4 ms·

I would like to know how much contraction is normal. I assume there's always some contraction around that time, because the holiday season is ending and the tem

by imzadi 7mo ago

I would like to know how much contraction is normal. I assume there's always some contraction around that time, because the holiday season is ending and the temp workers are being let go. I didn't see any mention of this in the article though (or I missed it).

squidbeak 7mo ago
> US economy >> unexpectedly << sheds 92,000 jobs in February
- buckle8017 7mo ago
  Ok but was the expected loss 60k or 0? Makes a big difference.
  - nemomarx 7mo ago
    I believe it was expected to grow by 50k jobs?
    - deleted 7mo ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
  - bilbo0s 7mo ago
    Well the data says: 2022, gained 678,000 jobs in February (Doesn't really count, global economy was emerging from Covid shutdowns.) 2023, gained 311,000 jobs in February 2024, gained 275,000 jobs in February 2025, gained 151,000 jobs in February (This seems to be the point of discontinuity with gains only about half of what were typically expected.) 2026, lost the 92,000 we're talking about. (Obviously, we had expected a gain.)
  - giantg2 7mo ago
    We live in an infinite growth economy mindset - it's always expected to grow
    - smartbit 7mo ago
      This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly (2011) https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691152646/this-time-is-different https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691152646/th...
  - ceejayoz 7mo ago
    A loss wasn't expected at all.
- imzadi 7mo ago
  But this is the full amount of jobs shed: > Payrolls in the US dropped by 92,000 and the unemployment rate ticked up to 4.4%, according to the latest official figures, surprising analysts who had expected hiring to remain stable. I'm not in any way suggesting the economy isn't taking a shit, but I'm curious about the actual expectation and reality. I know it says analysts expect hiring to be stable, but hiring isn't the same as job losses.
myrmidon 7mo ago
Looking at seasonally adjusted somewhat longer term trends, unemployment appears to be rising somehwat continuously for two years now: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE/ https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE/ I'd say the article overstates its point somewhat. The numbers (rise in unemployment) don't look to be caused by Trump alone (trend started before), but he most certainly did not improve the situation in his first year (numbers grew worse instead of better). But the absolute numbers (<5%ish unemployment) are not especially concerning for now despite trending in the wrong direction (and all of Trumps policies seem to make things worse so far).
dv_dt 7mo ago
These reports apply a seasonal adjustment for the reported numbers. This is the fairly standard economics approach, but if you're interested in the raw - they are usually buried deeper into the report. The BLS or other government stat agencies have historically published their data gathering and reporting methodology in detail.
kevstev 7mo ago
The numbers are seasonally adjusted- the reports themselves are not very difficult to read, I suggest you go to to the source: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm The bigger question is the impact of immigration policies- the US population is smaller than expected due to immigration effects, so some of the extrapolation typically done may be skewed. I doubt this will make the numbers look better though. These numbers may be volatile for some time until the true effects of the lack of immigration are understood and modeled properly.

by imzadi 7mo ago

squidbeak 7mo ago

> US economy >> unexpectedly << sheds 92,000 jobs in February

buckle8017 7mo ago
Ok but was the expected loss 60k or 0? Makes a big difference.
- nemomarx 7mo ago
  I believe it was expected to grow by 50k jobs?
  - deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
- bilbo0s 7mo ago
  Well the data says: 2022, gained 678,000 jobs in February (Doesn't really count, global economy was emerging from Covid shutdowns.) 2023, gained 311,000 jobs in February 2024, gained 275,000 jobs in February 2025, gained 151,000 jobs in February (This seems to be the point of discontinuity with gains only about half of what were typically expected.) 2026, lost the 92,000 we're talking about. (Obviously, we had expected a gain.)
- giantg2 7mo ago
  We live in an infinite growth economy mindset - it's always expected to grow
  - smartbit 7mo ago
    This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly (2011) https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691152646/this-time-is-different https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691152646/th...
- ceejayoz 7mo ago
  A loss wasn't expected at all.
imzadi 7mo ago
But this is the full amount of jobs shed: > Payrolls in the US dropped by 92,000 and the unemployment rate ticked up to 4.4%, according to the latest official figures, surprising analysts who had expected hiring to remain stable. I'm not in any way suggesting the economy isn't taking a shit, but I'm curious about the actual expectation and reality. I know it says analysts expect hiring to be stable, but hiring isn't the same as job losses.

myrmidon 7mo ago

Looking at seasonally adjusted somewhat longer term trends, unemployment appears to be rising somehwat continuously for two years now: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE/ https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE/ I'd say the article overstates its point somewhat. The numbers (rise in unemployment) don't look to be caused by Trump alone (trend started before), but he most certainly did not improve the situation in his first year (numbers grew worse instead of better). But the absolute numbers (<5%ish unemployment) are not especially concerning for now despite trending in the wrong direction (and all of Trumps policies seem to make things worse so far).

dv_dt 7mo ago

These reports apply a seasonal adjustment for the reported numbers. This is the fairly standard economics approach, but if you're interested in the raw - they are usually buried deeper into the report. The BLS or other government stat agencies have historically published their data gathering and reporting methodology in detail.

kevstev 7mo ago

The numbers are seasonally adjusted- the reports themselves are not very difficult to read, I suggest you go to to the source: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm The bigger question is the impact of immigration policies- the US population is smaller than expected due to immigration effects, so some of the extrapolation typically done may be skewed. I doubt this will make the numbers look better though. These numbers may be volatile for some time until the true effects of the lack of immigration are understood and modeled properly.