Public-sector jobs continue to decline, and private-sector job growth is not nearly strong enough to make a significant dent in the national unemployment rate, according to the latest monthly jobs report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. On the contrary, another recession is well within the range of possibilities for the coming year. Equally worrying, there appears to be no chance of passing another government stimulus package, no matter who wins the presidential election.
The full report on the Employment Situation in August 2012 is available here (pdf). Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 96,000, not nearly enough even to keep up with population growth. The unemployment rate was slightly down to 8.1 percent, but only because fewer unemployed people were looking for work during the past month. There are still about 5 million long-term unemployed Americans and 8 million “involuntary part-time workers” who would prefer to be employed full-time. The Bureau of Labor Statistics also revised downward its previous job growth estimate for July.
Bonddad noted a few other troubling points:
The workweek was unchanged and down — indicating that there is still excess capacity that we’re not using. That’s not good.
Hourly earnings edged down — another bad sign.
And we see a net reduction in jobs created over the last two months.
At this point, these reports are nothing more than cruel jokes on the economic pundits.
Also at the Bonddad blog, New Deal Democrat was more gloomy:
Another leading indicator, the number of people unemployed from zero to 5 weeks, increased by 133,000. It is 301,000 over its level in April. This is a level that in the past has frequently been associated with the onset of recession.
The diffusion index of employment growth declined to 50.2%, indicating that as many industries are shedding workers as are adding them.
The household survey reported an actual loss of -119,000 jobs.
Private jobs created were +103,000. Government shed -7000 jobs. […]
This is the kind of report that I would expect to see a few months before the onset of recession. That June and July were both revised down is another trend I would expect to see on the cusp of a recession. That hiring was so abysmal even in the relative absence of firing as measured by initial jobless claims is yet another red flag.
I’d probably go a little further than Bonddad and call this not just mediocre, but miserable – as miserable as a report could be and still have a positive topline number.
George W. Bush’s administration pushed for big increases in government domestic spending in response to the economic slowdown of 2001 and 2002. In contrast, current Republican politicians are locked into the position that government spending doesn’t create jobs, so the 2009 stimulus “failed.” Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan claim that big tax cuts and rollbacks in government regulations will get the economy booming again.
The construction sector as a share of the national workforce is “at its lowest level since 1946.” Many roads and bridges are in bad condition, and other public works projects (such as passenger rail) could help the economy in the medium- and long-term in addition to creating short-term jobs. But the political will to spend national resources this way is lacking in both parties.
President Barack Obama has genuflected to the austerity movement too many times. Although he half-heartedly pushed for more infrastructure spending during the past two years, he would not seek to pass another major stimulus package if re-elected, judging from his speech to the Democratic National Convention last night. Matthew Yglesias commented on Obama’s acceptance speech,
On content, what I think is interesting here is that in Obama’s story about the national economy there’s not a single hint of the (accurate) liberal conventional wisdom that persistent mass unemployment is primarily an issue of inadequate aggregate demand. There’s nothing about monetary policy, of course, but also nothing about housing finance. There’s nothing about fiscal stimulus even as a hypothetical. […]
There’s a forward-looking economic vision here, but it’s entirely a vision of structural transformation. A better health care system. Better schools. More domestic energy production, both renewable and natural gas. Better schools. Immigration reform.
That’s all good stuff, though I continue to find Obama’s obsession with manufacturing to be a bit daft. But it’s simply not responsive to the short-term jobs problem. If you’re an unemployed adult, then reforming high schools or creating quality early childhood education isn’t going to help you.
I am afraid we are looking at a “lost decade” in this country, no matter what happens in November.
UPDATE: Two members of Iowa’s Congressional delegation released statements about the jobs report on September 7. From Democrat Dave Loebsack (IA-02):
Washington, D.C. – Congressman Dave Loebsack today issued the following statement in response to the Department of Labor’s announcement that the unemployment rate was 8.1 percent in August and 96,000 jobs were added.
“The ongoing political games have gotten us nowhere. Today’s report serves as another reminder that in order for anything to get accomplished that actually improves our economy, Congress must work together.
“The House Republicans have shown an utter lack of leadership. It isn’t leadership when you continually put politics before people and refuse to bring a comprehensive jobs package up for a vote. Leadership isn’t holding hostage tax cuts for middle class families when we all agree they must be passed. Leadership isn’t taking our economy up to the brink of collapsing last summer by refusing to deal with the debt ceiling, and pushing it up against a fiscal cliff this fall. Leadership isn’t taking a five-week vacation when Iowans are dealing with the worst drought in 60 years without passing a reformed farm bill. Iowans expect their leaders to work until the job is complete and the leaders of this Congress have refused to even begin their work. The games must end and the work must begin.”
Today, in a face-to-face meeting, Loebsack also personally urged President Obama to use his position to push Congressional action on multiple critical issues that affect our economy, including the farm bill, a comprehensive jobs package, wind energy tax credit, sequestration, and middle class tax cuts. He stressed the importance of action and the dire consequences if no action is taken. A copy of the letter he presented to the President can be found here.
From Republican Steve King (IA-05), emphasis in original:
King: Numbers in this Report Are Not Just Numbers
Washington, DC- Congressman Steve King released the following statement today in response to the U.S. Department of Labor’s August jobs report. The report states that the national unemployment rate is 8.1 percent, a number that has been above 8 percent for 43 straight months. Only 96,000 jobs were created and nearly 370,000 more Americans gave up looking for work last month.
“Today’s jobs report reflects our nation’s stagnant economy, and with the policies of President Obama in place we can expect to see more of the same,” said King. “When the stimulus was signed into law, his administration claimed unemployment would be less than 5.5 percent today. His tax-and-spend, Keynesianism-on-steroids policies have failed, and this report shows that the President does not know how to handle this great challenge facing our nation.
The numbers in this report are not just numbers- they represent our neighbors, family and friends in Iowa and around the country who are struggling to find work, or have given up hope altogether. With more and more Americans giving up on looking for a job, our time for solving these problems is closing in. I knew when I started my business that government does not create jobs, but it can help to foster an environment for growth and development in our economy. We stand at a crossroads- we can choose more burdensome regulations and an unstable economy, or we can choose solutions that will reenergize Americans and get them back to work.”
SECOND UPDATE: The latest round of Mitt Romney’s television commercials in Iowa suggest that cutting government regulations and reducing government spending will create jobs. However, Romney commercials tailored to swing states with a larger defense sector promise to create jobs by reversing “Obama defense cuts”–in other words, by increasing government spending.
13 Comments
The sequester is having an impact
The DOD is canceling contracts and not issuing new RFPs. Defense industries are not hiring due to the uncertainty. House GOP intransigence is having the effect of imposing austerity with all its negative impacts on the economy.
cocinero Fri 7 Sep 11:03 AM
the irony is
every Republican admits that defense spending supports jobs, but they don’t acknowledge the same effect of other forms of government spending.
desmoinesdem Fri 7 Sep 2:35 PM
Spending
Oh I think you could get Ron and Rand Paul, Tom Coburn, Paul Broun, Scott Garrett and other fringe characters (my view) to slash defense spending and criticize it for a lack of job creation.
We need a more explicit Constitution that is plain as day on some of these social programs in the same way that it is explicit about a national defense, that’s the real problem. Even if the Warren Court and scores of justices have ruled a government program Constitutional, it means nothing to the Pauls and all of their followers.
If you don’t believe in any form of the common good and you live and die by the sword of Hayek and Rothbard, the rulings that government hands down mean very little.
It’s why I laugh at people who talk about Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand. You know who also likes Ayn Rand? Jared Polis! Ryan is just fascinated by her writing folks, his budget is nowhere near idealism for the hard line believers.
moderateiadem Fri 7 Sep 9:51 PM
how a bunch of Christian conservatives
came to love an atheist, adulterous author who detested Ronald Reagan is a bit beyond my comprehension.
desmoinesdem Fri 7 Sep 10:45 PM
sequestration
The local commentary in the DC area attributes the rise of unemployment (in MD, for example) due to uncertainty over the issue. This has been going on for at least five months. There was even a fed contractors rally in July, if you can imagine such a thing.
I would not agree that the general impression is one of a recalcitrant GOP House. Rather, people know they are political footballs because this is an issue that both parties think they can win. Ultimately, Virginians will have to make a decision, and where the majority comes down will probably decide the state.
I would characterize the entire campaign to date as more of the same. I frequently read that this is a campaign about “choice, not referendum,” but I’d describe it as a non-choice campaign. To partisans, the choices are “clear” but the average undecided is looking at non-choices. Who to blame for sequestration? Or
These are non-choices. I’ll double-down: no coincidence that both campaigns went the plausible deniability route on the speakers (didn’t vet! we were so scared!) who were sent out to lambast the other side. And Eastwood is just grabbing an extra five minutes right after the DNC.
Both campaigns have sent out wives to extol the virtues of their spouses as “family men,” as if that does a bit of good for people mulling sending out layoff notices due to lack of resolution on sequestration or other issues. The “family” has become a creepy proxy:
Undecided are so because they are not inclined to take an extreme view on the issue and there are few particulars on which to base a decision beyond syrupy appeals targeted at swing states.
One thing I find extremely interesting about the sequestration dilemma is as follows. The mindset in the DC area has always been one of “life goes on,” no matter which political party is in power. Democratic leaners adapt when Republicans are in power; Republican leaners adapt when Dems are in power. The argument that a particular worldview or ideology is critical to general stability is foreign in a sense. In MD, a very Democratic state, I know professors who compete for grants and counterintel professionals who all register “independent.”
So this is going to be interesting if there’s no bail with a “one-year extension.” Voters who are not accustomed to having to make a stark choice are being told that they have to roll the dice on what is actually a non-choice due to the lack of specifics. MD won’t matter, of course. At this time, I’d have to give a small edge to the GOP in NOVA. First, the GOP is largely in control of the state. Second, without any other information, naked self-interest is all that’s left. Which party is pledging “business as usual” for defense contractors? The federal weeklies around here were pretty grim on the WH missing the deadline on the sequestration plan, so it will be interesting to see what the Obama WH has up its sleeve.
albert Sat 8 Sep 9:24 AM
i'll add
that today’s print WashPost had a Woodward excerpt top-of-the-fold. It’s an interesting read — recommend. Both sides come across as jockeying for the next election/political gain. Non-choice.
albert Sun 9 Sep 5:15 PM
I'll miss
Fragile Recovery Summer.
albert Fri 7 Sep 2:45 PM
i admit...way way way off topic.....
…but since “political rhetoric” was in the headline of this desmoinesdem, it got me thinking. I would LOVE to see you discuss in a new posting what you felt were the best run campaigns ever (with a focus on Iowa history)…one of my nominations would be the long ago campaign to elect democrat Dick Clark to statewide office. Brilliant, effective, and successful on so many levels.
Thoughts on others?
mirage Fri 7 Sep 7:25 PM
that's a good idea for a post
I do not remember the 1972 campaign for Dick Clark, but I do remember Roger Jepson’s 1978 campaign against him. The Panama Canal was a big issue in campaign ads.
I think electing Tom Harkin statewide amid the Reagan landslide of 1984 was pretty impressive too.
Hope other people will weigh in or post a diary with their ideas.
desmoinesdem Fri 7 Sep 9:13 PM
come to think of it
Obama’s 2008 Iowa caucus campaign would be up there. Others had tried and failed to win Iowa by mobilizing new caucus-goers. He started out way behind among the experienced caucus-goers.
desmoinesdem Fri 7 Sep 10:46 PM
"best run"
in terms of field & execution, the Mathis campaign crushed. I don’t think Golding knew what hit her. A near zero on political messaging/candidate jujutsu, however — the short campaign favored a “potted plant” strategy.
A personal favorite is the recent SD22 GOP primary. Say what you want about the crazy pastor, but that fake newspaper was inspired. There’s a story in the “behind-the-scenes” executed by Ward, her allies and the anti-Mullen forces. Classic enemy-of-my-enemy. I mean, one day Ward was falling off a ladder onto her husband, and then all of a sudden she’s crushing Pastor Mullen in precincts all over the district.
2006 – write-in (Dem primary) Loebsack vs Leach. One can say Dem year/Dem district, but a blast from the past (9-30-06):
Not familiar with the Clark run.
albert Sat 8 Sep 7:30 AM
Not sure about best
But a couple years ago I did a post on the ten WORST Iowa campaigns http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/201… I might add Supreme Court 2010 (for not recognizing the ball game had changed and thus not campaigning at all) to the list, but it’ll be hard to ever displace “totally nude dancing?!?” from number one.
jdeeth Sat 8 Sep 9:15 AM
"totally nude dancing"
has to remain the all-time worst. The Supreme Court justices had never had to campaign before and (unlike Jim Ross Lightfoot) didn’t blow a 19-point lead with two months to go.
desmoinesdem Mon 10 Sep 12:11 AM