by Frank James
The economy continued to lose jobs in September, with 159,000 jobs evaporating during the month, producing the highest number of job losses in five years though the unemployment rate held steady at 6.1 percent. The job losses exceeded what many economists expected.
Here's an excerpt from the Labor Department's website.
Nonfarm payroll employment declined by 159,000 in September, and the unemployment rate held at 6.1 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Employment continued to fall in construction, manufacturing, and retail trade, while mining and health care continued to add jobs.
The job loss figures add more pressure on Congress as the House once again takes up the financial-markets bailout package which is meant to lubricate the credit markets which have gotten jammed up because of declining trust between financial institutions about the one another's soundness.
Returning to the employment report, the nation has lost more than three quarters of a million jobs this year, more precisely 760,000.
In September alone, the numbers were very ugly. Manufacturing lost 51,000; construction, 35,000; retailing 40,000; transportation and warehousing, down 16,000; the financial sector, 17,000; professional and business services, 27,000.
If we're not in a recession, the economy is doing a pretty good impersonation of one.
As mentioned earlier, the only areas that appeared recession-proof were health-care and mining. Health-care grew by 17,000 jobs in September, probably a reflection of the aging of the nation.
But even that was significantly lower than the 30,000 clip that sector averaged in previous months.
Meanwhile, mining grew by 8,000 jobs, likely a reflection of the nation's attempt to expand its own energy production and higher commodities prices.
• 
Comments
CAVUTO says the BAILOUT is expected to pass in the House today....not with AVERAGE JOE TAX PAYERS SUPPORT IT WON'T.....He said that markets find their own solutions to the problems without the need of govt involvment. It's proving to be the case with banks buying others. He said when they start talking like it won't go thru THEN the market goes up, and when they talk like it will go thru it then it goes down.
CALL THEM TO TELL THEM NO BAILOUT..... no, over 400 page PORK ADD ONS.
I heard on the radio they are using the ADD ON of support for help for schizophrenia to try and PUT THE POLITICAL SCREWS TO THEM TO PUT IT THRU.....saying that mental disorders are something that have effected nearly everyone in the country. OH YEAH, WELL, let me tell them a thing for two.....I have a family member with this illness and if ANYONE WOULD BE FOR IT SURELY IT WOULD BE ME, RIGHT?.....>WRONG, I believe our govt should protect us from efforts that clearly go against our constitution by using our tax dollars to BAILOUT PRIVATE BUSINESS and the risks that they chose to take (NINJA or unqualified subprimes and deals for Dodd loans and all).
THIS IS THE ARGUMENT THE HOUSE SHOULD MAKE FOR THE PEOPLE> The American people know that this illness effects nearly everyone in some way in this country....but so does the CONSTITUTION and if they want to pass this mental illness legislation OR ANY OTHERS THAT ARE ADDED ON> we would be happy to put it up for a vote afterwards.... HOWEVER, we will NOT EVER SUPPORT BAILOUTS FOR PRIVATE BUSINESS which this bill supports NOW. That is not the responsibility of TAX PAYERS and we will not ask them to do that.
Posted by: NO SUPPORT FOR MENTAL ILLNESS RIGHT NOW | October 3, 2008 9:59 AM
Clyborn just appeared before the cameras and mouthed the most transparnt string of buzz phrases in support of this disgusting bill:
"restore confidence"
"act in bipartisan manner".
Don't you members of Congress realize we peons ain't that stupid any more.
After a couple decades of C Span, you're going to have to come up with better catch phrases than
"restore confidence"
"act in bipartisan manner".
This bill does not restore oversight of the markets or establish limits on "derivatives".
Therefore, the party will just continue on Wall St., because they just brought in another punch bowl.
Pump that big soap bubble up again.
What part of "maxed out" do these "legislators" not understand????
Posted by: ornery | October 3, 2008 10:38 AM
FACTS, people, FACTS:
1. 2001-April, the Bush administration, in its 2002 budget proposal, asserted that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is a "potential problem," and that financial trouble in these Government Sponsored Entities, or GSEs, could "cause strong repercussions in financial markets."
2. 2003, autumn, the Bush administration pushed Congress to create a new federal agency to regulate and supervise Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
On 2003-Sep-10, then-Treasury Secretary John Snow, before the House Financial Services Committee, " We need a strong, world-class regulatory agency to oversee the prudential operations of the GSEs, and the safety, and the soundness of their financial activities."
On the same day, 2003-Sep-10, at the same hearing, the ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee Congressman Barney Frank (now chairman of the same committee) said in response, "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not in a crisis. The more people, in my judgement, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjur up the possibility of serious financial losses, to the Treasury, which I do not see, I think we see entities which are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios, and even if there were a problem the federal government doesn't bail them out. But the more pressure there is there, the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing."
The legislation the Bush administration put forward that day was blocked.
3. Alan Greenspan, 2005-Sep-17, to the House Financial Services Committee, on Fannie/Freddie, "Enabling these institutions to increase in size--they they will once the crisis in their judgement passess--we are placing the total financial system of the future at substantial risk."
4. Alan Greenspan, 2006-Apr-6, "If we fail to strengthen GSE regulation we increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis."
The same day, Democratic Senator Chuck Schummer, "I think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years has done a good job and are an intrinsic part of making America the best-housed people in the world. If you look over the last 20 or whatever years, they have done a very, very, good job."
5. Senate floor, 2006-May-25, John McCain, "For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac... and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market... the GSEs need to be reformed without delay." In the Senate Banking Committee, the Fannie/Freddie reform legislation that McCain cosponsored, 100% of the Republicans voted FOR it, and 100% of the Democrats, including Chuck Schummer and Chris Dodd, voted AGAINST it. This bill that passed the Banking Committee on a straight party-line voted was blocked by Democrats from passing the full Senate. Senator Obama was silent on this legislation.
As we know now, Dodd received $133,900 in campaign contributions from Fannie/Freddie (per opensecrets.org), ranking #1 in Congress. Obama received $105,949 from Fannie / Freddie (per opensecrets.org), ranking #3 in Congress.
6. 2008-Sep-25, former President Clinton indicated he AGREED with Fox News assertions that Democrats are responsible for failure to rein in Fannie/Freddie--Bill Clinton told ABC's Chris Cuomo that for years, Democrats have been "resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
Posted by: Joe 6-pack | October 3, 2008 10:43 AM
"The fundamentals of of our economy are strong."
John McCain September 15, 2008.
Posted by: Mel | October 3, 2008 11:21 AM
Joe 6-pack,
Who was in control of Congress and the Presidency from Jan 20, 2002 thru Jan 19, 2007?
Posted by: justaskin | October 3, 2008 11:42 AM
Why would I care what Cavuto said?? I certainly woudn't believe it.
Posted by: rupert 12-pack | October 3, 2008 1:05 PM
I dont think the US in the crappy just yet. Despite the stats, I still see high paying jobs posted on employment sites -
www.linkedin.com (networking)
www.indeed.com (aggregated listings)
www.realmatch.com (matches you to jobs)
good luck to those searching jobs.
Posted by: Jennifer | October 4, 2008 7:21 PM