Payrolls rose +661k in September and unemployment fell half a point to 7.9%.
We are still 11 million jobs below the February level -- a larger gap than at the low point of the financial crisis.
The economy is a deep hole, and the rate at which we're digging out is slowing.
While unemployment fell sharply (down by -970k), it's mainly because participation plunged, and the labor force fell by -695k.
The easy work of ending furloughs is slowing (temporary layoffs were down by 1.5 million), but the harder work of repairing the more lasting damage is only growing, and permanent layoffs were up by 345,000.
There are also deeper questions whether we really know what's going on in the labor market. The collection rate of the payrolls survey remains substantially below normal. What do you think is happening to the payrolls of those firms that aren't responding to the BLS?
Last few payrolls numbers:
June: +4.8 million
July: +1.8m
August: +1.5m
Sept: +0.7m
See the trend. We're still 10.7 million jobs below February's level. If the recovery slows any further (and there are indications it is), we're in this slump for a long time.
The only real strength in this payrolls report was the leisure and hospitality industry, and retailers returning to work. Not much good news for the rest of the economy. And further progress in the service industry depends on... the virus.
Pretty clear that the single best indicator for the short-term health of the economy over coming months is... data on the virus. When the virus flares, the recovery stalls.
The share of the population with a job remains well below the levels seen even during the darkest days of the 2008 recession. We're in a deep hole, and digging out too slowly.
That was the last jobs report before the election.
We now have 3.9 million fewer jobs than we did in January 2017. Employment has never before fallen over a Presidential term.
Covid plays a major role here, but results in other countries suggest it didn't have to be this bad.
In the midst of a childcare crisis and a service-sector led downturn, not surprising -- but still depressing -- to see women dropping out of the labor force.
This graph (via @nick_bunker) is what really worries me. One way to look through the shutdown-related fluctuations is to put temporary layoffs to the side, and focus on the rest of the labor force. This measure suggests that labor market fundamentals are continuing to get worse.
Wise words from @jasonfurman on why the recovery is stalling:
Important news from US-China trade talks: 1. The US will cut the rate at which it taxes Americans who buy stuff from China, to 30% 2. China will cut the rate at which it taxes Chinese folks who buy stuff from the US, to 10%.
It's another Ross and Rachel moment: A 90-day pause.
This is good news.
It means less inflationary pressure in both countries.
It means less disruption for business in both countries.
There are two ways to frame this news: 1. U.S. trade policy and our macroeconomic prospects are much better today than they were yesterday 2. U.S. trade policy and our macroeconomic prospects are much worse today than on Inauguration day
It's a "deal," not a deal:
"This document serves to define the general terms for the EPD that set forth the shared desires of the US and the UK... Both the US and the UK recognize that this document does not constitute a legally binding agreement."
My favorite bit: The filename is:
"US UK EPD_050825_FINAL rev v2.pdf"
(don't know why they didn't include "_latestDJT")
That title might also yield a hint as to why the press conference started late.
Here's the "unprecedented access to UK market" that Lutnick promised:
"The UK and the US plan to work constructively in an effort to enhance agricultural market access. Further, both countries positively support future discussions to strengthen bilateral agricultural trade. "
Payrolls grew a relatively uninteresting (and positive!) +177k in April, and unemployment was unchanged at 4.2%.
This economy is still humming along.
NOTE: This is a reading largely from the pre-tariff period. Still very foggy about what lies ahead.
Revisions were somewhat worrying: March was revised down -43k to +185k. Feb down -15k to +102k.
Three month average payrolls growth -- a useful indicator of the underlying pace of job growth -- is a healthy +155k. That's a pretty great place to be at this point in the cycle.
Nominal wage growth was 0.2% this month, and are up 3.8% over the year. That's probably enough to keep inflation above the Fed's target (and that's before factoring in the effect of tariffs).
Ugh. It's happening. The economy shrank in the first quarter, at an annual rate of -0.3%.
The good news: Consumption and investment remained strong. Think of this as a hard-to-interpret report due to -- **all of this**. Remember, this is the average of Q1, and the real concern is about Q2.
Look into the details, and the GDP report really isn't that bad. (We already know from the jobs data that the economy did okay in Q1.)
@jasonfurman suggested focusing on Real final sales to private domestic purchasers (basically C+I, the reliable parts of GDP) which grew +3.0%
The sharp rise in investment appears to be almost all due to pre-tariff front-running. Investment contributed 3.6%-pts to Q1 GDP growth.
Of that, inventory accumulation was 2.2%-pts.
And an additional 1.1% came from equipment investment (which is what the China tariffs hit).
1. Tariffmageddon isn't over: Lotsa tariffs to account for, but the average tariff rate is only down around one quarter.
2. He's not going to get big wins: Tariffs were low before this mess, and if Trump negotiates competently, they'll be low again. Basically no gain.
You've seen this movie before: It was NAFTA which got relabeled by Trump in 2020, but really barely changed.
3. The rationale for this policy keeps changing. Remember when it was all about bringing manufacturing home? (That was yesterday.) Now it's negotiating deals. Those are fundamentally in tension.
(I'm only going to build a factory in the US if tariffs are likely to persist.)
One thing I've learned to do when I have questions about social security number holders who are age 100 or older is to look up the SSA Inspector General audit report, "Numberholders Age 100 or Older Who Did Not Have Death Information on the Numident."