Economists React to Jobs Data
You can have fun parsing a few of these answers . . . I have an idea, lets play a guessing game: Can you guess which economist is full of $%&! ?
Its fun and easy for the whole family! Multiple answers are not only allowed, but encouraged!
Online WSJ: The Labor Department reported Friday that nonfarm employers added 146,000 jobs to payrolls -- a better pace of growth than seen in recent months, but short of what many forecasters had expected. The unemployment rate dipped to 5.2% as many discouraged workers suspended their hunt for a new job. Here's what a selection of economists had to say about the numbers:
* * *
If you believe the supply managers, firms are adding workers. Maybe BLS just can't find them. A sharp cutback in the motor vehicle sector played a major role in the decline. … The sub-par job gains undoubtedly have bond market investors salivating. But any whiff of weakness causes that market to rally.
-- Joel L. Naroff, Naroff Economic Advisors
Construction employment posted an outright decline for only the second time in the past couple of years. The BLS theorized that "adverse weather may have held down employment in the industry." … Also, it's worth noting that just about all of the downside in the average work week was concentrated in the construction sector. The construction work week declined 2% -- to the lowest level in more than 10 years.
-- David Greenlaw, Morgan Stanley
The key point here is that it is just too soon for the rise in help wanted and the higher ISM employment index, among other indicators, to affect the payroll data. But they will lift the numbers by the spring.
-- Ian Shepherdson, High Frequency Economics
We would have more faith in these numbers if they corresponded more closely to other evidence concerning the labor market. Weekly jobless claims have been at levels consistent with an underlying trend of about +200K for payrolls, as has the "jobs plentiful" reading in the Conference Board's consumer confidence survey. Consumer spending results are also more consistent with firmer labor market conditions than shown in these figures.
-- Joshua Shapiro, Maria Fiorini Ramirez Inc.
The official unemployment rate is at its lowest level of the post-recession period. However, alternative measures of labor market utilization indicate that there are still substantial labor resources available. The economy still has room to grow quickly without straining the available labor resources.
-- Steven Wood, Insight Economics
The unemployment rate declined to 5.2% but this masks fundamental problems in the labor market and broader economy. The labor force is shrinking. In January, the number of workers fell 224,000, and in December it declined 110,000. The economy is not creating enough good paying jobs, causing workers to quit looking for jobs altogether.
-- Peter Morici, Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland
The deceleration in job creation has not been confirmed by other labor market indicators such as initial jobless claims. In any event, job creation of around 150,000 per month is sufficient over time to absorb new entrants into the workforce unless labor force participation were to rise sharply.
-- John Ryding, Conrad DeQuadros, Elena Volovelsky, of Bear Stearns
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Economists React to Jobs Data:
I don't know which one is full of it, but I thought that the 150,000 number each month was the absolute minimum, and is not sufficient. Some of the other comments look pretty strange to me too.
Posted by: JWC | Feb 5, 2005 1:09:37 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.