Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Thomas Beckett <thomas AT tbeckett.com>]

Tony Spencer wrote:
> Read the report:
> <http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm>
>
> " Payroll job growth was fairly widespread, as construction employment 
> rose sharply and several major service-providing industries also * added 
> jobs * . "

The report says that 308,000 jobs were added to the economy, while 
unemployment was "about unchanged" at 5.7%.  "About" in this instance 
means up a tenth, from 5.6%.

Many of those counted as employed are only working part-time:

"In March, the number of persons who worked part time for economic 
reasons increased to 4.7 million, about the same level as in January. 
These individuals indicated that they would like to work full time but 
were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because 
they were unable to find full-time jobs."

And then there are half a million "discouraged workers", folks who have 
given up on finding work altogether.  That's what the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics says.  So while the one number, 308,000 new jobs, looks good, 
 on the whole things are pretty lackluster.

Tony Spencer wrote:
> Well that is true but new jobs have been created every month for the
> past 7 months.  Economists are now predicting growth of about 150,000
> jobs over the next several months, rising to 200,000 by the end of the
> year.  Unemployment claims are at the lowest level in over 3 years.

We would need four (or three, depending on who's counting) years 
straight of 300K/month job growth to get us back to where when W took 
office.  150-200,000 jobs a month barely keeps up with the population 
increase.

BTW, I believe that the BLS derives these numbers by doing surveys of 
households, as opposed to aggregating state unemployment claims, etc. 
So I think that people who have run out of unemployment benefits but are 
still actively looking would be counted among the unemployed by the BLS.

I also cringe when I hear about job loss due to increased productivity 
from American workers.  That essentially means that fewer people are 
doing more work -- the workload of the laid off -- for the same or less 
money.  People working desperately hard so as not to get laid off 
themselves.

In my mind, the absence of recession does not make a recovery.  A 
"limping along" more like.  It is nice that the stock market is having a 
recovery, but for ordinary people there's no good news.

In conclusion, I congratulate George W. Bush for, in the last year of 
his term of office, having the least horrifically bad employment 
indicators of his entire presidency.

TaB