March 2013 Jobs Report

[DINGO Joe]

88K? Seriously?

Month-to-month the numbers are really, really random. Note that January and February were simultaneously revised significantly upward. The big decline seems to have been in retail, which had a huge drop-off of -24,000, concentrated in clothing, who knows why.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

JC Penney?

[Ban my account ffs!]

The weather.  March was a sh**tty cold month.  Nobody buys spring when there's still snow on the ground for Easter.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The weather.  March was a sh**tty cold month.  Nobody buys spring when there's still snow on the ground for Easter.

LOL, we know you want global warming to continue, but anyways these are seasonally adjusted.

[Benj]

The weather.  March was a sh**tty cold month.  Nobody buys spring when there's still snow on the ground for Easter.

LOL, we know you want global warming to continue, but anyways these are seasonally adjusted.

"Seasonally adjusted" means they account for ordinary growth/decline in certain months, not that they account for unusual weather in a specific month. March would actually usually be a strong month for employment as the construction industry is usually gearing up, so it would probably have been adjusted downward slightly to account for normal March changes.

Eh, might be an explanation. I think the weather is overplayed in its impact on employment numbers, but perhaps.

[Sbane]

The weather.  March was a sh**tty cold month.  Nobody buys spring when there's still snow on the ground for Easter.

LOL, we know you want global warming to continue, but anyways these are seasonally adjusted.

It was a very cold March in about 2/3rd of the country. That is just fact.

[HoosierPoliticalJunkie]

88K? Seriously?

Month-to-month the numbers are really, really random. Note that January and February were simultaneously revised significantly upward. The big decline seems to have been in retail, which had a huge drop-off of -24,000, concentrated in clothing, who knows why.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

JC Penney?

Also, we could've seen this coming with the 388K jobless claims report a few days before.

[Benj]

88K? Seriously?

Month-to-month the numbers are really, really random. Note that January and February were simultaneously revised significantly upward. The big decline seems to have been in retail, which had a huge drop-off of -24,000, concentrated in clothing, who knows why.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

JC Penney?

Also, we could've seen this coming with the 388K jobless claims report a few days before.

Under 400k new claims is usually considered the bar for job growth greater than population growth, while 88k is somewhat below population growth. 388k new claims would suggest job growth of more like 120-150k. It just tells us that this stuff is noisy. Next month we'll have a big job growth number but the U3 rate will stay the same. And so it goes; the overall pattern is towards full employment, but slowly. We'll probably be at pre-recession levels (~5%) by the 2016 election, but individual months act strangely.