U.S. Payrolls Rose 180,000 in March; Jobless Rate at 4.4%

[Anna]

Remember under the Clinton Administration when the jobless rate would go down to 5.6% and the Lame Stream Media would just go bonkers reporting it for days, going on and on and on endlessly about how wonderful the economy was doing?  Now we really have to look to even find the information!  No bias in our media coverage?  Sure there is!  And it is Liberal all the way.  Rosie is a prime example of what passes for information under this current crop of non-journalists and reporters.  She takes her very slanted and inaccurate world view right from today's headlines!

--------------------

U.S. Payrolls Rose 180,000 in March; Jobless Rate at 4.4%

By Joe Richter

April 6 (Bloomberg) -- Hiring in the U.S. rose more than forecast and the jobless rate unexpectedly dropped, giving the economy a spark as it struggles to overcome slumps in housing and manufacturing.

The 180,000 increase in employment followed a 113,000 gain in February that was larger than previously estimated, the Labor Department reported today in Washington. The jobless rate fell to 4.4 percent, matching October's five-year low.

New jobs and bigger paychecks are giving more Americans the means to spend, preventing the housing recession from spreading to the rest of the economy. The drop in the jobless rate may concern Federal Reserve policy makers who've said the threat of inflation is a bigger risk for the expansion.

``Jobs are plentiful and employers are giving fairly large wage increases,'' Robert Gay, managing director at Fenwick Advisers LLC in Rye, New York, and a former Fed economist, said before the report. ``Outside housing and manufacturing, the rest of the economy is doing pretty well and continuing to create jobs.''

Economists projected payrolls would rise by 130,000 following a previously reported 97,000 February increase, according to the median of 75 forecasts in a Bloomberg News survey. They also anticipated an increase in the unemployment rate to 4.6 percent.

Revisions for the previous two months showed employers added 32,000 more jobs than the Labor Department had earlier estimated.

Earnings

Workers' average hourly earnings rose 6 cents, or 0.3 percent, after a 0.4 percent increase the previous month. Economists expected a 0.3 percent increase in hourly wages. Earnings were up 4 percent from March last year.

``There's not a lot of deterioration in the labor market, despite the worries over the effects of the housing market,'' Michelle Girard, senior economist at RBS Greenwich Capital in Greenwich, Connecticut, said before the report. ``The fact that the labor market is still tight means the hurdle for Fed easing rates is higher than a lot of people might think.''

Builders added 56,000 jobs after shedding 61,000 the prior month. The snap back is probably due to the return of more seasonable temperatures after cold weather played a role in the February drop, the Labor Department said.

Service industries, which include banking, insurance, restaurants and retailers, gained 137,000 workers last month after a 180,000 gain in February, the report showed. The increase was led by a 36,000 gain in retail employment that was the biggest since July 2005.

Manufacturing

Manufacturers' payrolls fell 16,000 last month after dropping 11,000 a month earlier. Economists expected manufacturers to eliminate 12,000 positions. The manufacturing workweek rose to 41.1 hours and overtime increased to 4.3 hours from 4.2 hours.

Average weekly hours worked by production workers increased to 33.9 from 33.8. Economists in the Bloomberg survey had forecast hours would rise to 33.8 from 33.7.

Average weekly earnings rose to $583.76 last month from $580.01 in February.

``We continue to see modest growth and stability in the labor market,'' Steve Pogorzelski president of Monster International Worldwide, said in an interview on April 4. ``Employers continue to report they're concerned about turnover, driven by opportunities to make more money'' in other jobs.

The report is in line with others in recent weeks that suggested the labor market was holding up.

Other Surveys

ADP Employer Services said companies added 106,000 jobs last month after a 65,000 gain in February. The ADP data are based only on a count of private payrolls that exclude government workers.

A Conference Board survey released last week showed the share of Americans who said jobs are plentiful rose last month to the highest since August 2001. First-time claims for unemployment benefits also showed companies are holding on to workers.

``It's hard to find enough people to grow the way we want,'' said John Milligan, chief operating officer of Foster City, California-based Gilead Sciences Inc., the world's second-biggest seller of HIV drugs behind GlaxoSmithKline Plc, in an interview last month.

Other businesses are trying to trim costs by reducing staff. Milpitas, California-based Solectron Corp., the world's second- largest maker of electronics for other companies, said last week it may cut as many as 1,500 jobs as it consolidates facilities in North America and Europe.

Fed

Federal Reserve policy makers were counting on jobs and wages to keep consumers and the economy afloat.

``The continuing increases in employment, together with some pickup in real wages, have helped sustain consumer spending,'' Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said during Congressional testimony last week. ``Growth in consumer spending should continue to support the economic expansion in coming quarters.''

Bernanke also said interest-rate policy was still aimed at combating inflation, which central bankers considered a bigger risk to the economy. Still, ``uncertainties have risen, and therefore a little more flexibility might be desirable.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Joe Richter in Washington Jrichter1@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: April 6, 2007 08:30 EDT
http://tinyurl.com/yoahvy

[A's Fever]

The jobs report was big news in the MSM outlets that I am familiar with.  The jobs report was eagerly anticipated all week because the number is looked at closely by the Fed and is one of the key indicators that the Fed considers when it decides whether to raise interest rates at the upcoming Fed meeting on May 9.  CNBC (TV) had reports on the anticipated number earlier in the week, and covered the ramifications of the report all morning yesterday, probably because the equity market was closed and there was little other news.  CNN.com (CNN Money) and Thestreet.com both ran lead articles on the news.  This morning my local newspaper devoted 1/2 of the first page of business news to the jobs report, complete with graphics showing the breakdown of the numbers in ten categories.

[pdh3]

I thought the jobs report was covered fairly and accurately by all the major media outlets. It was big news, and lots of people were waiting for it to come out. I'm sure Time, Newsweek, and other magazines will cover it as well.

Rosie is not a journalist. She is a comedian and talk show host who is doing what she is paid to do....cause controversy to revive a dying TV show. She has been very, very successful at doing just that. Everyone is now talking about The View, and the ratings are way up... thanks to Rosie O'Donnell. It was a great PR move, and students majoring in marketing and advertising will be studying it for years to come. Rosie is many things, and her opinions are not mainstream, but she is very entertaining, and that's why she is there.....to make money for ABC. It has nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with advertising dollars.

[Anna]

Well, that's sort of my point, A's.  It may have been on the first page of the business sector but in the days of the Clinton Administration, it would have been front page headlines.

I'm not saying there was no coverage of it but considering that this is pretty historical for a low, I would certainly have anticipated more if we truly had anything close to a balanced coverage of news.  Instead, most of it is devoted to Nancy Pelosi in that headscarf.

Other than programs and segments devoted to just financial news, I don't see the economy mentioned very much in the regular coverage.  Remember "It's the Economy, Stupid!"  Used to the the lead in on the regular nightly news, not just the financial portion.

[Anna]

Jobless rate falls to five-year low
By Patrice Hill
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published April 7, 2007

 
 
The unemployment rate fell to a five-year low of 4.4 percent as job growth picked up to 180,000 last month — a show of strength that bolstered hopes that the economy will endure the turmoil in the housing and mortgage markets without major harm.
    The March increase in jobs reported by the Labor Department reflected a revival of hiring among construction companies, department stores and retailers as well as continued robust growth of health care jobs. The construction job gains erased a big loss in February resulting from cold weather and left jobs in the sector roughly unchanged since September with increases in hiring for office and government construction projects offsetting losses in housing construction.
    In another sign of unexpected strength, hiring in January and February was 32,000 more than previously reported. But the overall employment gains in March masked the loss of another 16,000 manufacturing jobs — the ninth straight month of shed factory jobs — as well as a rare cut in business services jobs for accountants and temporary employees.
    "The latest job numbers show an economy that is effectively absorbing the blows from the residential and mortgage sectors," said Bernard Baumohl, managing director of the Economic Outlook Group, an economic advisory firm in Princeton Junction, N.J.
    Job growth averaged a "respectable" 152,000 a month in the first quarter, which is down from last year's 188,500 pace but consistent with the more subdued growth of the economy, he said.
    Wages continued to grow moderately, bringing the yearly gain for average hourly workers to 4 percent. Both the wage gains and the unemployment rate are at levels attained at the end of the last expansion in 2001, signaling that the job market remains fairly tight despite a slackening of economic growth since last spring.
    "The economic outlook is quite bright, and the probability of recession is still negligible" as long as consumers continue to gain jobs and income, Mr. Baumohl said.
    The report suggests the Federal Reserve has achieved its goal of a "Goldilocks" economy where growth is "not too hot, not too cold" and will not ignite inflation, he said. It particularly vindicates Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke's view that solid growth in jobs and income will underpin consumers and keep the economy growing despite the troubles in housing and manufacturing.  

 David Wyss, chief economist with Standard & Poor's, said the strength in construction and other areas was a "major surprise" and indicates that the slowdown in hiring during January and February was more of an aberration because of cold weather than previously thought. But he cautioned that early retail hiring for Easter and other distortions in the department's seasonal adjustments may have overstated the job gains.
    "The strength in construction, in particular, is highly encouraging" in light of an 18 percent drop in home building and a loss of 134,000 home construction jobs in the last year, he said. "However, the seasonal factors swing very sharply between February and March, and exact numbers need to be taken with a larger grain of salt than usual. The [March] job gain was 939,000 on a nonseasonally adjusted basis, which is nearly half the 1,984,000 gain over the last year."
    Lawrence Kudlow of Kudlow & Co. called the jobs report a "blockbuster" that "puts the lie to those perma-bear pessimists who keep predicting recession from the subprime mortgage problem and the housing slowdown."    

The report vindicates optimistic investors who have driven stocks to near record highs in the past year, he said.
    "The rate of economic growth ebbs and flows over long expansion periods such as this one," which is in its sixth year of growth, he said. "In the absence of major policy blunders" like big tax increases, the unleashing of inflation and protectionist forces or overregulation, "the economic pie keeps expanding," he said.
    Peter Morici, business professor at the University of Maryland, said the job boomlet has been better for college-educated and skilled people than for high school graduates and dropouts, though all groups have seen their unemployment rates drop in the past year.
    "For high school graduates without specialized skills or training, jobs offering good pay and benefits remain tough to find," he said. "Historically, manufacturing and construction offered workers with only a high school education the best pay, benefits and opportunities for skill attainment and advancement. Troubles in these industries push ordinary workers into retailing, hospitality and other industries where pay often lags."
 
http://tinyurl.com/2cs8u4



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Anna]

Well, I'm certainly not the only one who sees it this way.

----------


Poll shows Bush lagging on economy
Bill Sammon, The Examiner
Apr 8, 2007 10:01 PM (38 mins ago)
Current rank: # 154 of 17,137

WASHINGTON - Although the current expansion is in its sixth year, most Americans continue to give President Bush poor marks on the economy.


A Gallup poll taken late last month found that only 41 percent of respondents approved of Bush's handling of the economy, compared to 55 percent who disapproved.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said the mainstream media has displayed a "double standard" by largely ignoring economic growth under Bush after giving extensive coverage to the economic expansion during Bill Clinton's presidency.

But Fratto conceded there is another reason why Clinton gets more credit than Bush for the health of the economy.

"If you go back to that point in time in the mid-90s, you have to ask yourself, what the heck else was going on? I mean, there wasn't a whole lot else to pay attention to except the economy," he said.

By contrast, today's headlines tend to focus more on the Iraq war, which Fratto called "this huge, dominating issue."

"It's something that has turned - from a public perception standpoint - very negative for the president," he said.

"And if they have a negative view of the president right now on what many people consider the most important issue, it's hard to give him credit on other things," Fratto said.

http://tinyurl.com/yoq3eg

 

 

bsammon@dcexaminer.com

Read related story: White House says economic surge robust


Examiner

[nonesuche]

I agree that MSM has not afforded this positive for the job market nearly the press it deserves. I likely have a different perspective and perhaps some insights in that human resources has been part of my consulting practice for many years.

I blame Clinton for building an economy on shifting sands and he would have been credited for this, if not for the timing of Bush's first election. I worked exclusively with technology companies throughout that period and began hearing a sucking sound in the fall of 2000, as the grossly overinflated tech market began to droop. US companies that had been expanding their personnel by 200% annually in new technologies such a 2G wireless in the US and 3G in Europe and Asia, suddenly stopped hiring entirely. Other new soft technologies like CRM did exactly the same. Who got blamed for this? Bush for he had just been elected, when in fact it was goodtimes Clinton's administration who allowed the inappropriate valuations of these companies to not only occur but also to not sense their way thru knowing our economy was headed for this measure of crash for they shared none of this - forecast none of it - compensated nor took corrective action in anticipation from cues for none of it? Were they honest with us? No, in no way were they honest, Clinton was packing up and made his pretty pennies then made a clean getaway. Just like whitewater......

It was a classic domino effect and Bush had nothing to do with the origins of it. That isn't a partisan statement, it's reality.

I watched companies/start-up's with stock valued at $345/share that I worked closely with the executive leadership as an external vendor, then watch their stock plummet to $35/share by year-end. Unless you lived it, unless you saw the house of cards Clinton allowed to happen unfold, I am unsure if you could truly feel the real impact unless of course you had vested heavily in the tech stock market. What is sad ultimately is that some of our finest minds, the truly independent thinkers and inventors of that period, were squashed beneath economic recklessness advanced by Clinton and friends. I think all in retrospect would have chosen more modest gains and valuations, in exchange for the survival of the richness and inventiveness in business and product of that period.

It's just a crock, pure an unadulterated crock in retrospect to say Clinton led a thriving economy in his last term. Honestly it's taken corrective actions and rebuilding since 2000 for truly 'good jobs' to take hold again and for the services sector to begin to thrive again, so deep was the damage done during the Clinton years. The beginnings of the move to offshore jobs as well all began during Clinton's last years in office and was further fueled by the downturn, when CIO's were pressured into cost over quality and within financial services sector, cost over security and privacy for consumers.

MSM isn't about to report the true story nor to publicize perhaps the best news we've had regarding our employment market in well over a year. Why? Well it's not the ultra liberal position, MSM takes partisanship to new levels each and every day along with Pelosi and friends.

[mrs. red]

SO well said NONE!  I also notice that Enron, et. al ... they get blamed on Bush when it was occurring under Clinton... it didn't just cover the tech sector.

Too bad that there is the Internet for those that really want answers as far as the msm is concerned.

Great post! Thanks

[A's Fever]

My point was that it is a matter of perception that a news story that was so heavily covered could be considered obscure, something that we really have to hunt for.  I certainly can't remember back to the Clinton days and how economic news was reported so many years ago, but I would point out that that was a pre-911 world, and the headlines were not at that time filled with war coverage so perhaps it was fitting to go on for days with positive news.  But would it really be appropriate to go on about it now, how jolly things are at home, when our nation suffers in the shadow of this war?

If you are looking for liberal bias in the media, no doubt you will find it.  

pdh3, you bring up an interesting point about news and entertainment.  I did not understand the Rosie comment so thanks for clarifying that.  I have often wondered when we read on these boards about the MSM what it refers to these days?  Major newspapers, wire services, netwowrk news, cable "news", blogs, Internet sources?  What exactly is MSM?  And cable news reporting, so often discussed here, is it really news reporting, or entertainment?  The line is so blurred, I mean, is Rosie considered MSM??

JMHO

[nonesuche]

I think economic news has great importance, particularly for the reams of individuals who are either looking for jobs or have been pushing the rock of increased productivity up the hill this last five to seven years. Since I live within one hour of the majority of the base deploying army soldiers to Iraq, I can also promise you many of their spouses are happy to have good news regarding jobs, many of them work.

The media has been full of one witch hunt after another of late, I don't hear much about the war but only about whose campaign war chest is largest or who dissed who in their campaign speeches on any given day. The election is driving 99.9% of our news of a serious nature, then we have the Anna Nicole case consuming the cable networks.

[Anna]

MSM = Mainstream Media in all its forms to me.

Having Rosie on TV every day spouting such things as Bush being behind 9-11 and that he and not al Quada is responsible for that attack is just ludicrous.

If Rosie takes it upon herself to do her daily  commentary on politics and the news, then she falls into that category just the same as any other person being given air time.

Because one is a member of entertainment if she could even remotely be called that does not give one a license to say anything without consequences and tells lies and slander as she does.

Talk show hosts are just as accountable for what they say as anybody else.  If not, why is Imus on the hot seat right now?  He certainly is not a journalist by any standard.

It's fairly well admitted that network news is liberal.  I don't think they can deny that and last survey I saw on actual reporters was that 82% of them were liberal.  The coverage is skewed accordingly.

This old joke has a lot of truth in it:  Bush walks on water and MSM reports with headline "Bush Can't Swim!"

It's just so much worse than I have ever seen it in my lifetime now.  And also this is the first time I have ever seen members of congress issuing blanket subpoenas and demanding personal email in order to go on witch hunts and try to find something, anything to try to smear and possibly bring some sort of charges against people like Carl Rove who are totally immune from this very kind of investigation because of the nature of their jobs.

Tom Delay would be another prime example.  Bring charges so he can't run in an election then later just drop them.  This is dirty politics at its worst.  What it basically boils down to is an attempt by the DNC members of congress to jail their political opponents just like in the old USSR.  See Scooter Libby for yet another example.  Why is he going to jail and not Richard Armitage if that was about "outing" desk jockey and not covert Plame?  Frame up.  The FBI agent deviated from SOP and yet evidence was allowed anyway by liberal judge.  She failed to do the required recording and yet was allowed to testify on just her word alone.  

So we have it becoming illegal to be a Republican now along with a press that leaks classified information and slants the news.  Shades of Old Russia and Pravda right here in our country.  Sad, really, the lengths some will go to for a few votes and a little power.