https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ns-pick-up
"...Payrolls rose 103,000, compared with the median estimate of economists for 185,000, after an upwardly revised 326,000 advance, Labor Department figures showed Friday. The jobless rate was 4.1 percent for a sixth month, bucking forecasts for a decline, while average hourly earnings increased 2.7 percent from a year earlier, matching projections...."
(04-06-2018 09:55 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ns-pick-up
"...Payrolls rose 103,000, compared with the median estimate of economists for 185,000, after an upwardly revised 326,000 advance, Labor Department figures showed Friday. The jobless rate was 4.1 percent for a sixth month, bucking forecasts for a decline, while average hourly earnings increased 2.7 percent from a year earlier, matching projections...."
So job growth didn't rise as much as was expected but for the new jobs that were there, they were higher paying.
So where are all of the liberals screaming bloody murder this morning ? I assume still preparing their scripts they got from Soros/DNC HQ.
(04-06-2018 10:09 AM)thespiritof1976 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-06-2018 09:55 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ns-pick-up
"...Payrolls rose 103,000, compared with the median estimate of economists for 185,000, after an upwardly revised 326,000 advance, Labor Department figures showed Friday. The jobless rate was 4.1 percent for a sixth month, bucking forecasts for a decline, while average hourly earnings increased 2.7 percent from a year earlier, matching projections...."
So job growth didn't rise as much as was expected but for the new jobs that were there, they were higher paying.
So where are all of the liberals screaming bloody murder this morning ? I assume still preparing their scripts they got from Soros/DNC HQ.
Another take on the numbers:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/poli...m-elusive/
(04-06-2018 10:42 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote: [ -> ] (04-06-2018 10:09 AM)thespiritof1976 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-06-2018 09:55 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ns-pick-up
"...Payrolls rose 103,000, compared with the median estimate of economists for 185,000, after an upwardly revised 326,000 advance, Labor Department figures showed Friday. The jobless rate was 4.1 percent for a sixth month, bucking forecasts for a decline, while average hourly earnings increased 2.7 percent from a year earlier, matching projections...."
So job growth didn't rise as much as was expected but for the new jobs that were there, they were higher paying.
So where are all of the liberals screaming bloody murder this morning ? I assume still preparing their scripts they got from Soros/DNC HQ.
Another take on the numbers:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/poli...m-elusive/
Washington Post ? Who the hell are you trying fool, anyhow ?
(04-06-2018 10:09 AM)thespiritof1976 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-06-2018 09:55 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ns-pick-up
"...Payrolls rose 103,000, compared with the median estimate of economists for 185,000, after an upwardly revised 326,000 advance, Labor Department figures showed Friday. The jobless rate was 4.1 percent for a sixth month, bucking forecasts for a decline, while average hourly earnings increased 2.7 percent from a year earlier, matching projections...."
So job growth didn't rise as much as was expected but for the new jobs that were there, they were higher paying.
So where are all of the liberals screaming bloody murder this morning ? I assume still preparing their scripts they got from Soros/DNC HQ.
Good economic news = bad news for liberals. First the scoff at the idea of the tax cuts having any effect for the average worker at all, then they get upset when the positive effect of the tax cuts aren't "yuge".
The WaPo article that Mr posted is a ho-hum piece bemoaning gains while simultaneously misleading readers and seeming to imply things would be better if the tax cuts hadn't been passed.
The article compares quarterly weekly earnings, but many companies didn't change the withholdings until mid to late February. (My company changed a full 2 pay cycles before my wife (fed gov employee) saw a change.) The qtr to qtr comparison is fine and well, but many people didn't see a change in their earning for roughly half the qtr so it might not be the best measure to see the impact of the tax cuts. In fact, the IRS noted in release in Jan (can't find it now) that a good portion of people may not see a change in take home pay until some time in march.
(04-06-2018 11:11 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: [ -> ] (04-06-2018 10:09 AM)thespiritof1976 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-06-2018 09:55 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ns-pick-up
"...Payrolls rose 103,000, compared with the median estimate of economists for 185,000, after an upwardly revised 326,000 advance, Labor Department figures showed Friday. The jobless rate was 4.1 percent for a sixth month, bucking forecasts for a decline, while average hourly earnings increased 2.7 percent from a year earlier, matching projections...."
So job growth didn't rise as much as was expected but for the new jobs that were there, they were higher paying.
So where are all of the liberals screaming bloody murder this morning ? I assume still preparing their scripts they got from Soros/DNC HQ.
Good economic news = bad news for liberals. First the scoff at the idea of the tax cuts having any effect for the average worker at all, then they get upset when the positive effect of the tax cuts aren't "yuge".
The WaPo article that Mr posted is a ho-hum piece bemoaning gains while simultaneously misleading readers and seeming to imply things would be better if the tax cuts hadn't been passed.
The article compares quarterly weekly earnings, but many companies didn't change the withholdings until mid to late February. (My company changed a full 2 pay cycles before my wife (fed gov employee) saw a change.) The qtr to qtr comparison is fine and well, but many people didn't see a change in their earning for roughly half the qtr so it might not be the best measure to see the impact of the tax cuts. In fact, the IRS noted in release in Jan (can't find it now) that a good portion of people may not see a change in take home pay until some time in march.
so as long as the spin is in your favor it is cool?