Unemployment falls below 8

[skinsmarydu]

I'm super stoked about this. BARACK2012

[Chump Bailey]

Excellent news.

Now hopefully people actually, you know, feel this. On the ground, unless you are in the DC area (yay me) its still appears very rough.

It's very rough outside of this area for the most part - very much so...

It will get bad here if the DoD contracts go down the toilet and they will if O get's re-elected (God help us personally)

I got real lucky. I was in Florida unemployed from 7/11 thru 8/12. I reached out to a contact in the NOVA area and landed in a federally funded contract position. I have some security, but anything can happen.

[DallasCowboyFan156]

This is the lowest unemployment number since the President took office. He has one more jobs report due out before the election. If it dips below 7.8% he can claim that the economy is now better than it was than at the end of the Bush era which would be huge.

[skinsfan07]

This is the lowest unemployment number since the President took office. He has one more jobs report due out before the election. If it dips below 7.8% he can claim that the economy is now better than it was than at the end of the Bush era which would be huge.

Bingo. Hopefully it drops to at least 7.5%.

[Buford]

Obviously getting back to the levels when he took office during the crash is ok. But what we need is levels from at least 6 months before that. If he's smart enough, that's the message now. "This is headed in the right direction, but the next goal is ......"

[Predicto]

This was completely inevitable. We were in a horrible decline in 2008, and whatever candidate won and whatever that new President did, the next few years were going to suck for the economy and the President was going to get blamed. Many insider GOP operatives were happy when McCain lost in 2008, because they knew that 2009-2012 was going to be an economic suckfest of major proportions that was going to stain whoever was in office.

Now we are pulling out of the worst of it, and the next few years are going to be much better, and whatever candidate wins and whatever the President does, he is going to get massive credit for that improvement which is largely beyond his control.

Presidents only affect the economy at the margins. The economy moves on long term trends influenced by policies created years and decades earlier. The key to political success is to be the guy in office and get all the accolades when things go well, even if you had not very much to do with it. Just ask Bill Clinton.

[Chump Bailey]

This article is stating the new rate to be 8.2%:http://www.cnbc.com/id/49290835

Well, apparently this article is incorrect. My apologies...

[Hersh]

This article is stating the new rate to be 8.2%:http://www.cnbc.com/id/49290835

Well, apparently this article is incorrect. My apologies...

The article isn't incorrect because it wasn't stating facts of what happened today. It was written yesterday before the report came out about what economist had expected to happen today. Fortunately for the country, the news is better than expected.

[Elessar78]

The funny thing is that the stock market will probably surge because of this report and people will feel good and start buying. But the reality is that the situation didn't change all that much for 97% of Americans.

The economy (and money) is psychological. If people simply would not adjust spending because of factors irrelevant to their own circumstance then maybe we wouldn't be in these predicaments. When negative news about the economy comes out the correct behavior needs is counter intuitive. We need people to spend to spur the economy. Stock market going down? People need to look at it as stocks going on sale and not go into cash.

[twa]

It is an estimate. These numbers are always estimates. We do not survey every single American every month to ask them whether or not they are working.

Are the revised numbers also estimates?(rhetorical question )

Why is the U-6 unchanged?
ether there was about 600k hired part-time or somethings off.

btw, I don't pay a accountant to estimate , I can do that just fine

Elessar78....my wife has been stimulating the hell out of the economy

[PeterMP]

Are the revised numbers also estimates?(rhetorical question )

Why is the U-6 unchanged?
ether there was about 600k hired part-time or somethings off.

btw, I don't pay a accountant to estimate , I can do that just fine

Elessar78....my wife has been stimulating the hell out of the economy

Or a large number of people that were happy working part time jobs now want full time jobs:

"In September, the number of part-time workers who would like full-time jobs surged by 582,000. That represents about two-thirds of the increase in employment last month and is larger than the drop in the number of unemployed. That’s why the U-6 stayed at 14.7% in September."

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/...t-rate-drop-9/

I'd bet if you look at history, it happens quite a bit. People have kids home and other things going in in the summer. They are happy to not work full time. We have a secretary that wants to NOT work in the summer, most summers doesn't and was asked to work this summer because somebody else got hurt, and did it, but not happily.

Fall starts kids go back to school you have time during the day to work more w/o worrying about day care costs and Christmas and the related bills are now coming soon.

[twa]

That should be in the seasonal adjustment already Peter

IF things are improving we will see the unemployed and participation rates rising as more attempt to get into the job market.
the full times jobs added are below what is needed to simply hold the rate steady

[Wrong Direction]

If headlines were reality, everything would be wonderful.

Every GDP number being reported is terrible. Manufacturing has been down again. The participation rate is far far far below where it was even on January 1 of 2012, and boom, in the middle of the hottest election cycle, the government releases a rosy headline number.

Take it how you will, but for every headline number that's good, there are 10 that are very bad. This story will only have whatever legs the media can give to it.

[Larry]

. . . for every headline number that's good, there are 10 that are very bad.

. . . if you know where to look.

[Elessar78]

More gray cloud stuff but what are the nature of the jobs created? Low paying? High paying? Skilled labor? White collar? Minimum wage?