Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United States Businesses Government

US Jobs Dropped By 33,000 In September, Likely Due To Storms (npr.org) 128

An anonymous reader shares an NPR report: The U.S. economy shed 33,000 jobs in September, according to the latest report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while unemployment fell to 4.2 percent. The September payrolls drop broke a nearly 7-year streak of continuous job gains. But economists caution that the drop is likely representing the short-term consequences of bad weather, not a long-term shift in the job market. Before this report, the economy had added an average of about 175,000 jobs per month; the unemployment rate has been at 4.3 or 4.4 percent since April. Job growth in September was expected to be lower than usual because of the effects of several devastating hurricanes. Economists did not generally predict an actual decline, but a not-so-stellar report was widely anticipated.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Jobs Dropped By 33,000 In September, Likely Due To Storms

Comments Filter:
  • The long overdue Hillary Recession is finally coming. The end is neigh!
  • by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Friday October 06, 2017 @09:47AM (#55321493) Journal

    Given that the hurricane-stricken areas are in semi-tropical places where construction can (and probably does) happen year-round, I'm betting that there will be a massive boom in construction jobs coming in the next month or two, and lasting maybe 6 months or more. Someone's gotta rebuild all that stuff, after all...

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Solandri ( 704621 )
      Broken window fallacy [investopedia.com]. If there hadn't been any storms, the money those places will now have to spend on repairs would've been spent on other business instead. So that construction boom comes at the cost of other business jobs. i.e. There's no net increase in number of jobs, it's just that money has been siphoned away from other jobs to pay for construction jobs.

      Also see opportunity cost [investopedia.com]. Like most people, you are incorrectly calculating opportunity cost by comparing to a vacuum (construction repair
      • by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Friday October 06, 2017 @10:52AM (#55321983) Journal

        I never stated that hurricanes were good for the economy, nor did I recommend destruction in order to stimulate said economy. I merely stated that a frigton of temporary jobs would come of it, and why.

        QED: I posted no fallacy here.

    • Construction is economically bad. That is less money that could be spent on other things. For a middle income family a $25,000 repair bill means no new cars, toys, investments, etc for 2 years.

      Construction jobs pay shit and the money goes to Mexico mostly anyway. I am not racist but live in Texas. Construction is no longer a middle class job here.

      FYI these replaced workers are the ones who voted for Trump for obvious reasons

      • Depends on their deductible, really. Typical is something like $2.5-$5k or so.

        A $25k deductible tells me this is either one very stupid (or rather, a stupidly skinflint) homeowner, or some massively shit insurance. Bumping to a $5k or $10 deductible and banking that cash in savings I can understand, but $25k? damn...

      • by Gryle ( 933382 )
        Two questions: 1) How are you defining middle class? 2) What do you consider construction jobs? General contractors who do their own work? Project managers? Architects? Day-laborers?

        I still maintain contacts with some folks I know in Texas who are involved in light (domestic) construction. No one's getting filthy rich, but they've put kids through college and no one's going hungry. I'll grant that day-laborers are a different story, but qualified and competent skilled workers (electricians, concrete men, c
  • Storms? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 )

    Aren't we pretty sure it's Trump's fault?

    Or the Russians?

    Or Global Warming. Ah...that works "storms" = global warming. NOW I can fit this news into my preconceived worldview.

    • The Unemployment Rate [bls.gov] this year since January has been 4.8%, 4.7%, 4.5%, 4.4%, 4.3%, 4.4%, 4.3%, 4.4%, 4.2%. Jobs dropped by 33,000 but unemployment went down...? FAKE NEWS!!!

      Seriously though, what? Labor force participation rate went up from 62.9% in August to 63.1% in September. Labor force went from 160,571,000 to 161,146,000. Number of employed went from 153,439,000 to 154,345,000. Where do you see 33,000 jobs reduced?

      • I'm guessing from this:

        "People who have jobs but weren't paid during the survey period don't count as "employed" in the BLS statistics. That would include, for instance, a restaurant worker who is paid hourly and could not work for an extended period because of a storm."

    • Re:Storms? (Score:5, Funny)

      by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Friday October 06, 2017 @10:33AM (#55321833)

      "Aren't we pretty sure it's Trump's fault?"

      That's just Twitter storms.

  • I Blame (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dcw3 ( 649211 ) on Friday October 06, 2017 @10:13AM (#55321685) Journal

    Plug in your political affiliation and start pointing fingers now...

    Democrat
    Trump
    Climate Change
    Misogyny
    Russia

    Republican
    Obama/Clinton
    Abortion
    Snowflakes
    BLM

    Or maybe, instead of picking sides, and listening to the talking heads, we could just for a moment stop and realize that "the other side" isn't all evil/crazy, and that they just see things through a different lens that we should try to understand instead of listening to our individual echo chambers.

    • Republican
      Obama/Clinton

      Funny. The Wall Street Journal had a recent article that Obama is/was "too conservative" [wsj.com] for the Democrats. I've always thought Obama and Clinton were moderate conservatives.

      • I've always thought Obama and Clinton were moderate conservatives.

        You only think that because they are moderate conservatives.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by JoshuaZ ( 1134087 )

      No, the other side isn't evil or crazy, but that doesn't mean that climate change isn't real, that Donald Trump isn't a sexist asshole who literally bragged about sexually assaulting women, and that he very likely collaborated with Russia in if not illegal, certainly questionable ways. And of course, there are Republicans out there who are willing to stand up to him, but that doesn't make Trump less bad.

      Every Presidential election since I was old enough to care except this one, I've sent time arguing wi

    • If just 10% of the energy people spent on blaming others with different political affiliation was instead spent on work, growing a business, or starting a new business, most of the problems we complain about would disappear on their own.

      The entire reason we developed representative government with elected officials is so we would only need to take a few days out of our lives every couple years to worry about politics. Instead of having to learn the minutiae of every political issue every day so we can m
      • by hawk ( 1151 )

        >The entire reason we developed representative government with elected officials is so we would
        >only need to take a few days out of our lives every couple years to worry about politics.

        No, that just isn't correct.

        Britain developed it much by accident.

        Coming out of the feudal period, the king couldn't simply impose taxes; Parliaments were about getting the consent he needed for those/

        Over time, Parliament came up with a "grievances before revenues" policy in which they wouldn't approve the revenues unt

  • still waiting (Score:1, Informative)

    Still waiting for slashdot to post an article about the growth rate surpassing 3% as described in that nasty conservative rag USA Today:
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/09/28/u-s-economic-growth-revised-up-3-1-rate-q-2/711674001/
    That 3.1% growth was higher than anything under Obama, as confirmed by far, alt-right Nazi organization politifact:
    http://www.politifact.com/illi... [politifact.com]

    Oh snap, they're MSM and left wing hacks respectively
    • Still waiting for slashdot to post an article about the growth rate surpassing 3% as described in that nasty conservative rag USA Today:

      https://www.usatoday.com/story... [usatoday.com]

      That 3.1% growth was higher than anything under Obama, as confirmed by far, alt-right Nazi organization politifact:

      http://www.politifact.com/illi... [politifact.com]

      Oh snap, they're MSM and left wing hacks respectively

      Is that news for nerds, stuff that matters? This story is marginal, and that one would be no better.

    • Well yeah. Thanks to Obama.

      It's funny that people such as yourself who use the term MSM as a pejorative, claiming their "fake", are quick to use those same "fake" news sources to bolster your misguided claim the con artist has had anything to do with growth or employment.

      It's even funnier, perhaps pathetic is the correct word, when in March of 2009 when Obama took office, you were quick to blame him for the bad economy, loss of jobs and the banking crisis when only a few months before it was Bush handing o

      • Obama is making the economic growth rate HIGHER a year into the Trump administration than it ever was during his administration?

        Fascinating. I didn't realize economic growth was such a delayed thing or he was still pulling the strings in secret. Too bad the voters probably won't pick up on that.
  • Let's get in the wayback machine and go back to May 4, 2012.

    https://twitter.com/realDonald... [twitter.com]

    You will notice that in this tweet, Donald Trump is complaining about a labor force participation rate of 64.3%, and that there should be 300,000 new jobs per month.

    Last month, the labor force participation rate was 63.1% and the economy lost 33,000 jobs.

    Before you say, "but, hurricanes!", let me remind you that before last month, there were 83 consecutive months of job growth in the US. The longest uninterrupted p

  • We are finally finally seeing rising wages after the sevre Great Recession eliminated so many jobs.

    33,000 lost is no biggie in the grand scheme. Now if we loose more next month then I will worry as it shows a trend of contraction

  • A loss of 33K jobs in a month is pretty much in the noise level.

    • by tomhath ( 637240 )
      There was a net decrease of 33K jobs, compared to the net increase of ~175K that would have been expected without the storms. How many people enter the workforce, change jobs, or retire isn't the issue here.
  • Neither Puerto Rico nor US Virgin Islands are part of this measure.

    It's far worse.

  • This'll make you feel better, or worse... Afghanistan 35%, American Samoa 50%, Kenya 42%, Senegal 48%, Yemen 35%, Syria 40%, Zimbabwe 95%

It's been a business doing pleasure with you.

Working...