Friday, 4 May 2018

Jobless Rate Looks Like Old Times, but the Economy Doesn’t

Jobless Rate Looks Like Old Times, but the Economy Doesn’t
[ad_1]

The last time the unemployment rate fell below the 4 percent threshold was in 2000, during a period of frenetic activity remembered as the dot-com boom.

Nine years into a sustained, if less feverish, economic recovery, that milestone has been achieved again.

The Labor Department said Friday that the jobless rate in April fell to 3.9 percent, raising anew the question of just how tight the labor market can get, and for how long.

In the past half-century, only the late 1960s brought an extended period when the rate stayed below 4 percent.

“We’ve continued to add jobs routinely every month for so long, and the unemployment rate we have reached is amazing,” said Catherine Barrera, chief economist of the online job site ZipRecruiter.

President Trump crowed about the landmark on Friday, tweeting, “4% is Broken!”

The steady-as-she-goes economy has produced a record 91 straight months of job growth. That may represent a healthier foundation than the dot-com era, when pride — or, as it was branded, “irrational exuberance” — went before a fall.

But the banner number announced Friday did not resolve any of the broader questions that economists have about this unparalleled run.

The most prominent is a mystery that has proved impervious to easy explanation: why wage increases haven’t been more robust, when the market continues to edge toward full employment.

Friday’s report showed that hourly earnings went up by 2.6 percent over the past year, not much faster than inflation. The subdued wage gains eased the prospect that the Federal Reserve would accelerate its plans to raise interest rates, helping to send stocks higher. But lagging pay also reflects how the economy of 2018 is fundamentally different from earlier eras.

“A 3.9 percent rate today doesn’t suggest as tight a labor market as 3.9 percent in 2000 or 3.9 percent in the late 1960s,” said Ellen Zentner, Morgan Stanley’s chief United States economist.

A lot has changed since the turn of the century. The share of working-age women in the labor force began to fall in 2000, after increasing for decades. Men have been dropping out for much longer. The upshot is that a smaller share of people are participating in the labor market, and it’s easier to get low levels of unemployment when fewer people are vying for jobs.

In fact, a shrinking labor force in April is part of why the unemployment rate fell to 3.9 percent from 4.1 percent even as payrolls grew by a fairly routine 164,000 jobs.

The population is also older than they used to be, on balance. The baby-boom generation has moved steadily toward retirement over the last two decades. And those still working have not helped push wages up. Generally, workers climb the economic ladder fastest when they are young, and so an older work force may weigh on average wages, economists say.

In 2000, wages for rank-and-file workers rose at an annual rate of around 4 percent. Part of the problem now is that some 60 percent of the jobs added since 2010 have been in low-wage, service-sector jobs, according to Morgan Stanley.

Fifty years ago, there were plenty of factory jobs paying a decent wage, and unions held much greater sway. Manufacturing accounted for one in four jobs; today it’s not even one in 10.

The tech explosion of the late 1990s gave rise to lucrative roles in companies based on new business models. The share of the economic pie going to workers rose steadily for the first time since the 1970s — a feat not repeated since.

“No one is creating an e-commerce group out of nothing anymore,” said Tom Gimbel, chief executive of LaSalle Network, a Chicago staffing firm. Instead, companies are bulking up their warehouses to compete with Amazon, slotting in tens of thousands of relatively low-paid pickers, packers and stockers over the past several years.

Mr. Gimbel said he had seen a particular hunger for new bodies in call centers, which offer candidates the minimum wage to deal with consumers’ complaints about the gadgets they ordered online.

More recently, Mr. Trump’s flirtation with a trade war has thrust uncertainty into the economic picture. The White House has provided little clarity about whether its newly imposed steel and aluminum tariffs will extend to allies like Mexico, Canada and the European Union, and it seems no closer to smoothing over economic tensions with China.

Economists say it is too soon to tell how employers may change their hiring or expansion plans in response to the tariffs on Chinese goods, or to Beijing’s retaliation. But there are signs that companies that buy metals are feeling the effects already. The Institute for Supply Management said this week that manufacturing activity grew in April at its slowest pace since July.

Uncertainty over the price of raw materials could prompt factories to cut back from their recent hiring spree. Manufacturers added 73,000 jobs in the first quarter, much more than in the same period last year.

“A faster pace of wage growth would be great for households, but in a way that would create even more difficulty for policymakers,” Ms. Zentner said. An acceleration could force Fed officials to raise rates more aggressively, which would raise the cost of car loans and credit card debt.

However mixed the blessing, Ms. Zentner said, the ever-tightening job market could soon force faster growth in paychecks. “We are getting closer and closer to that flash point, but we don’t know exactly when it is going to happen,” she said.

A wave of bigger raises has already reached Chandler Steffy’s roofing company in Clive, Iowa.

Three years ago, Mr. Steffy could pay laborers less than $15 an hour. No longer. In March, the latest month measured at the state level, the jobless rate in Iowa was 2.8 percent, one of the nation’s lowest. Mr. Steffy now pays roofers $25 an hour, including benefits.

His rate for subcontractors has been spiking. It went up 7 percent in March, and will rise another 7 percent in May. There will be bumps in June and August, too. It’s all Mr. Steffy can do to keep himself in the game.

“There’s a price war going on for labor,” he said. He has had crews leave job sites before finishing a roof because they got a better offer from another contractor. “The next 18 months are going to be crazy,” he said.

Ben Casselman contributed reporting.



[ad_2]

Source link

Thursday, 3 May 2018

Sanders admits White House’s story about Comey firing has changed, argues it doesn’t matter – ThinkProgress

[ad_1]


During his train wreck of an interview on Hannity on Wednesday night, new Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani explained that the president fired then-FBI director James Comey because Comey refused to publicly announce that Trump “wasn’t a target” of the FBI’s investigation of his campaign.


There’s just one problem. Giuliani’s explanation for Comey’s firing differs from two previous ones that have already been offered by the White House — the official line, which was that Comey mishandled the Hillary Clinton email investigation; and the one Trump offered NBC’s Lester Holt, which was that he fired Comey because he was frustrated with the Russia investigation.



On Thursday, Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was asked to reconcile team Trump’s shifting rationales for Comey’s firing. She responded with the verbal equivalent of the shrug emoji.


“There were a number of reasons that James Comey was fired. The president has named several of them,” Sanders said. “But the bottom line is, the president doesn’t have to justify his decision. The president has the authority to fire and hire, and I think every single day we’ve seen that he made the right decision in firing James Comey.”



Despite what Sanders would have you believe, the White House’s changing story could cause problems for Trump. Part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation pertains to whether Trump obstructed justice when he fired Comey amid an active FBI investigation into his campaign. The answer hinges on Trump’s motivations.



Trump himself has said contradictory things about why he fired Comey. Though he initially admitted he fired him because of the Russia investigation, Trump recently tried to walk that back in a tweet proclaiming that “the worst FBI Director in history, was not fired because of the phony Russia investigation where, by the way, there was NO COLLUSION (except by the Dems)!”




In that tweet, Trump did not cite a reason for Comey’s firing. The implication, however, is that Comey’s poor character justified his termination. Giuliani furthered that effort during his interview with Hannity, at one point calling Comey “a very perverted man.”












[ad_2]

Source link

Tuesday, 1 May 2018

Klein doesn't see the point - and neither do Leicestershire

Klein doesn't see the point - and neither do Leicestershire
[ad_1]

Leicestershire 381 (Horton 66, Ackermann 65, Reece 3-64) drew with Derbyshire 251 for 8 dec ( Wilson 64)
Scorecard

A final day battle for bonus points ended with both Leicestershire and Derbyshire satisfied with their return from a match which saw the first seven sessions lost to the weather.

An entertaining morning's cricket saw Leicestershire add 114 to their overnight score but miss out on a fifth batting bonus point as Derbyshire picked up five wickets.

Resuming on 267-5, Neil Dexter and Ned Eckersley scored quickly in extending their sixth wicket partnership to 82, with Dexter lofting leg-spinner Matt Critchley high over extra cover for six before leaving a delivery from fellow South African Duanne Olivier that knocked his off-stump out of the ground.

Eckersley went on to his half-century, made from 121 deliveries, before pulling Ravi Rampaul hard to midwicket, where 12th man Callum Broderick held the catch at the second attempt.

Ben Raine hit eight boundaries in going to 47 from just 50 balls, and looked set to guide the Foxes to their 400 target, but a mix-up with Dieter Klein saw both batsman at the same end.

In the circumstances, Klein's refusal to step out of his ground and sacrifice his wicket was hard to understand, the more so when Gavin Griffiths and Varun Aaron were duly dismissed quickly to leave the Foxes 19 short.

Raine did his best to atone, striking twice when Derbyshire began their first innings. The right-arm seamer had left-handed opener Luis Reece leg-before without scoring with a delivery that swung back in from around the wicket, before Ben Slater edged a delivery pushed across him to wicketkeeper Eckersley.

In between, newcomer Aaron picked up his first wicket for the Foxes, when Wayne Madsen was leg before to the former India international seamer.

Griffiths won the third leg before decision of the session when Derbyshire skipper Billy Godleman was given out on the back foot, but Gary Wilson was dropped by Eckersley on just four, and Matt Critchley put down by Paul Horton at first slip, both times off the bowling off Griffiths.

Dexter bowled Alex Hughes before Critchley pulled Griffiths to midwicket where Raine took a fine low catch. Hardus Viljoen increased the run rate, hitting 43 off just 33 balls, but Wilson steered his side past 250 before a declaration with an over remaining left Leicestershire a wicket short of a third bowling point.




[ad_2]

Source link