Jobless Uptick Masks Some Positive News

Private-sector jobs grew for the eighth month in a row

September 3, 2010 RSS Feed Print

Phrases like "jobless recovery" and "double-dip recession" have been on the lips of politicians and pundits for months now, and the latest unemployment numbers may do little to quell such worries. The newest Bureau of Labor Statistics figures, released today, showed unemployment remaining painfully high, inching up in August to 9.6 percent from 9.5 percent. However, economists said a modest rise in private payrolls last month is a sign that the economy is on the mend, though just barely.

Both the Obama Administration and mainstream economists say that the country is in for, at best, a long, slow recovery in the employment situation and the broader economy. Employment is typically a lagging indicator of economy recovery, and this is particularly true at a time when employers are reluctant to hire because of concerns about a potential double-dip recession.

“The hard truth is that it took years to create our current economic problems, and it will take more time than any of us would like to repair the damage,” President Obama said this morning, commenting on the latest economic data.

At this morning's remarks in the Rose Garden, Obama stressed that the country is seeing growth, however slow. "The key point I'm making right now is that the economy is moving in a positive direction. Jobs are being created," he said. However, he added that "we still have a long way to go before the economy is generating all the jobs we need for the labor force."

In a briefing at the Treasury Department, Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy Alan Krueger said that while private sector job growth exceeded expectations, "the pace of job growth...remains below what we would like."

August's small unemployment uptick belies a complex situation, in which real signs of growth are visible. The one-tenth of a percent increase represents a net loss of 54,000 non-farm payroll jobs. However, this job loss was expected, as a result of 114,000 workers finishing their temporary Census jobs. Private payrolls, in contrast, increased by 67,000 in August. Krueger pointed out that private sector jobs have increased for eight months in a row, and that a total of 763,000 jobs have been added during that period.

Other recent unemployment figures bolster the claim that the job situation is improving. In the week ending August 28, there were 472,000 initial jobless claims, 6,000 fewer than the week before and 32,000 fewer than the week before that.

Such reassurances of slow growth provide little comfort to the 14.9 million unemployed and 1.1 million discouraged workers in the United States. Alongside July's record drop in existing home sales, as well as the weak gross domestic product growth of 1.6 percent in the second quarter of 2010, economists and policymakers are worried about the possibility of another slide into recession.

However, Gary Burtless, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution, thinks that widespread worries about a "double-dip recession" are overblown. "I still don't think that we're going to have a double-dip recession," he says. "I personally think that the odds are 3-to-1 or 4-to-1 in favor of economic growth."

Yet he adds that, Americans are experiencing frustrated expectations about the speed of recovery, particularly in the area of employment. "Many of us hoped, I think, that because the job market downturn was so severe that the bounceback would also be commensurately rapid," he says.

Martin Evans, a professor of economics at Georgetown University, agrees that the labor market is now seeing a normal, if frustrating, recovery from a devastating crisis. "I think the bottom line in all of this is that realistic expectations should not be that unemployment is coming down anytime soon, and it's going to bobble around for a while," he says.

Rather than wait for those "bobbles" to turn in a more decidedly positive direction, the administration is hoping to help accelerate job growth. President Obama today urged the Senate to pass a pending small business jobs bill that would provide some help to the economy. The bill, stalled by Republicans before the August recess, would increase loan availability for small businesses.

However, Burtless downplays that bill's importance within the larger economic picture. Burtless points to tax cuts instituted by President George W. Bush, which expire at the end of 2010. Republicans want to extend all the cuts, saying it is the wrong time to raise taxes and risk undermining the recovery, while Obama and the Democrats want to let the tax cuts expire for the wealthiest income earners, in part to rein in the federal deficit. "What the Congress and the administration agree to do about taxes for the general population will be a lot more important" for general economic recovery, said Burtless.

Evans, meanwhile, advocates more federal assistance to state governments, many of which are facing severe budget deficits forcing cutbacks in jobs for teachers, police and other public workers. "We do need the federal government to make up for the contraction that is really going on at the state level" as the stimulus package support winds down, he says.

While some economists might advocate such a policy, the Obama administration on Thursday quelled speculation that it is considering this type of "second stimulus." However, Obama indicated that he does plan to offer some new "ideas" next week, and will discuss them at a press conference.

For its part, the administration is striking a tone of cautious optimism surrounding recovery, both of jobs and of the U.S. economy as a whole. As Krueger said today, "I think there is more durability to the recovery," pointing to the April 2009 H1N1 flu crisis in particular as a potential threat that failed to shake long-term growth.

However, Krueger added, the upward economic trajectory he predicts will likely remain bumpy: "The recovery faces some headwinds that are going to mean that not every line is going to point upward every month."

Tags:
Treasury Department,
unemployment,
Barack Obama,
employment

Reader Comments Read all comments (9)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Not only is Obamacare making employers reluctant to hire (just talk to small business owners), it is also already causing job loss.

Just one example is the decision by Assurant Health, a health insurer based in Milwaukee that specializes in individual and small-group policies, to lay off 130 workers.

Employers are logically reluctant to hire and will take steps necessary to survive (ncluding lay offs) in this era of uncertainty that is resulting from the flawed, hyper-partisan health "reform" bill that was rammed through and which many Democrats didn't even read.

Stan of OH 2:28PM September 04, 2010

Tiresias,

Word of advice, to make a credible argument, you're going to have to do better than cite flawed "studies" from the ACLU (well-known amnesty proponents).

Mass immigration (legal and illegal) does negatively impact native born workers, as credible research shows. For example, Harvard professor George Borjas has found that by "increasing the supply of labor between 1980 and 2000, immigration reduced the average annual earnings of native-born men by an estimated $1,700 or roughly 4 percent."

With a U-6 underemployment rate of nearly 17%, and record unemployment for teenagers, it is quite obvious that if we enforced our current immigration laws and started removing the 7 million illegal foreign workers, many if not most of these jobs would open up for unemployed working class Americans, including African-Americans.

And any "path to citizenship" amnesty for the low-skilled 11 million illegal aliens here would have dire fiscal impacts on American taxpayers. The Heritage Foundation estimated that if the 2007 Bush/Kennedy amnesty bill had passed it would have imposed a net burden of well over $2 TRILLION on American taxpayers.

Stan of OH 2:11PM September 04, 2010

Tax cut for the wealthiest income eraners should be expired to alleviate the budget deficit. If the wealthiest income earners do not receive a tax cut, they will face a smaller impact in their living standards than the poorer income eraners. For instance, a poor family may benefit a lot from $1000-$4000 tax cut a year. They may use it to pay to pay for their children's summer schools or buy an old car for their children in college. In contrast, wealthy income earners will be able to buy their children a car in college, pay for schools' tuition comfortably without the extra cash. However, I do believe that all citizens should be treated equally and share equal responsibility. But the budget deficit is getting larger, and the economy is getting worse, letting taxing cut expired on the rich first is a better option than letting it expired also on the poors who are facing unemployments and facing greater impact wihout the tax return each year.

ellyn of TX 1:37AM September 04, 2010

advertisement

Latest Video