Multiple Jobholders Hits 21st Century High, As Full-Time Jobs Tumble
by Tyler Durden
ZeroHedge
Nov 4, 2016 8:30 AM
While today's headline jobs print was somewhat disappointing, with the Establishment Survey missing the expected print of 173K, rising by 161K, it was offset by upward revisions to previous months. But while the quantitative headline aspect is open to interpretation, the qualitative component of the October jobs print was - just like in the case of September - all too clear: it was ugly, again.
Recall that in September, the Household Survey revealed that the number of part-time workers soared by 430,000 as full-time workers actually declined by 5,000. The trend continued in October, when another 103,000 full-time jobs were lost, which was offset by a 90,000 increase in part-time jobs. In other words, the transition to a part-time worker society appears to have resumed after a hiatus.
The same series on a historical basis, shows that full-time jobs have been giving way to part-time jobs in recent months as Obamacare starts to bite, and as retail hiring picks up a the expense of all else.
But perhaps even more troubling than the breakdown in September job quality, was another seldom-touted series: the number of Multiple jobholders, or people who are forced to hold more than one job due to insufficient wages or for other reasons. It was here that the red flashing light came on because when looked on an actual, unadjusted basis, the number of multiple jobholders rose to 8.050 million, the highest number this century.
The begs the question how many of the 161K jobs "added" were double counted as a result of the ongoing rise in the number of multiple jobholders.
So yes: overall job growth continues to chug along - and paradoxically wages continue to grow - if at a modestly disappointing pace at least in October, but the quality of the added jobs remains woeful.
#1: buckeroo To: nolu chan (#0)
In a hundred years or just the past 16 years? You voted for GWBush, didn't you?
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 13:01:54 Reply Private Reply
#2: Justified To: buckeroo (#1)
Bush had to fix everything dealt to him. Obama had it all set up for him to take off with and he just went full bore socialist which means no jobs and heavy government. Now everyone wants more of the same with Clinton again! OMG Can America be more stupid!! I may need some heavy drugs to deal with this shit!
Justified posted on 2016-11-06 13:21:25 Reply Private Reply
#3: buckeroo To: Justified (#2)
Which Bush? The globalist that suggested the internationalism would make America better or the child that played in a sand box creating war everywhere?
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 13:34:46 Reply Private Reply
#4: Justified To: buckeroo (#3)
Clinton is pure evil. Just like Bush 1. Bush 2 was dealt a terrible blow along with America. All this could be tied right back to the Clinton and Bush 1.
You have to be able to cut your way through the BS to see what is real.
Bush 2's two biggest issues were Iraq and illegal aliens. Thats where he failed and failed badly.
Actually war around the world went down. I guess when the biggest dog is fighting people tend to stop what they are doing and keeping an eye on what is happening. This is where MSM has failed again. War under Obama has never been higher around the world except through World war I & II.
Yes bush 2 sucked but compared to what? He is clearly better than Clinton's, Obama, Bush1, Carter, Nixon, LBJ and JFK. We sat the bar so low its hard to fail as a president these days.
Justified posted on 2016-11-06 15:43:34 Reply Private Reply
#5: buckeroo To: Justified (#4)
GWBush sucked BIG TYME!
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 15:50:58 Reply Private Reply
#6: Justified To: buckeroo (#5)
Pretty sad when there is only one president in the last 50 years better than him!
Justified posted on 2016-11-06 16:07:42 Reply Private Reply
#7: buckeroo To: Justified (#6)
Who is that? I say ALL modern US Presidents suck.
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 16:22:36 Reply Private Reply
#8: Justified To: buckeroo (#7)
President Reagan. Even with the back stabber Bush as VP still was able to help America. I can not imagine how good he could have been if not saddle with bush who worked against him at every turn. With friends like bush who needs enemies!
Justified posted on 2016-11-06 16:28:23 Reply Private Reply
#9: buckeroo To: Justified (#8)
Bullet item Reagan's accomplishments.
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 16:32:02 Reply Private Reply
#10: Justified To: buckeroo (#9)
Justified posted on 2016-11-06 16:39:24 Reply Private Reply
#11: buckeroo To: Justified (#10)
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 16:41:05 Reply Private Reply
#12: nolu chan To: buckeroo (#1)
I think it was from when you were born, which would put it at about 2010.
nolu chan posted on 2016-11-06 17:33:13 Reply Private Reply
#13: buckeroo To: nolu chan (#12)
As Americans do we have to pay for your waste and oft' hyper agreement with modern US Presidents?
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 18:18:18 Reply Private Reply
#14: Justified To: buckeroo (#11)
For the most part. If you are looking for perfection there is anyone and never will be. Reagan was forced to take Bush or lose major backers. I still think bush sr had something to do with Hinckley shooting Reagan. It seems like every time party nominates a non party guy they lose and the party elites help destroy them. Kinda like Trump.
Justified posted on 2016-11-06 19:03:47 Reply Private Reply
#15: buckeroo To: Justified (#14)
When you use the term, "force" in your discussions, you have lied to me or all the others have lied to you.
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 19:14:58 Reply Private Reply
#16: Justified To: buckeroo (#15)
By force you mean gun held to his head. No.
Your right he could have chosen someone else and lost. He was told by the GOP elites that either take Bush or they would back someone else.
Bush hated Reagan and im sure the feel was mutual.
Justified posted on 2016-11-06 19:23:05 Reply Private Reply
#17: buckeroo To: Justified (#16)
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 19:25:58 Reply Private Reply
#18: Justified To: buckeroo (#17)
One of us is drinking some stout stuff and all Im drinking is a drpepper!
Justified posted on 2016-11-06 19:32:54 Reply Private Reply
#19: buckeroo To: Justified (#18)
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 20:24:27 Reply Private Reply
#20: nolu chan To: buckeroo (#13)
Who's we. You got a mouse in your pocket? You are about six years old and, as a minor, you are not responsible. Even when you grow up, Hillary will provide for all your needs. Chelsea will take care of you after that.
nolu chan posted on 2016-11-06 22:13:04 Reply Private Reply
#21: buckeroo To: nolu chan (#20)
buckeroo posted on 2016-11-06 22:26:18 Reply Private Reply
#22: nolu chan To: buckeroo (#21)
Same as usual. You get to sit in a corner and pull your pud.
nolu chan posted on 2016-11-07 00:34:41 Reply Private Reply