« | »

Fewest Jobs Added In 9 Months, But Rate Drops

From the Associated Press:

US economy adds 88K jobs, rate drops to 7.6 pct.


WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. employers added just 88,000 jobs in March, the fewest in nine months and a sharp retreat after a period of strong hiring. The slowdown is a reminder that the job market’s path back to health will be uneven.

The Labor Department says the unemployment rate dipped to 7.6 percent from 7.7 percent. While that is the lowest in four years, the rate fell only because more people stopped looking for work.

Wow. These are harsh words, coming as they do from the White House’s most dependable economic lap dog.

The weakness may signal that companies were worried last month about steep government spending cuts that began on March 1.

Whew. Mr. Rugaber quickly gets back on the side of righteousness by blaming the sequester.

March’s job gains were half the pace of the previous six months, when the economy added an average of 196,000 jobs a month. The drop raises fears that the economy could slow after a stronger winter.

We could "slow down" from our robust .4% GDP?

From the Weekly Standard:

Goolsbee: ‘This Is a Punch to the Gut. This Is Not a Good Number.’

By DANIEL HALPER | April 5, 2013

Austan Goolsbee, a former economic adviser to President Obama, called this morning’s jobs report "a punch to the gut."

"We all overshot it," said Goolsbee on CNBC.

All of the news media’s expert economists had predicted that at least 200,000 new jobs would be added. Just like they always over-estimate under Obama.

"This is a punch to the gut. This is not a good number."

He went to blame sequestration, though a CNBC [talking head] interrupted him to say that it’s result of the payroll tax hike.

And that little $600 billion dollar tax increase on ‘the rich.’ And Obama-Care. And all of Obama’s other economic policies.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, April 5th, 2013. Comments are currently closed.

2 Responses to “Fewest Jobs Added In 9 Months, But Rate Drops”

  1. GetBackJack says:

    “May be worried?”


  2. Professor_Repulso says:

    The methods used in the process of determining the unemployment numbers are on about the same level as one might expect to find in a book on business ethics written by Bernard Madoff. When someone stops looking for work, are they then declared a nonperson? Why even use such a metric that so poorly corresponds to reality? I guess that was a rather silly question, wasn’t it? As for the former economic adviser to Skid Mark, a more appropriate spelling of his last name would be ‘Ghoulsbee’.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »