Posted on 06/02/2018 7:02:25 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The real question in analyzing the May jobs numbers released Friday is whether there are enough synonyms for “good” in an online thesaurus to describe them adequately.
So, for example, “splendid” and “excellent” fit the bill. Those are the kinds of terms that are appropriate when the United States economy adds 223,000 jobs in a month, despite being nine years into an expansion, and when the unemployment rate falls to 3.8 percent, a new 18-year low.
“Salubrious,” “salutary” and “healthy” work as words to describe the 0.3 percent rise in average hourly earnings, which are up 2.7 percent over the last year — a nice improvement but also not the kind of sharp increase that might lead the Federal Reserve to rethink its cautious path of interest rate increases.
And a broader definition of unemployment, which includes people who have given up looking for a job out of frustration, fell to 7.6 percent. The jobless rate for African-Americans fell to 5.9 percent, the lowest on record, which we would count as “great.”
If anything, some of the thesaurus offerings don’t really do these numbers justice. But some aspects of the report would be fairly described as “solid,” “decent” or “benign,” such as the uptick in the ratio of the adult population that is employed to 60.4 percent, which only matches its recent high of earlier in the year.
Then there are other thesaurus synonyms for “good” that we don’t normally use in reference to employment numbers, but which are apropos this month. For example, “congruous,” in the sense that the various pieces of the report align with each other: Employers are creating more jobs, leading more people to work and fewer people to be unemployed, and leading wages to rise.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Neil Irwin is a senior economics correspondent for The Upshot. He previously wrote for The Washington Post and is the author of “The Alchemists: Three Central Bankers and a World on Fire.”
“despite being nine years into an expansion”
Seven of those years of that “expansion” can only be described as anemic.
This would have happened regardless, Trump has nothing to do with it. /sar
...and “anemic” is being overly generous and kind.
Finally, a NY Times article that doesn’t mention Trump even once.
Regardless, just before the election they will endorse the democrat candidate, no matter who it is.
People having jobs doesn’t matter to these people. All that matters is that all are “equal.” (equally miserable.)
Actually, there are dozens of words that can adequately describe the Trump jobs report. These include “outstanding, great, superb, excellent, marvelous, magnificent”, etc. It’s just that the NYT can’t bring themselves to using them.
Trump haters want to credit the economic boom to Obama.
They’re frustrated and angry to boot he is reaping the political benefits from it.
The Democrat Party is being forced to run against tax cuts, jobs and prosperity.
A winnah!
There was an very weak “expansion” under Obama that finally started to trickle in around 2016. There was nothing but pure economic devastation before that. The economy didn’t start a real recovery ie one that most Americans could truly feel until the last 6 months.
The comments section is hilarious though. Don’t believe your lying eyes!!!
Inflation.
Deflation.
Recession.
Depression.
Trumpflation!
Anecdotally, you can see it around here if you're observant:
(1) more blacks and more "unexpected" (less than perfect) workers in basic jobs.
(2) in restaurants and stores, the diversity of the people spending money
(3) anecdotally: I've gotten some calls from young adults who only need to pass a math test to get a HS diploma that they didn't bother with before. They're seeing opportunities that are now open to them, with a HS diploma.
That's my take, anyway. It's all good. If people get jobs and next step feel confident enough to develop normal relationships with families, a lot of the problems we have as a nation will be less severe.
I think the unspoken reason why birth rates kept falling - the Great Recession never really ended. We’ve had ten years of falling wages, high real unemployment hidden by people shifting to disability.
So their actions demonstrated what no one reported under Obama - it really WAS still bad out there.
Now the economy is starting to turn around, so the birth rate may return to normal.
I’m amazed a paper as dreadful as the New York Times would pick up someone as insightful as Neil Irwin... We can assume they won’t make that mistake twice.
If Ohama hadn't screwed up everything so badly, Trump wouldn't have gotten elected.
Now Trump is repairing all the damage Obama did.
If it weren't for Carter, we never would have gotten Reagan.
If it weren't for Obama, we never would have gotten Trump.
The tax cut changed our entire economy.
And this so called trade war is just another piece of the economy that has to be checked.....unless you like being scr**** year after year.
I guess it really galls him to not be able to give Obama credit. Those "stimulus" packages of Obama's were devastating, and placed needless stress on an economy that was struggling. Now that Trump is taking various pressures off the economy and it is improving, the leftists at NYT apparently just cannot bring themselves to give him credit. Or, by extension, to acknowledge that central government control of the economy can only suppress economic activity.
Reagan never reached the effectiveness of Trump. IIRC, he had a Democrat house and senate, so had to fight them tooth and nail every step of the way. Plus, they tricked him into granting amnesty, which is a big factor in the illegal invasion of today. Even with the RINO Never Trumpers, Trump has a far better house and senate to make his vision happen.
The “new norm” of a stagnant jobs/economy outlook is yet another of Obama’s legacies that Trump has destroyed...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.