Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Job creation posts blowout month in February, ADP says"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "Job creation posts blowout month in February, ADP says"

    Job creation posts blowout month in February, ADP says

    Jeff Cox
    Wednesday, 8 Mar 2017

    Companies added jobs at a blistering pace in February, with a notable shift away from the service-sector positions that have dominated hiring for years, according to a report Wednesday.

    Employment in the private sector surged by 298,000 for the month, with goods producers adding 106,000, ADP and Moody's Analytics said. Construction jobs swelled by 66,000 and manufacturing added 32,000.

    The total shattered market expectations of 190,000, according to economists surveyed by ADP. The blockbuster report also solidified market expectations for the Fed to hike interest rates next week. Probability for an increase jumped to 91 percent after the release, according to the CME.

    The report encompassed the first full month under President Donald Trump, who has pledged to rebuild the nation's aging infrastructure system.

    [...]

    http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/08/priva...-2017-adp.html

    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

  • #2

    Comment


    • #3
      I do not want to go off subject/etc...but can any experts tell what effects immigration has on job growth/jobs/unemployment/available jobs/etc?
      --also the birth rate per immigration down the road [ US ''good'' jobs keeping up with the population over a period of generations? ]

      seems like with hundreds of thousands of immigrants/work visas/etc each year--plus their children and grandchildren, jobs could not keep up and/or keep standard of living high---wages would go down-prices up ?
      thanks
      Last edited by Moulin; 09 Mar 17, 12:02.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
        Job creation posts blowout month in February, ADP says

        Jeff Cox
        Wednesday, 8 Mar 2017

        Companies added jobs at a blistering pace in February, with a notable shift away from the service-sector positions that have dominated hiring for years, according to a report Wednesday.

        Employment in the private sector surged by 298,000 for the month, with goods producers adding 106,000, ADP and Moody's Analytics said. Construction jobs swelled by 66,000 and manufacturing added 32,000.

        The total shattered market expectations of 190,000, according to economists surveyed by ADP. The blockbuster report also solidified market expectations for the Fed to hike interest rates next week. Probability for an increase jumped to 91 percent after the release, according to the CME.

        The report encompassed the first full month under President Donald Trump, who has pledged to rebuild the nation's aging infrastructure system.

        [...]

        http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/08/priva...-2017-adp.html

        So where are these workers coming from Did unemployment drop or under employment.

        granted it economics but I was just reading the other day that the GDP was expected to be sub par ie below 2 percent again. So maybe the author was wrong.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Moulin View Post
          I do not want to go off subject/etc...but can any experts tell what effects immigration has on job growth/jobs/unemployment/available jobs/etc?
          --also the birth rate per immigration down the road [ US ''good'' jobs keeping up with the population over a period of generations? ]
          thanks
          I once heard that for the economy to be doing well and keep up with normal expansion you needed around 200k jobs a month created. Well at least that what the republicans kept saying during Obama tenure

          Doc I am sure can do a better job of explaining the whole loss creation of jobs and why the number 200k is important

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by craven View Post
            So where are these workers coming from Did unemployment drop or under employment.

            granted it economics but I was just reading the other day that the GDP was expected to be sub par ie below 2 percent again. So maybe the author was wrong.
            The "experts" expected 190,000 new jobs in February...
            Employment in the private sector surged by 298,000 for the month, with goods producers adding 106,000, ADP and Moody's Analytics said. Construction jobs swelled by 66,000 and manufacturing added 32,000.

            The total shattered market expectations of 190,000, according to economists surveyed by ADP. The blockbuster report also solidified market expectations for the Fed to hike interest rates next week. Probability for an increase jumped to 91 percent after the release, according to the CME.

            ADP found that construction and manufacturing jobs surged by almost 100,000 in February.

            ADP's tally doesn't factor into the BLS unemployment rate; but analysts expect the unemployment rate to tick down a bit.
            Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by craven View Post
              I once heard that for the economy to be doing well and keep up with normal expansion you needed around 200k jobs a month created. Well at least that what the republicans kept saying during Obama tenure

              Doc I am sure can do a better job of explaining the whole loss creation of jobs and why the number 200k is important
              That's about right. Somewhere around 200k per month is treading water.
              Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                The "experts" expected 190,000 new jobs in February...
                Employment in the private sector surged by 298,000 for the month, with goods producers adding 106,000, ADP and Moody's Analytics said. Construction jobs swelled by 66,000 and manufacturing added 32,000.

                The total shattered market expectations of 190,000, according to economists surveyed by ADP. The blockbuster report also solidified market expectations for the Fed to hike interest rates next week. Probability for an increase jumped to 91 percent after the release, according to the CME.

                ADP found that construction and manufacturing jobs surged by almost 100,000 in February.

                ADP's tally doesn't factor into the BLS unemployment rate; but analysts expect the unemployment rate to tick down a bit.
                the part that confuses me is the article I read I think was on Tues so they should of had numbers for Jan and Feb for GDP purposes. So with Jobs rising I would expect GDP to be looking better. Ie I say it economic and kind of like stats guess it depends on who ya talk to.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                  The "experts" expected 190,000 new jobs in February...
                  Employment in the private sector surged by 298,000 for the month, with goods producers adding 106,000, ADP and Moody's Analytics said. Construction jobs swelled by 66,000 and manufacturing added 32,000.

                  The total shattered market expectations of 190,000, according to economists surveyed by ADP. The blockbuster report also solidified market expectations for the Fed to hike interest rates next week. Probability for an increase jumped to 91 percent after the release, according to the CME.

                  ADP found that construction and manufacturing jobs surged by almost 100,000 in February.

                  ADP's tally doesn't factor into the BLS unemployment rate; but analysts expect the unemployment rate to tick down a bit.
                  Still have 93.7 million more jobs to find. Grandma in the Nursing home needs full time work, according to President Trump at least. The First Lady needs a job also.. once again according to the President.
                  “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                  “To talk of many things:
                  Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                  Of cabbages—and kings—
                  And why the sea is boiling hot—
                  And whether pigs have wings.”
                  ― Lewis Carroll

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by craven View Post
                    the part that confuses me is the article I read I think was on Tues so they should of had numbers for Jan and Feb for GDP purposes. So with Jobs rising I would expect GDP to be looking better. Ie I say it economic and kind of like stats guess it depends on who ya talk to.
                    Jobs and GDP growth aren't always directly correlated. The latest Q1 2017 GDP growth forecast is 1.2%. which sucks. The unexpectedly strong jobs numbers in January and February may lead to an upward revision of the GDP forecast. The Fed is certainly acting as if the economy is heating up...
                    After the ADP report, Ian Shepherdson, chief economist of Pantheon Macroeconomics, raised his forecast for Labor Department's tally to 250,000 job gains from 200,000. While average monthly employment gains fell to 180,000 in 2016 from 226,000 the prior year, Shepherdson said he expected 200,000-plus advances on average "for the foreseeable future." That view differs from the belief of many economists that the low 4.8% unemployment rate is supplying employers with fewer workers, tempering hiring.

                    Barclays economist Rob Martin said the firm hasn’t changed its prediction for a solid 200,000 new jobs, but high-flying business and consumer confidence increase the chances of a stronger performance as firms hold on to workers in a tightening market. The job total is a net figure that combines new hires and layoffs.

                    “If you expect things to pick up in the near-term, there’s no need to lay off right now,” Martin said.

                    Friday’s payroll report had been viewed as key in cementing an anticipated interest-rate hike by the Fed next week. After officials there recently signaled that a rate increase is all but certain, economists have said it would take an unusually anemic showing to give them pause. In fact, outsize gains in the Labor Department's report could prompt the Fed to raise rates again in June.

                    http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...-feb/98872942/

                    This is an important point...
                    Shepherdson said he expected 200,000-plus advances on average "for the foreseeable future." That view differs from the belief of many economists that the low 4.8% unemployment rate is supplying employers with fewer workers, tempering hiring.

                    This means one of two things:
                    1. The real unemployment rate is actually significantly higher than 4.8%.
                    2. The Labor Force Participation Rate is increasing.
                    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by The Doctor View Post

                      Snip

                      This means one of two things:
                      1. The real unemployment rate is actually significantly higher than 4.8%.
                      2. The Labor Force Participation Rate is increasing.
                      U3 is exactly what it is. What it means is that those that had slipped into the want a job but don't look for one, which implies to me they don't want one, will possibly switch to actually getting out and looking for one and will possibly find one.
                      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                      “To talk of many things:
                      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                      Of cabbages—and kings—
                      And why the sea is boiling hot—
                      And whether pigs have wings.”
                      ― Lewis Carroll

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                        U3 is exactly what it is. What it means is that those that had slipped into the want a job but don't look for one, which implies to me they don't want one, will possibly switch to actually getting out and looking for one and will possibly find one.
                        Shepherdson said he expected 200,000-plus advances on average "for the foreseeable future." That view differs from the belief of many economists that the low 4.8% unemployment rate is supplying employers with fewer workers, tempering hiring.

                        The 4.8% unemployment rate led many economists to assume that 200k+ per month job growth was impossible. This either means that the U3 isn't a particularly good measure of unemployment or that people are rejoining the labor force. I tend to think it's the former, because I don't think the labor force participation rate could flip this quickly.
                        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                          Shepherdson said he expected 200,000-plus advances on average "for the foreseeable future." That view differs from the belief of many economists that the low 4.8% unemployment rate is supplying employers with fewer workers, tempering hiring.

                          The 4.8% unemployment rate led many economists to assume that 200k+ per month job growth was impossible. This either means that the U3 isn't a particularly good measure of unemployment or that people are rejoining the labor force. I tend to think it's the former, because I don't think the labor force participation rate could flip this quickly.
                          Not at all. U-3 measures people looking for work and not finding it. Not unreliable at all if you can understand that simple 70+ year concept.

                          Yes, people that had stopped looking, and so were covered in other groups in the unemployment figures, could very well get off their asses and start looking again. Not rocket science.

                          So the basic point is that a certain group of Economist were wrong. That is an amazing concept.
                          “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                          “To talk of many things:
                          Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                          Of cabbages—and kings—
                          And why the sea is boiling hot—
                          And whether pigs have wings.”
                          ― Lewis Carroll

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                            Not at all. U-3 measures people looking for work and not finding it. Not unreliable at all if you can understand that simple 70+ year concept.

                            Yes, people that had stopped looking, and so were covered in other groups in the unemployment figures, could very well get off their asses and start looking again. Not rocket science.

                            So the basic point is that a certain group of Economist were wrong. That is an amazing concept.
                            Economists being wrong is not unusual. Economists assuming that 4.8% U3 unemployment precluded 200k+ job growth is what's unusual.

                            5% U3 unemployment is often characterized as "full employment." It pretty clearly isn't. This is why U5 or U6 should be the "official" unemployment rate.
                            Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Interesting how good news make so many people upset.
                              Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X