rose to a near 16-month high against the euro.

Republican presidential hopefuls have blasted Obama's economic policies as doing more harm than good.

The latest economic signs, however, could offer him some political protection.

The economy added 1.6 million jobs last year, the most since 2006, and the jobless rate, which peaked at 10 percent in October 2009, has dropped 0.6 percentage point in the last four months.

Obama welcomed the news and urged Congress to extend a two-month payroll tax cut through 2012 to help sustain the recovery.

"We're moving in the right direction. When Congress returns they should extend the middle-class tax cut for all of this year, to make sure we keep this recovery going," he said.

LONG ROAD BACK

Employment remains about 6.1 million below its pre-recession level and at December's pace of job growth, it would take about 2-1/2 years to win those jobs back. There are roughly 4.3 unemployed people for every job opening.

Unseasonably mild weather last month helped fuel a hefty gain in construction employment. Courier jobs also rose sharply, a move the Labor Department pinned on strong online shopping for the holiday season.

Those jobs could be lost in January and the unemployment rate might rise as Americans who had abandoned the hunt for work are lured back into the labor market.

The drop in the jobless rate was mostly due to strong hiring. The labor force shrank only modestly.

A broad measure of unemployment, which includes people who want to work but have stopped looking and those working only part time but who want more work, dropped to an almost three-year low of 15.2 percent from 15.6 percent in November.

Still, all told, 23.7 million Americans are either out of work or underemployed.

With the labor market still far from healthy, the debt crisis in Europe unresolved and tensions over Iran threatening to drive up oil prices, the U.S. economy faces stiff headwinds.

FED STILL IN PLAY

Economists predict the recovery will lose a step early this year after expanding in the fourth quarter at what is expected to be the fastest pace in 1-1/2 years.

While the prospect of a further easing of monetary policy was damped a bit by the jobs data, the shaky outlook means a third round of asset purchases by the Federal Reserve remains an option.

"The Fed will be watching for further credible evidence that this improving trend is gaining traction," said Anthony Karydakis, chief economist at Commerzbank in New York.

New York Federal Reserve Bank President William Dudley on Friday suggested the U.S. central bank was still leaning toward buying more bonds to pull borrowing costs lower, describing the recovery as "frustratingly slow" and the unemployment rate as "unacceptably high."

"I believe it is also appropriate to continue to evaluate whether we could provide additional (policy) accommodation," said Dudley.

GOVERNMENT A DRAG

All the job gains in December came from the private sector, where payrolls rose 212,000 - the most in three months.

Government employment contracted 12,000, with most of the drag coming from local government layoffs. However, the pace of government job losses is moderating as some states report revenue growth after years of being in the red.

For all of 2011, the private sector added 1.9 million jobs, while government employment fell 280,000. A measure of the share of industries that showed job gains during the month rebounded to a five-month high in December after diving in November.

Construction payrolls increased 17,000 after falling 12,000 in November as mild weather has boosted groundbreaking for new homes.

Transportation and warehousing employment jumped 50,200. The bulk of the rise came from the messenger industry, which added 42,000 jobs, reflecting an increase in deliveries of online purchases made during the holiday season.

Manufacturing jobs rose 23,000, the largest increase since July. Factory employment rose 225,000 last year, sustaining gains for the first time since 1997.

But there were soft spots in retail, where payrolls growth slowed to 27,900 after hefty gains in November as retailers geared up for a busy holiday shopping season.

Temporary hiring, seen as a harbinger of future hiring, fell for the first time June, dropping 7,500 in December after gaining 11,200.

Hourly earnings rose a modest four cents, indicating that most of the jobs being created are low paying.

This is a potentially troubling sign for consumer spending, which has been largely supported by a reduction in savings, although it also signals a lack of inflation pressure.

"Firms need to grow wages faster if consumption is to accelerate. There is not a lot of appetite to give raises," said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors in Holland, Pennsylvania.

[Phillip V]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loBe0WXtts8

Next Tuesday is Election Day. Next Tuesday all of you will go to the  polls, will stand there in the polling place and make a decision. I  think when you make that decision, it might be well if you would ask  yourself, are you better off than you were four years ago? Is it easier  for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago?  Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four  years ago? Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do  you feel that our security is as safe, that we're as strong as we were  four years ago? And if you answer all of those questions yes, why then, I  think your choice is very obvious as to whom you will vote for. If you  don't agree, if you don't think that this course that we've been on for  the last four years is what you would like to see us follow for the next  four, then I could suggest another choice that you have.

[Ideologue]

Fuck Ronald Reagan.  I could have been born under the benevolent watch of Jimmy Carter.

But fuck Mitt Romney even harder.  He's evil.

[11B4V]

Will Romney's only talking point vanish?

No and he wont win either

[Syt]

Fuck Ronald Reagan.  I could have been born under the benevolent watch of Jimmy Carter.

How can you hate a man who told such wonderful stories? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qColFjbzoK0&feature=related

[HisMajestyBOB]

That's good news.
Back in December, I saw a news article that speculated an increase in unemployment for Q1 2012.
Granted, Q1 isn't over yet.

[Razgovory]

That's good news.
Back in December, I saw a news article that speculated an increase in unemployment for Q1 2012.
Granted, Q1 isn't over yet.

Not if you want to get rid of Obama.  If the economy picks up then the GOP will be stuck hoping for a terrorist attack.

[Phillip V]

That's good news.
Back in December, I saw a news article that speculated an increase in unemployment for Q1 2012.
Granted, Q1 isn't over yet.

The predictions I have seen forecast unemployment to remain static at 8.5-8.7% through the end of 2012.

Growth for the past year is estimated to be 2% of GDP instead of the original 4% projection made in January 2011.

Thus, the White House is noticeably cautious about touting the numbers since previous "summers of recovery" never came.

The biggest threats to the American economy are external, such as European debt crisis or a hard landing in China. Natural disasters might also fuck things up.
Internally, the biggest threat is politicians may destroy the country. But also for real, there is a large shadow housing inventory that banks have yet to unleash on the depressed market, the student debt bubble continues to skyrocket, and government contraction will also put a damper on things. Think about all those broken and crazy veterans being cut and thrown away to survive in this economic environment!

[Sheilbh]

The past few months US (and UK data actually) has consistently been better than expected.  Hopefully that means there's a recovery gathering pace more quickly than it can be measured, similarly most revisions of past data has been upward.

If the Euro holds together and there's not Eurogeddon, then the US should do well.  Even estimates for the UK expect a pretty flat two quarters but, God-willing, real recovery in the last two. 

[Phillip V]

The past few months US (and UK data actually) has consistently been better than expected.  Hopefully that means there's a recovery gathering pace more quickly than it can be measured, similarly most revisions of past data has been upward.

If the Euro holds together and there's not Eurogeddon, then the US should do well.  Even estimates for the UK expect a pretty flat two quarters but, God-willing, real recovery in the last two. 

Most revisions have been downward. It was part of what precipitated the stock market crash this past summer. The recession numbers were worse and recovery less than initially thought, thus leading the market to "correct" itself. Last month, the housing numbers for when the bubble burst were also revised downward. Heck, this latest unemployment numbers announcement even says that November's unemployment figure was actually 8.7% instead of the previously stated 8.6% The stockmarket declined yesterday despite the numbers.

No Obama-bashing here. Just some warranted caution.

[Sheilbh]

I think the combo of Europe and the genuinely horrifying debt ceiling debacle had more to do with it.  But to take that as an example initially the employment numbers for August were 0, we've since found out around 100k jobs were created that month.  Here's a graph of what I meant:


I'm not sure what's happening in the stock market.  It just seems very volatile and emotional.  It'll fall by 2% one day and rise by the same the next on the same data.  I've read, in this country, that actually looking at, say, the FTSE 250 (which is still volatile) is more relevant to how our economies doing because so many of the FTSE 100 are very globalised companies - for example banks, financial services and lots of mining companies.

It's fair to be sceptical though.  Personally I'm more hopeful than I have been.  I think we should have a strong recovery underway by the end of the year - if there isn't, say, Eurogeddon, a revolution in Saudi, a war in Iran or whatever else. 

[Admiral Yi]

The Greatest Recession and unemployment have always been a double edged sword for Obama and the Democrats.  When it's there it gives them the chance to spend money and/or beat up Republicans for indifference to hard working middle class Americans, or middle class Americans who usually work hard but aren't at the moment.  But it leaves them open to the charge of "economic mismanagement," or "ineffective leadership."  If unemployment recedes they lose both the upside and the downside.

A number of pundits appear to be talking up 8% unemployment as the magic threshold that Obama needs to win reelection.  I think it will still be above 8 on election day and I think Obama will still win.  But then again, I was completely blindsided by the midterm GOP takeover of the House, so what do I know.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Fuck Ronald Reagan.  I could have been born under the benevolent watch of Jimmy Carter.

But fuck Mitt Romney even harder.  He's evil.

I'll be the first to say Reagan is overrated (and I am a Reagan supporter), but come now, Carter was a failure and an abomination worse than a thousand Hitlers.

[OttoVonBismarck]

The Greatest Recession and unemployment have always been a double edged sword for Obama and the Democrats.  When it's there it gives them the chance to spend money and/or beat up Republicans for indifference to hard working middle class Americans, or middle class Americans who usually work hard but aren't at the moment.  But it leaves them open to the charge of "economic mismanagement," or "ineffective leadership."  If unemployment recedes they lose both the upside and the downside.

A number of pundits appear to be talking up 8% unemployment as the magic threshold that Obama needs to win reelection.  I think it will still be above 8 on election day and I think Obama will still win.  But then again, I was completely blindsided by the midterm GOP takeover of the House, so what do I know.

I think Obama will be vulnerable in 2012, but as the saying in football goes, "you still have to play the games." For that reason I'd be very shocked if Obama actually loses. Not because I don't think he'll be vulnerable, but because a Presidential election isn't going to be Barack Obama against a generic candidate, it is going to be Barack Obama against a specific Republican candidate. I think the man is a flawed President, but given what we saw in his defeat of Hillary and then McCain, anyone who can't say that we're talking about one of the most masterful campaigners, organizers, and fund raisers in American electoral history is a damn fool and a liar. The fact that he's vulnerable means he could be beaten in spite of that, but because of his talents at campaigning it means that he's no featherweight who any Republican patsy is going to knock over with a strong wind. He's vulnerable but the Republicans needed to field a solid candidate to actually take advantage of that.

I don't dislike Romney, truth be told. But he's just an average candidate, he's not strong enough to beat the President. No one else in the field is moderate enough to beat the President.

[OttoVonBismarck]

For example if Chris Christie had thrown his hat into the ring, and had he won the nomination, I think he could beat Obama in 2012. Christie has everything it would take to beat Obama, none of his policies will totally alienate the middle, and he's a brawler who isn't afraid to go for the vicious body blows and has no fear of staking out his position on the issues.

Romney is gearing up to be a Dewey type candidate who I will try to commit as few errors as possible and will be banking on general dissatisfaction with the President winning the election. It didn't work for Dewey when the country was much less favorable towards the incumbent; and I don't see it working for Romney, who is already seen a bit more negatively than Dewey was.