Some good news on jobs, but a long way to go

Finally, a decent monthly job report. Here are some highlights, brought to you by Meteor Blades:

The Bureau of Labor Statistics stated in its seasonally adjusted report that some 162,000 new jobs were created in March, the best showing since March 2007, but somewhat below the consensus of experts surveyed earlier in the week. The official unemployment rate held steady at 9.7%. Some 15 million Americans are officially out of work.

The U6 unemployment rate, an alternative measure that includes underemployed Americans as well as a portion of those too discouraged to have looked for jobs recently, rose to 16.9%. [...]

Some 48,000 of the new hires are temporary jobs with the Census. Hiring for the decennial count of the population will continue through June, with an estimated 1.15 million workers eventually hired. As a consequence of the short term nature of these jobs, experts will be largely discounting public employment when judging the health of the labor market during this period. Employment rose in construction, manufacturing, health care and temporary services. It held steady in transportation and warehousing, leisure and hospitality, the retail trade, and wholesale trade. There were losses in the information industry and financial services.

BLS revisions lowered the job losses in January from the 26,000 reported last month to a gain of 14,000 and reduced the job losses for February from 36,000 to 14,000. Average hourly earnings fell 0.1% in March.

Click over for more details and charts. It's going to be a very long climb out of this recession, which was the most severe in seven decades in terms of job losses. Blades notes that if the economy created 200,000 jobs a month from now on, "it would take until October 2013 before the number of employed Americans equaled those with a job in December 2007, when the recession began."

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

Tags: Economy, jobs, unemployment (all tags)

Comments

16 Comments

Thanks to the ARRA...

...one of those 162,000 jobs was me.

I'm going back to work! And it is thanks to stimulus money, I was told.

When all is said and done, I will have been unemployed for 60 weeks.

I will never forget the experience of losing my job, nor will I ever forget those who are still left behind.

We need more civil infrastructure spending.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-04-02 11:44AM | 2 recs
RE: Thanks to the ARRA...

Hey! Now that's really great news! Good luck & God bless!

by vecky 2010-04-02 01:35PM | 0 recs
RE: Thanks to the ARRA...

Congratulations, that's great!

by Steve M 2010-04-02 01:43PM | 0 recs
Congrats!

 

Employment more than almost anything drives home the "all politics are local" truism, eh? It is a 7M-job we took so it will in fact take a long time to work back out again.  The curves in these sorts of things are organic by nature, so for the short term (the rest of this year and the next) it is safe to look for a continuing positive trend.  The slope of the curve is the important bit, and it's too early to really nail that down. <img src="http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn231/chrisblask/JobsChart-march-2010.jpg"&gt;

Employment more than almost anything drives home the "all politics are local" truism, eh?

It is a 7M-job we took so it will in fact take a long time to work back out again.  The curves in these sorts of things are organic by nature, so for the short term (the rest of this year and the next) it is safe to look for a continuing positive trend.  The slope of the curve is the important bit, and it's too early to really nail that down. 

by chrisblask 2010-04-07 10:35AM | 0 recs
Congrats!

 

Employment more than almost anything drives home the "all politics are local" truism, eh? It is a 7M-job we took so it will in fact take a long time to work back out again.  The curves in these sorts of things are organic by nature, so for the short term (the rest of this year and the next) it is safe to look for a continuing positive trend.  The slope of the curve is the important bit, and it's too early to really nail that down. <img src="http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn231/chrisblask/JobsChart-march-2010.jpg"&gt;

Employment more than almost anything drives home the "all politics are local" truism, eh?

It is a 7M-job we took so it will in fact take a long time to work back out again.  The curves in these sorts of things are organic by nature, so for the short term (the rest of this year and the next) it is safe to look for a continuing positive trend.  The slope of the curve is the important bit, and it's too early to really nail that down. 

by chrisblask 2010-04-07 10:35AM | 0 recs
Transportation

The new green secter jobs are going to be in transportation building roads and railways not in the industrial plants. 

And its time to be less focused on the old jobs and more on construction.

by olawakandi 2010-04-02 11:59AM | 0 recs
RE: Transportation

If I had been in charge of the stimulus I would have allocated $250 billion toward passenger rail, with a special focus on high-speed rail. There really is that much demand for it.

by desmoinesdem 2010-04-02 03:54PM | 0 recs
If I was in charge of the stimulus

I would have doubled it and put a trillion toward a works program to rebuild our infrastructure, but I also realize that I'd probably be still fighting for Senators to vote for it with 14% unemployment and a barrage of "just do something...anything" from everyone around me. 

That's what makes politics frustrating. 

 

by ND22 2010-04-02 04:27PM | 0 recs
RE: If I was in charge of the stimulus

I know I've tossed this number around, but there is a $2.2 trillion infrastructure deficit in this country, representing just the cost to repair and upgrade our existing infrastructure and meet present demand.

We need to be spending $250 billion a year more on infrastructure than we currently are.

To put that number in perspective, the pentagon budget is $653 billion a year.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-04-02 08:14PM | 0 recs
RE: Transportation

Except they arent building HS rail in this country. The only way to do that is to build track dedicated specifically to commuter HS rail. That isnt happening, the projects in the works use existing lines.

by BuckeyeBlogger 2010-04-02 10:45PM | 0 recs
False.

In the US, any train travelling in excess of 150mph requires dedicated ROW.

Calfornia HSR (220mph) will use all new, dedicated ROW

Florida HSR (160-165mph) will use all new, dedicated ROW

There is exponentially increasing cost with speed, thus, you can see why the speed limit of the Florida HSR will be only about 160mph for now. Tampa to Orlando (with stops at Disney and Lakeland) will not make it worth the trainset reaching much in excess of 160mph.

The Acela trainset is capable of doing up to 200mph, but is limitted to 150mph because it uses common tracks in the NECR.

When the florida line is expanded down to Miami, higher speeds will be implemented.

Speeds of 150mph are nothing to sneeze at.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-04-03 08:04AM | 0 recs
RE: False.

Have you ever ridden Acela? Average speed is around 90 mph. In most cases those top speeds of 150mph are for very short stretches.

 

Further the money Ohio was given for example for HS rail will rely on dedicated track and therefore will be capable of truly running at HS. HS wont make a real impact unless and until you build dedicated track from the Northeast Corridor to the central, south and western points of the country. What we are building is a hodgepodge or rail lines. Why because politically no one has the guts to do it. The Government needs to simply use its muscle to get it built.

by BuckeyeBlogger 2010-04-03 10:07AM | 0 recs
RE: False.

There also needs to be some economic feasibility. Densely populated areas like the NW corridor, FL and the California coast are ripe for HSR, but the mid-west and west the urban concentrations are few and far between. For example Boston to DC is 450 miles with several large cities in between - New York, Philadelphia, Newark. Chicago to Philly is another possible line - but it's 750 miles and the cities in-between are smaller. And as much as I would like to see one, I doubt a HSR between Richmond and Orlando is feasible.

You also have to consider politics. CA had an excellent idea of building a rail line between LA and Las Vegas, given a huge number of people who drive. But then the RNC and Faux went on a mis-information spree claiming it was rail line direct to the Bunny Ranch. Where do they come up with this stuff...

by vecky 2010-04-03 03:31PM | 0 recs
RE: Some good news on jobs, but a long way to go

"The US unemployment rate, an alternative measure...rose to 16.9 percent."

And it will continue to rise as long as it gives republicans and little old lefties in tennis shoes somethig to bellyache about and it serves its purpose as a cold water bucket for that crowd.

The posters who feel that green spending is the future of the economy are right, BTW.

by spirowasright 2010-04-02 12:58PM | 0 recs
RE: Some good news on jobs, but a long way to go

I know a lot of underemployed people. It's a significant problem, not just for their families, but for the other businesses where the underemployed no longer have money to shop/dine out, etc.

by desmoinesdem 2010-04-02 03:55PM | 0 recs
RE: Some good news on jobs, but a long way to go

Sorry to hear about your friends and I hoe their situation can imo=rove soon.

We foreget that real people are involved here, but sometimes I get so disgusted with people trying to come up with statistics that undermine wht should be seen as progress (like 162,000 new jobs last month) and go out of their way to negative about it.

I'm afraid I'm way too cynical about politics in a way a lot of people aren't.

by spirowasright 2010-04-02 05:10PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads