Employment +134k
11 responses | 0 likes
Started by TimNew - Oct. 5, 2018, 8:50 a.m.

Below expectations.  18+k MFG jobs added.   Not an exciting report.  But I suspect it will ease fears of Fed tightening.  Equities up slightly following report.  

By Richard - Oct. 5, 2018, 9:59 a.m.
Like Reply

With the growth rates in the money supply that we have been seeing, job gains between 125K and 150K are going to be the new norm. Lets just hope that the numbers do stay positive and that negative numbers do not appear, but clearly job gains above 250K are behind us for now.

By mcfarm - Oct. 5, 2018, 10:18 a.m.
Like Reply

pretty sad when the best unemployment rate since 1969 is not even mentioned.... 3.7....just imagine if our x-king would of been in office an the headlines all day long on the commy news

By Richard - Oct. 5, 2018, 10:52 a.m.
Like Reply

The unemployment rate of 3.7% is a number that has nothing to do with reality. The real unemployment rate is closer to 8%

By TimNew - Oct. 5, 2018, 12:33 p.m.
Like Reply

I don't pay much attention to U3,  it excludes too many.  U6 was 7.4 in August.  It's come down quite a bit and continues.

By mcfarm - Oct. 5, 2018, 1:17 p.m.
Like Reply

fine fair is fair, I an all about fair...so you "non" hypocrites, love that, go ahead and compare Obama economy to trumps any damn day, and use any numbers...by the ay Mr hypocrite when it comes to Kavanaugh, after all the testimony has been rebutted now are you still mr independent, not wanting to make a rash decision, that is a a laugh as most knew long ago about these 3 "victims"

By Richard - Oct. 5, 2018, 1:26 p.m.
Like Reply

The economy is doing better now then under Obama and I was complaining when Obama was President. Well for the record I am not actually complaining, more like stating that 3.7% unem is just not real. 

By cliff-e - Oct. 6, 2018, 7:46 a.m.
Like Reply
By TimNew - Oct. 6, 2018, 8:03 a.m.
Like Reply

For a scientific analysis, apples to apples to coin a phrase,  we'll need to compare full terms to full terms.  We don't have the data yet, and comparing Obama's 1st term to Trumps will be unfair as Obama did inherit an economy in severe decline where Trump inherited a relatively healthy one.

An analysis of Obama's 8 years shows a steady growth.  Some, myself included, would call it sluggish. And a notable metric, as noted in the article was/is the labor participation rate.  GDP growth is also not in Obama's favor.  

Assuming Trump has 2 terms, and that's a pretty big assumption as things stand,  I would expect his numbers will be quite a bit better than Obama's.  Economic growth so far is much better. But until 2024,  that's speculation which may be clouded by personal bias. GDP and wage growth, among others, seem to support my thinking 

By Richard - Oct. 6, 2018, 10:51 a.m.
Like Reply

As we get into Trumps second term, oil is going to be surging well past $100 and I think the FED is not going to like that. By 2024, the economy may not be doing quite so good, as it is doing now and I voted for Trump so I am not bias.

By metmike - Oct. 6, 2018, 11:11 a.m.
Like Reply

I have one more day at our huge fund raiser event:


Until then, I only have time to do a weather post and couldn't resist several Judge K posts. Until then, I'll let all the posts in this thread stand and actually see it as a good example of some self policing with others chiming in regarding NTR posting on this forum. 

I'll clean this up on Sunday but would appreciate everybody following the rules that the majority prefer to have for your forum..........which means everybody should follow. 



Sunday morning update:

The posts with political elements defining them have been deleted. The rules regarding this are not strict and its inevitable that markets and politics will mix and can still be acceptable here on the trading forum under many circumstances.

However, in this case, the 2 posting authors also injected some expressing of ideas that were interpreted by the other one as being inflammatory towards them.

This appears to have resolved on its own but I deleted the offending/NTR posts. 

By Lacey - Oct. 7, 2018, 11:09 a.m.
Like Reply

All the BLS  numbers are bullsh.. 

But it is all they have used for decades.  It is the yardstick to compare to new numbers .