Private sector October job growth beats expectations

[ProSense]

Private sector October job growth beats expectations

(Reuters) - U.S. companies added to payrolls more than expected in October, slightly boosting optimism about the job market ahead of Friday's government employment report.

U.S. private employers added 43,000 jobs in October compared with a revised loss of 2,000 jobs in September, payrolls processor ADP Employer Services, which developed the report with Macroeconomic Advisers LLC, said on Wednesday. The September figure was originally reported as a loss of 39,000.

The October number came in well above expectations for a rise of 20,000 private-sector jobs, based on a median of estimates from 35 economists surveyed by Reuters.

It was the latest of some stronger-than-expected data on the U.S. economy, including Monday's report showing surprisingly strong growth last month in the U.S. manufacturing sector, and among the last bits of data before Wednesday's expected Federal Reserve announcement on monetary easing.

more

[fugop]

1. It's because the GOP is in charge now!

Just wait: They'll take credit for anything from 12:01 a.m. last night. Just watch...

And I suspect too many people are stupid enough to believe it. Stupid people.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

2. Funny, I'm still out of work...

[timkainemustgo]

3. The economy is getting better even here in Michgan

Both my wife and I start new jobs nect Monday. There are far more want ads in the paper.

[impik]

4. Congrats to you both.

[ProSense]

5. Interesting to note:

"U.S. private employers added 43,000 jobs in October compared with a revised loss of 2,000 jobs in September, payrolls processor ADP Employer Services, which developed the report with Macroeconomic Advisers LLC, said on Wednesday. The September figure was originally reported as a loss of 39,000."

[and-justice-for-all]

6. Its because the Obama plan is working..

the stimulous is working; people are just to impatient and expect things to happen over night.

[global1]

7. But Unfortunately The Repugs Will Take Credit For Any Sucess Now....nt

[Igel]

8. Perhaps.

However unemployment has traditionally increased after a recession. What you need to do is find the right model afterwards--one that actually does model the economy--and compare what would have happened both with and without the stimulus.

That's the way it's done, and the answer you get largely depends on the model chosen. Even the "job creation" numbers attributed to the 2009 stimulus result from this model. The model makes assumptions; if the assumptions are right, the model's likely to be not too bad; if the assumtpion's are wrong, the model sucks. It's just like pre-election polls on so many levels.

An error in the model accounts for why people thought the unemployment rate hadn't increased more quickly early in the recession. Errors in the model account for why Obama promised no unemployment above 8.5% given the stimulus. Errors in the model account for lots of things.

The alternative is to try to account for unemployment being as low as it was in 1928 after the various panics and recessions of the 19th and early 20th century. If government intervention was required to create private jobs after a recession you'd have expected the "low" unemployment figure of 1928 to have been something upwards of 90%. That's "90% unemployment."

Of course, the other problem is that the model's built for typical "business cycle" recessions. This one wasn't. Or, if it was, it was mitigated by the 2008 stimulus (the one that we never hear about, but the effect of which would have started to wane just before the big downturn in the economy in late 2008). This is more of a financial-crisis recession. I'm not sure they have good, tested models for those in operation, mostly because we haven't had one for decades and the assumptions have to reflect the regulatory and trade environment--and the environment we have today is markedly different from past environments.

What's left is a kind of narrow chauvinism.