The February jobs report was very good, showing the economy added 313,000 jobs. This is the sort of news that I’m sure is met with delight in the White House (and I suspect with dismay by more than a few Dopers). Trump seems to be having a very good start to his second year:
I’m glad the economy is doing okay.
Trump, however, remains an incompetent and ignorant embarrassment. He could preside over 4 years of peace and prosperity and appoint me to the Supreme Court, and I would still want him run out of town on a rail.
LOL!
I appreciate the honesty.
Imagine if Trump had to turn around a ruined economy like Obama had to, instead of walking into one that was humming along.
Yes, these are the best numbers since the tail end of the Obama administration (July 2016). I’m glad the recovery begun under the previous administration is continuing, and I’m pleased when more people have jobs. Why on earth would that cause anyone “dismay”?
I’m not sure how much Trump himself has to do with it. And Trump is thoroughly unfit for the presidency and completely reprehensible for myriad reasons. Two months of good job numbers don’t change that. I try to look past one or two narrow, notoriously mercurial economic numbers when I evaluate a President’s performance.
Two months doesn’t really prove anything. Sometimes a couple of strong months are followed by a really really bad month.
And despite the bloviating hype, 2016 was a WAY better year for job creation that 2017.
Also, he’s pulling a long con. That strategy involves letting the mark win big at first.
One of the things I hated during the Obama administration was, with the release of any good jobs report, was Jack Welch and all the CNBC clowns changing the narrative immediately. Either they were floating conspiracy theories about fake numbers or else they started moving the goal posts and whining about U-6.
I hate Donald Trump and the Republican Party. However, today’s job report was good and the numbers are correct, although they are subject to monthly revisions for the next two months as all unemployment reports are. The unemployment rate is basically at the natural rate of unemployment. The one annoying aspect, as was true under Obama, is that wage growth remains stubbornly slow. This low rate of wage growth is maddening. A very low unemployment rate for this long should have started to lead to wage-push inflation which hasn’t happened yet.
If I’m reading this table correctly, February was the 7th best month out of the previous 122 (looking back through Jan 2008).
HuffPo described 2017 as “down slightly” from 2016, but you said “2016 was a WAY better year for job creation that 2017”. Those two statements seem incongruous.
Sorry, I was just honing my trumpification skills.
2016-2,344,000
2017-2,186,000
Down 6.7%
Eliminating both Januarys
2016-2,241,000
2017-1,927,000
Down 14%
I’ve come up with a theory that might be complete bullshit, but makes a bit of sense to me.
People talk about how long it’s been since there’s been real wage growth. I vaguely recall it being some time in the 70s or perhaps early. What I do know, however, is that there was much higher inflation in those days, including up through the early 80s, until the Fed decided it was going to put the kibosh in inflation by raising interest rates however much it took. Now, whenever it looks like the economy is at full employment and wages are going to be pressed higher as there’s not enough people out there to fill the vacancies, interest rates are hiked to put the break on the economy so as to not cause inflation.
Thus, it is the Federal Reserve who are to blame for the lack of real wage growth. They never let the economy enter a state where wages start rising quickly, because that causes inflation. Yes, I know we’re talking about real wage growth and not just nominal, but wages presumably will outpace the rate of inflation when they are the main driver of it, as there are plenty of other costs in the market besides wages.
But that’s just my theory.
You really are completely clueless about what people think outside of your conservative bubble, aren’t you?
Non-conservatives, even liberals, love America just as much as conservatives do. Our opposition to Trump isn’t based on some childish whim. It’s based on our belief, supported by ongoing evidence, that he is harming America. We oppose Trump because we love America.
In a world where labor can be in China or “undocumented” and underpaid, you have to consider global labor capacity when thinking about domestic labor inflation.
QFT
So what’s the message here? It’s OK that we’re living through the most blatantly corrupt administration in history because 300K jobs were created two months ago (which, btw, Trump can’t realistically claim as his own anyway, not that that ever mattered to him)?
The OPs implied message is that Trump has good economic policies. It’s fun to see someone assert that, given that Trump’s top economic adviser just quit because of Trump’s economic policies.
Do you truly believe that some Dopers view positive news for the US as a negative? They’d rather hundreds of thousands of people go hungry/lose possessions/lose their house only because DONALD FUCKING TRUMP is such a shithead?
:rolleyes: is all too true.
Trump started claiming the jobs growth numbers as a product of his leadership within weeks of his inauguration, when he had even less possible influence on it (and the same numbers which, when he was a candidate, he claimed were tremendously under-reported).
I think that Trump is an asshole, a supremely unqualified president, and very likely incredibly corrupt. There are few things I’d like more than for him to leave office this very day. That said…I’m happy that our economy hasn’t been driven into a ditch yet, and that people are finding jobs.