If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Business Insider)   Markets plunge after only 80,000 jobs added to the workforce, sharply missing expectations of 100K   (businessinsider.com) divider line 56
    More: Interesting, Brookline, NASDAQ Composite, NYSE Composite, expectations, intraday  
•       •       •

587 clicks; posted to Business » on 06 Jul 2012 at 10:40 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-06 10:30:19 AM  
So kick the market analysts in the balls for being so off the mark. Why doesn't anybody hold those farkers accountable for how horrible they are at their jobs?

I bet weathermen would love it if they predict 90° and sunny and everybody got mad at the atmosphere if it was 80° and rainy.
 
2012-07-06 10:31:44 AM  
When the administration sets the bar low to lower expectations and then misses, not good.
 
2012-07-06 10:32:40 AM  
how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.
 
2012-07-06 10:37:31 AM  
Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.
 
2012-07-06 10:45:46 AM  
It's slow, but I haven't heard a coherent argument as to how to speed it up, so I can't really say whether this is bad, good, or just more of the same.
 
2012-07-06 10:47:30 AM  
How is it exactly that these 'experts' and 'analysts' are never bloody right?

How do any of them still have jobs themselves?
 
2012-07-06 10:57:38 AM  

FlashHarry: which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now


Shouldn't any competent manager want to have productivity at max output, reguardless of politics.
 
2012-07-06 10:57:41 AM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.


So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"
 
2012-07-06 11:00:19 AM  

xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"


So you prefer the economy to lose 700K jobs per month instead of gaining 80K?
 
2012-07-06 11:01:34 AM  

xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"


We welcome your undoubtedly compelling insight on how turning a strong decline into a slow recovery is somehow a failure, but causing the decline itself is just liberal coincidence and if we only push those policies harder it will somehow be better.
 
2012-07-06 11:02:05 AM  

hugram: xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"

So you prefer the economy to lose 700K jobs per month instead of gaining 80K?


If it means we get rid of Obama sure, lets burn down the union to the ground for defying us.
 
2012-07-06 11:14:17 AM  

xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"


False equivalency is false.

Try "Hey Guys! We won the game by 2 points instead of losing by 20!"
Or how about "Hey Guys! We moved up in the standings instead of dropping 10 spots!"
Or maybe "Hey Guys! We're going forward instead of backward!"

Gaining jobs isn't the same as losing a game. Gaining is good. Losing is bad. Even if the economy only gains 2,000 jobs next quarter, it's better than dropping 20,000. Or is that too difficult to understand?
 
2012-07-06 11:14:21 AM  

hugram: xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"

So you prefer the economy to lose 700K jobs per month instead of gaining 80K?


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dichotomy
 
2012-07-06 11:18:03 AM  

FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.


Cash hoarding is quite likely a big problem, no doubt, but the issue is less that they want to influence the election (they've been doing it for years) and more because of they're afraid of another recession hitting combined with incentives to keep the money and disincentives to spend it.

We can easily change the incentives -- replace the corporate income tax with a corporate wealth tax and hike in the dividend tax rate (so that it's equal to all other income). This would encourage companies to bring in more money and then turn around and spend it on hiring and expansion.
 
2012-07-06 11:29:48 AM  
remember kids, the US is isolated in the global economy. the lack of business confidence has everything to do with tax rates and fartbongo, and nothing to do with the eurozone crisis nor the significant growth slowdown in the BRICS
 
2012-07-06 11:48:46 AM  
We have about 125,000 people entering the workforce each month. In every recession prior to the most recent, employment levels have recovered and reached pre-recession levels in about two years or less. We're 4 years in and not even close. And if you look at economic conditions around the world, there is little on the horizon that would point to things improving anytime soon. We are in for some bad times ahead.
 
2012-07-06 11:53:15 AM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.


It is better, but that was 3.5 years ago. All voters care about is the future is it getting better? Is the economy picking up steam? Right now the answer is it is holding steady. At the end of the day to the average voter they see unemployment is 8.2%, that is not good. Remember at the end of the day with this upcoming election it is about one thing "the economy". A repeat of Bush 1 vs Clinton. It is the economy stupid.
 
2012-07-06 12:15:57 PM  
I got a job last month, so I'm getting a kick. . .

/three years unemployment over, and surprise surprise, the job actually sounds like I'm going to enjoy it
//will be paying it forward to help the next girl that needs a hand, fark the "I've got mine" attitude
 
2012-07-06 12:18:02 PM  

Peki: I got a job last month, so I'm getting a kick. . .

/three years unemployment over, and surprise surprise, the job actually sounds like I'm going to enjoy it
//will be paying it forward to help the next girl that needs a hand, fark the "I've got mine" attitude


Congratulations!
 
2012-07-06 12:19:35 PM  
150 points in a 12,000+ market is hardly a steep drop. Considering the market was at 7000 when Obama took office, I'm gonna have to go with 'meh'
 
2012-07-06 12:44:44 PM  

evilmrsock: xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"

We welcome your undoubtedly compelling insight on how turning a strong decline into a slow recovery is somehow a failure, but causing the decline itself is just liberal coincidence and if we only push those policies harder it will somehow be better.


80K is not a recovery. It's stagnant. That doesn't keep up with population growth.

While better than -700K, the idea this is in any way shape or form "good" is ridiculous.
 
2012-07-06 12:52:44 PM  

SharkTrager: evilmrsock: xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"

We welcome your undoubtedly compelling insight on how turning a strong decline into a slow recovery is somehow a failure, but causing the decline itself is just liberal coincidence and if we only push those policies harder it will somehow be better.

80K is not a recovery. It's stagnant. That doesn't keep up with population growth.

While better than -700K, the idea this is in any way shape or form "good" is ridiculous.


At least with bad news like -700,000 jobs, people would freak out and someone would do something.

People here a positive number and think it means improvement. Nothing is improving, just slowly bleeding, and all the motivation for action is lost.
 
2012-07-06 12:54:10 PM  

evilmrsock: We welcome your undoubtedly compelling insight on how turning a strong decline into a slow recovery is somehow a failure, but causing the decline itself is just liberal coincidence and if we only push those policies harder it will somehow be better.


Job growth less than population growth is not a recovery. Bush's failure is irrelevant as to whether or not this is a failure. It is.

(Realistically the President can do very little about the economy, but that isn't exactly Obama's position, is it?)
 
2012-07-06 01:04:07 PM  

YixilTesiphon: evilmrsock: We welcome your undoubtedly compelling insight on how turning a strong decline into a slow recovery is somehow a failure, but causing the decline itself is just liberal coincidence and if we only push those policies harder it will somehow be better.

Job growth less than population growth is not a recovery. Bush's failure is irrelevant as to whether or not this is a failure. It is.

(Realistically the President can do very little about the economy, but that isn't exactly Obama's position, is it?)


He shouldn't have spent the last two years trying to pass off stabilization and small shifts as the green shoots of a healthy, growing economy. It made people complacent.
 
2012-07-06 01:05:42 PM  
how many people filed for first time unemployment in the last month? 300K+ a week is not a good number. And when you factor in the number of people falling off unemployment and/or filing for disability because they can't find a job, this is bad news for everybody that transcends political parties.
 
2012-07-06 01:23:08 PM  
YixilTesiphon: evilmrsock: We welcome your undoubtedly compelling insight on how turning a strong decline into a slow recovery is somehow a failure, but causing the decline itself is just liberal coincidence and if we only push those policies harder it will somehow be better.

Job growth less than population growth is not a recovery. Bush's failure is irrelevant as to whether or not this is a failure. It is.

(Realistically the President can do very little about the economy, but that isn't exactly Obama's position, is it?)


The president and congress can do quite a bit about the economy. The Tea Party congress hasn't passed one jobs bill in their two years in office.

(And why should they when their platform is "taxes and anything the federal government does is evil".)
 
2012-07-06 01:25:51 PM  
People were biatching when unemployment was 4.5% under Bush. Do you miss those years yet? Will we ever see that kind of employment again?
 
2012-07-06 01:31:19 PM  
Unemployment is what ~ 8% ?
So only 92% are working.
 
2012-07-06 01:40:14 PM  

TyrantII: YixilTesiphon: evilmrsock: We welcome your undoubtedly compelling insight on how turning a strong decline into a slow recovery is somehow a failure, but causing the decline itself is just liberal coincidence and if we only push those policies harder it will somehow be better.

Job growth less than population growth is not a recovery. Bush's failure is irrelevant as to whether or not this is a failure. It is.

(Realistically the President can do very little about the economy, but that isn't exactly Obama's position, is it?)

The president and congress can do quite a bit about the economy. The Tea Party congress hasn't passed one jobs bill in their two years in office.

(And why should they when their platform is "taxes and anything the federal government does is evil".)


They can screw it up, sure. But since the multiplier could easily be less than 1 (and that's assuming well-targeted government spending), a "jobs" bill would be "let's lower the debt".

But instead Paul Ryan is portrayed as some sort of radical budget-cutter because of his plan that would negligibly reduce government spending. His plan is nothing. It's crap. But it's portrayed as radical by both sides because neither wants to face facts.
 
2012-07-06 01:48:41 PM  
Did they mention that 80,000 were also added to the disability program? So it's worse than we thought.
 
2012-07-06 01:51:49 PM  

cig-mkr: what


8% of the people they still count...
 
2012-07-06 02:01:21 PM  

FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.


The number of conspiracies the Republicans are engaged in is breathtaking: job suppression, vote suppression, science suppression, the War on Women, purposely tanking the economy, the Koch brothers' mission to turn America into a Corporatocracy, the list is endless. The big question is how people who the left routinely condemn as retrograde morons manage to keep all these plots in motion.
 
2012-07-06 02:08:34 PM  

FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.


Because businesses exist to influence elections rather than earning returns on investment. Brilliant.
 
2012-07-06 02:12:00 PM  

jjorsett: FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.

The number of conspiracies the Republicans are engaged in is breathtaking: job suppression, vote suppression, science suppression, the War on Women, purposely tanking the economy, the Koch brothers' mission to turn America into a Corporatocracy, the list is endless. The big question is how people who the left routinely condemn as retrograde morons manage to keep all these plots in motion.


In the parody of reality that is a TEAM BLUE partisan's mind, those who disagree with them are composed entirely of rich fatcats and their uneducated, stupid, ignorant, religious serfs.
 
2012-07-06 02:21:36 PM  
aren't job and spending numbers seasonal?
 
2012-07-06 02:24:48 PM  

mycatisposter: FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.

Because businesses exist to influence elections rather than earning returns on investment. Brilliant.


Though I doubt his conspiracy, you'd be naive to think that businesses don't try to influence elections.

Remember..."corporations are people"...
 
2012-07-06 02:34:51 PM  
Up is up don't be such a bloody pessimist. As long as the up out weighs the down we are winning the battle against unemployment.
 
2012-07-06 02:36:31 PM  

FabulousFreep: we are winning the battle against unemployment.


OOOOOOOO, lets declare war on the unemployed. Do I get to start the shooting?
 
2012-07-06 02:46:17 PM  
You have also consider the accerating number of people claiming disability as their UI benefits run out, which is shrinking the labor force and skewing the unemployment rate.
 
2012-07-06 02:59:18 PM  

FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.


I guess all CEO's in Europe are conspiring to do the same thing aren't they. Not to mention Asias economy is slowing down.

But you're right. It's a huge GOP plan!!!
 
2012-07-06 03:00:24 PM  

asmodeus224: 150 points in a 12,000+ market is hardly a steep drop. Considering the market was at 7000 when Obama took office, I'm gonna have to go with 'meh'


When his friend Bernanke prints trillions of dollors to prop up the stock market...

That has nothing to do with it either does it..
 
2012-07-06 03:02:17 PM  
Almost 800,00 less women are in the workforce now then when Odumbo took office.
 
2012-07-06 03:53:41 PM  

Cubs300: xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"

False equivalency is false.

Try "Hey Guys! We won the game by 2 points instead of losing by 20!"
Or how about "Hey Guys! We moved up in the standings instead of dropping 10 spots!"
Or maybe "Hey Guys! We're going forward instead of backward!"

Gaining jobs isn't the same as losing a game. Gaining is good. Losing is bad. Even if the economy only gains 2,000 jobs next quarter, it's better than dropping 20,000. Or is that too difficult to understand?


But..."the experts" said we should be doing better, so therefore...we should be doing better. They're goddamn EXPERTS, for Christ's sake. They know things we could never hope to know.

Real people lose their jobs when these "experts" predict something will happen and it doesn't. And Wall Street just goes along with it.
 
2012-07-06 04:36:44 PM  

praymantis: Peki: I got a job last month, so I'm getting a kick. . .

/three years unemployment over, and surprise surprise, the job actually sounds like I'm going to enjoy it
//will be paying it forward to help the next girl that needs a hand, fark the "I've got mine" attitude

Congratulations!


Thanks. :)
 
2012-07-06 04:53:02 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Cubs300: xtragrind: AdolfOliverPanties: Again I point out that even a meager +80,000 a month is better than the -700,000 a month that Bush left us with.

So you're happy that the job market is still terrible?

"Hey Guys! We lost the game by 40 points but at least we didn't lose by 50!"

False equivalency is false.

Try "Hey Guys! We won the game by 2 points instead of losing by 20!"
Or how about "Hey Guys! We moved up in the standings instead of dropping 10 spots!"
Or maybe "Hey Guys! We're going forward instead of backward!"

Gaining jobs isn't the same as losing a game. Gaining is good. Losing is bad. Even if the economy only gains 2,000 jobs next quarter, it's better than dropping 20,000. Or is that too difficult to understand?

But..."the experts" said we should be doing better, so therefore...we should be doing better. They're goddamn EXPERTS, for Christ's sake. They know things we could never hope to know.

Real people lose their jobs when these "experts" predict something will happen and it doesn't. And Wall Street just goes along with it.


And if those same "experts" had lowballed their guess, and predicted no job growth last month, the markets would be ecstatic about adding 80k. The reality is that the economy in general isn't necessarily driven by objective reality----in many ways, it's driven by mass psychology. If you could convince very large numbers of people (including some with real money and influence) that things were going great----to control their perception of reality in that way for 1 month----the economy would be firing on all cylinders by August or September. Economic realities seem to become what people believe them to be.

I always think of FDR as an example of that. The man put into place good laws and programs to help people in the Great Depression, but in studying the history of that era, it seems like people more remember his relentless optimism. He made people believe in themselves and their country, and it seems like that made as much of a difference as anything else he did prior to WWII.

Anyway, Wall Street "experts" are idiots, and so are most bankers. We're not going to see meaningful growth or recovery until those clowns are appropriately regulated----for their own good as much as for our own good.
 
2012-07-06 07:33:16 PM  
YixilTesiphon: TyrantII: YixilTesiphon: evilmrsock: We welcome your undoubtedly compelling insight on how turning a strong decline into a slow recovery is somehow a failure, but causing the decline itself is just liberal coincidence and if we only push those policies harder it will somehow be better.

Job growth less than population growth is not a recovery. Bush's failure is irrelevant as to whether or not this is a failure. It is.

(Realistically the President can do very little about the economy, but that isn't exactly Obama's position, is it?)

The president and congress can do quite a bit about the economy. The Tea Party congress hasn't passed one jobs bill in their two years in office.

(And why should they when their platform is "taxes and anything the federal government does is evil".)

They can screw it up, sure. But since the multiplier could easily be less than 1 (and that's assuming well-targeted government spending), a "jobs" bill would be "let's lower the debt".

But instead Paul Ryan is portrayed as some sort of radical budget-cutter because of his plan that would negligibly reduce government spending. His plan is nothing. It's crap. But it's portrayed as radical by both sides because neither wants to face facts.


Heh, except Paul Ryans Phantom budget, as scored by the CBO, would increase the debt.

You can't cut social services, and increase defense and increase high income tax cuts your way to a balanced budget. It's just more voodoo economics rolled up in talking points about scary words.

Coming out of the recession we did the number one priority is jobs and employment. Once you talked that, fiscal austerity needs to be enacted to deflate any bubbles and to put us in better financial footing.

Every single metric (besides unpaid tax cuts) has given Dem presidents the edge if fiscal sanity and budget deficits are your concern. Kicking the Teabaggers out and finding Conservative GOP politicians (or not insane libs) that will actually work with this president to balance budgets is all that's needed. History has proven it. The number prove it.

When every GOP candidate refuses a 10:1 spending cut to revenue increase, their focus is not a balanced budget.
 
2012-07-06 08:50:30 PM  

FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.




there is no demand so there is no expansion of business. doesnt matter how much money or how many ideas a company has if no one will buy their stuff. i feel like there should be a new WPA instead of bailouts for companies that deserve to fail because they are failures. i might be a little off here but WPA brought unemployment from 20% to 10% in 5 or so years?
 
2012-07-06 09:18:08 PM  

jjorsett: FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.

The number of conspiracies the Republicans are engaged in is breathtaking: job suppression, vote suppression, science suppression, the War on Women, purposely tanking the economy, the Koch brothers' mission to turn America into a Corporatocracy, the list is endless. The big question is how people who the left routinely condemn as retrograde morons manage to keep all these plots in motion.


Dont forget the fact that they pay people to make them look good on social websites.
 
2012-07-06 09:18:45 PM  

Unknown_Poltroon: jjorsett: FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.

The number of conspiracies the Republicans are engaged in is breathtaking: job suppression, vote suppression, science suppression, the War on Women, purposely tanking the economy, the Koch brothers' mission to turn America into a Corporatocracy, the list is endless. The big question is how people who the left routinely condemn as retrograde morons manage to keep all these plots in motion.

Dont forget the fact that they pay people to make them look good on social websites.


And those aren't conspiracies, those are their farking official positions, you moron.
 
2012-07-06 10:50:31 PM  

Unknown_Poltroon: Unknown_Poltroon: jjorsett: FlashHarry: how much capital is american business sitting on right now? they could hire a farkload of workers if they wanted to. now if i were a conspiracy-minded man, i'd say that republican-leaning CEOs (i.e. most of them) would be deliberately holding off hiring to try to influence the election. which would explain why worker productivity is strained to the max right now.

The number of conspiracies the Republicans are engaged in is breathtaking: job suppression, vote suppression, science suppression, the War on Women, purposely tanking the economy, the Koch brothers' mission to turn America into a Corporatocracy, the list is endless. The big question is how people who the left routinely condemn as retrograde morons manage to keep all these plots in motion.

Dont forget the fact that they pay people to make them look good on social websites.

And those aren't conspiracies, those are their farking official positions, you moron.


i hate the republicans but regarding the supposed "war on women" i think they were on the correct side for several reasons.
i dont think a religion should be forced to pay for medicine they believe to be morally wrong. (i dont think it wrong myself)
the VAWA really has needed reform for a long time. it is much to easy to abuse.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report