By MICHAEL POWELL and SEWELL CHAN
January 8, 2011
The year 2010 ended on a disappointing note, as the economy added just 103,000 jobs in December, suggesting that economic deliverance will not arrive with a great pop in employment.
Signs still point to a long slog of a recovery, with the unemployment rate likely to remain above 8 percent — it sits at 9.4 percent after Friday’s report — at least through the rest of the president’s four-year term.
President Obama is not unaware of the political dangers posed by high unemployment. On Friday he appointed a new head of his National Economic Council, Gene Sperling, to replace the departing Lawrence H. Summers.
The latest report was also a let-down for some within the White House, as recent economic data had suggested that the recovery would gain speed going into 2011. The political stakes are high, as Democrats and Republicans wrestle over who should take credit for the progress of the jobs market, or the blame for its failure to ignite.
“We need collective patience,” said William C. Dunkelberg, chief economist for the National Federation of Independent Business. “You can’t recover quickly from a disaster like we’ve been through.”
With local governments continuing to shed some jobs, all of December’s gain came from private employers. In fact, private employment grew each month last year. The unemployment rate, which is based on a separate survey of households, fell from 9.8 percent in November, though a substantial part of that drop is caused by Americans leaving the work force.
Long-term unemployment, however, remains a malady without an easy cure. The percentage of the unemployed who have been without work 27 weeks or longer edged up last month to 44.3 percent, virtually unchanged from a year ago. Other indicators, such as the length of the workweek, remained stagnant.
The challenge, still unsolved, is how to add enough accelerant to light an employment fire. The Federal Reserve chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, said Friday that he expected economic growth to be “moderately stronger” this year.
“We have seen increased evidence that a self-sustaining recovery in consumer and business spending may be taking hold,” Mr. Bernanke told the Senate Budget Committee in his first testimony to the new Congress.
He was less optimistic about employment, noting that the job market had “improved only modestly at best.” And he added a cautionary forecast: “It could take four to five more years for the job market to normalize fully.”
Mr. Bernanke noted that housing, an enormous potential driver of middle- and working-class jobs, continued to edge downward. The Fed, he emphasized, plans to proceed with its plans to buy $600 billion worth of government bonds, in hopes of stirring more growth.
President Obama, in a speech at a factory in Landover, Md., accentuated the positive, which was a year of private sector job growth. “That’s the first time that’s been true since 2006,” he said. “The economy added 1.3 million jobs last year.”
Left unsaid, however, was the fact that job growth was not enough to absorb people entering the work force in the United States, much less to shrink the unemployment rolls.
R. Glenn Hubbard, dean of Columbia University’s business school and former chairman of the council of economic advisers for President Bush, remains a guarded optimist. He sees signs of the economy gaining speed.
“We could run as high as 200,000 per month this year, but keep in mind that might only bring the unemployment rate down to 9 percent,” Mr. Hubbard said. “That does very little for the person who is long-term unemployed.”
The so-called real unemployment rate, which includes those workers who are discouraged or have given up looking for work, stands at 16.7 percent.
Daniel Alpert, managing partner at Westwood Capital, pointed to a disturbing fact in Friday’s report. “We are seeing what appears to be evidence of structural unemployment,” he said, “among those in the prime, higher-earning 35- to 44-year-old demographic, where unemployment actually increased in December.”
The president’s advisers dispute this. Austan Goolsbee, the chairman of the council of economic advisers, agrees that long-term employment poses a great challenge, but he says there are few signs of European-style structural unemployment, in which job seekers essentially surrender hope.
“We are not cutting them off and dumping them out the door,” he says. “The biggest help for them is to drive down the overall employment rate.”
In the days leading up to the Friday report, economists pointed to hopeful signs. Consumer spending was on the rise, businesses were spending more, car sales nosed upward. And private surveys pointed to the possibility of a sharp, even explosive increase in hiring by small and midsize businesses.
Mr. Dunkelberg, however, noted that surveys of his membership showed no strong trend toward such hiring. Fifty percent reported they had no need to seek bank loans, as they had little intention of hiring.
“The consumer still has way too much debt and our members are very cautious,” he said. “Their only capital spending going on is to fix a leaking roof.”
Employment growth decelerated a bit toward the end of the year, with the biggest increases coming in October — the Bureau of Labor Statistics revised that number upward by 38,000 jobs on Friday.
Adam Hersh, an economist with the liberal-leaning Center for American Progress, recently ran a calculation to see when, at the current pace, the nation would regain the number of jobs lost during the great recession. The answer was 2037.
“Look, we have a huge employment crisis,” Mr. Hersh said.
Much of the growth last month came in the hospitality sector, which added 47,000 jobs. Such jobs, however, tend to provide lower wages and uncertain prospects for long-term employment.
Manufacturing, a source of encouragement earlier this year, added 10,000 jobs. And health services added 36,000, continuing a year-long rise in that area, fed in part by the aging of the American population.
Local governments shed 10,000 workers, fewer than in some past months, and state employment held more or less steady.
For the longer term, economists see hopeful signs. Some take the view that, in retrospect, the recovery of early last year was a false spring, reflecting only the bounce-back from the deep gloom of 2009. Real signs of recovery, including a pickup in shipping and manufacturing, took hold this autumn, they say.
“It’s pretty clear the economy went into a swoon last summer,” said Steve Blitz, senior economist for ITG Investment Research. “Now the real recovery is beginning, and I expect to see improvement.”
But, he acknowledged, he could as easily point to a glass still half empty. American corporations, sitting atop nearly $2 trillion of cash, are not doing much hiring, even as the president and Congress add the carrots of tax cuts and investment incentives.
“The most disturbing fact is that you’re not seeing any breadth in the hiring,” Mr. Blitz said. “It’s looking to be a slow climb.”■
January 17, 2011
Commentary: Maya MacGuineas is the director of the fiscal policy program at the New America Foundation.
The facts are ugly. The federal debt, which has averaged less than 40% of the total economy, now represents more than 60%. It's likely to hit 100% in a little over a decade.
You want more? Here's more.
Pretty much every impartial analyst has declared the situation unsustainable. And many European countries have already been hit by nervous credit markets worried about their debt levels.
Bottom line: If Congress and the president fail to make changes to current policies, the United States will experience some form of a fiscal crisis.
Not a pretty picture. And yet policymakers continue to drag their feet.
When it comes to fiscal policy, the political system is stuck in posturing mode.
Sorry, the abominable $858 billion tax deal President Obama struck with Republicans last month, in which both sides piled on more to the public debt and called it a win-win, does not qualify as my kind of fiscal compromise.
Geithner's debt ceiling warning
It's time for real compromise.
As long as each political party sees an advantage to delaying, we will continue to inch along, closer and closer to that inevitable crisis.
Last week, both Moody's and Standard and Poor's commented on the need for the United States to make changes or jeopardize its triple-A credit rating. A few years back, such warnings would have seemed inconceivable.
The gridlock comes in part from both sides believing they are right.
Republicans view smaller government as promoting more individual freedoms and as better for the economy because it allows for lower taxes. Fair enough.
Democrats see government as serving a more useful purpose -- one that is particularly justified because of the needs of an aging population, years of under investment and growing income inequality. Also legit.
On top of that, both sides blame the other for having made the problem worse for political reasons. Unfortunately, both are right.
Under the Bush administration, Republicans initiated dramatic tax cuts that fundamentally reshaped the structure of our tax system and brought revenues down to 16% of GDP from almost 20%. That decline has pushed down the starting point now that it is time to take steps to increase revenue. The end result will be far more appealing to Republicans. Pretty clever.
Democrats responded by enacting the massive health care entitlement and new layer of government spending. (At least, unlike the tax cuts, the costs of that law were offset.) Federal spending is now on track to grow to 25% of GDP by the end of the decade compared to historical norms of 21%.
None of this is to say Republicans didn't want lower taxes or that Democrats don't want expanded health coverage.
But strategic political motivations were also at play. Political operatives on both sides worked to peg the starting point of future compromise to their advantage.
Most 'absurd' corporate tax breaks
So here we are. Terrific -- both sides have succeeded in making things worse.
But they are also both making a miscalculation if they believe waiting this out plays to their advantage.
As the recent report of the bipartisan fiscal commission demonstrated, we still have a window of opportunity to put together a plan that would be large enough to reassure global credit markets, while preserving central objectives of both the left and the right.
0:00 /2:11The GOP's debt-tamer
The commission's proposal allows for fundamental tax reform that would improve the efficiency of the tax system. It would raise revenues without relying on a major new revenue source. In particular, it avoids introducing a Value Added Tax, which Republicans rightly worry would be so good at raising revenue that it would reduce pressure to make important spending reductions.
You better believe that every year we wait, that VAT becomes more and more likely.
The commission's proposal also allows for entitlement reforms done progressively. It would require greater contributions from those who can afford them, while protecting benefits -- and in some cases increasing them -- for those who cannot.
By waiting to reform Social Security, we risk shredding the safety net. Such a result is not only unconscionable, it is needless if we act preemptively.
The talk in the Senate seems to be focused on looking for compromises. Meanwhile, House Republicans and the White House are holding back. But 2011 must be the year of the compromise. Otherwise it is dangerously likely that we will all lose.
Anthony Balderrama on Feb 23, 2011
Location matters when buying a home (“Oh, a lake view!”) or accepting a job offer (“It’s just a 15-minute drive!”). If you don’t like the home with the lake view, you can drive a few blocks and look for a home with a park view. Or you can turn down the job with the 15-minute drive and find one near a train stop. But if you’re job searching, your location isn’t quite as flexible. You can’t say, “The local economy is a bit rough, so I’ll just pick up and move across the country.” You can, I suppose, but it takes a lot of time and money, two items job seekers can’t afford to waste.
Recently, the Bureau of Labor Statistics looked at the unemployment situation in metropolitan areas throughout the country for December 2010, the month with the most current data. Although the economy’s recovery is slow and steady, it is improving when compared to year-over-year data.
Of the 372 metros included in the study, 238 held lower unemployment rates in December 2010 than they did in 2009. Conversely, 115 metro areas had higher unemployment rates, while only 19 were unchanged.
In December, the national unemployment rate was 9.1 percent. Yet, the rate in 109 metros was higher than 10 percent, a significant improvement from 140 metros in 2009. Fortunately, one number that did rise is the amount of metros with unemployment rates lower than the national average. In 2009, 66 metros had rates below 7 percent, but in 2010 that number climbed to 73 metros. It may seem like a small victory, but if you’re a job seeker in one of these states, it’s a welcome improvement.
Michigan boasts the most improvements
Michigan, a state that has seen some particularly rough jobless numbers over the past few years, experienced many of the best improvements from 2009 to 2010. According to the BLS, “The 10 largest year-over-year jobless rate decreases in December were reported in Michigan areas.” These cities all saw jobless decreases between 3.4 and 4.8 percent:
Muskegon-Norton Shores
Monroe
Jackson
Flint
Holland-Grand Haven
Detroit-Warren-Livonia
Saginaw-Saginaw Township North
Grand Rapids-Wyoming
Lansing-East Lansing
Niles-Benton Harbor
Unfortunately, Yuma, Ariz. experienced the largest year-over-year jobless rate increase at 4.4 percent. On the plus side, no other city saw a jobless rate increase higher than 2 percent, and even then only 24 metros experienced such jobless rises.
Who had the best years?
When it comes to who saw the biggest year-over-year increase in employment, each region of the country had some reason to boast. Two-hundred metros experienced improved employment, but these saw the most significant increases, ranging from 17,000 new workers to 57,500:
Washington, D.C.-Arlington-Alexandria
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy
Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington
In terms of percentage, these metros saw the biggest improvements:
Ocean City. (14.4 percent)
Kennewick-Pasco-Richland (4.9 percent)
Kokomo (4.5 percent)
Who had the worst year?
Unfortunately, not every city had a strong year. These metros saw the largest decreases in employment:
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont
Detroit-Warren-Livonia
Kansas City
Sacramento–Arden-Arcade—Roseville
Perhaps the most interesting point to be made about these cities is that Detroit saw a decrease in the number of workers, but in terms of the unemployment rate, it improved. Although there is no definitive way of knowing what is at play, long-term unemployed workers might have quit searching and no longer factor into the figure. Either way, the Detroit metro is an interesting area to watch.
And in terms of percentage, the cities with the largest December-to-December decreases were:
Bend, Ore. (3.8 percent)
Dalton, Ga. (3.5 percent)
Yuba City, Calif. (3.2 percent).
What you should do with this information
If you’re a job seeker, you might be wondering, “OK, so a lot of people are better off than they were a year ago, and some aren’t. So what?” Well, as a job seeker, you should always be aware of your local economy because it does affect your job search. Knowing what the employment situation is like where you live can help you understand why you’re not receiving an offer or inspire you to get more creative to stand out.
Another option that some job seekers will consider is relocation. We understand that it’s not for everyone. First, it’s expensive. Flying back and forth to interviewers, hiring movers or driving to your new city, and finding new place to live—they all cost money. Plus, leaving behind your family and friends isn’t always possible. However, if you have the means and desire to look beyond your current city, you will increase your chances of finding a job. In fact, some regions might be experiencing a shortage of workers in your industry, and you will be a sough-after applicant. You never really know what you’ll find by looking in another city.