Hiring was down in October:
To put this into context, hiring is still above its pre-pandemic average. At the same time, it's declined 1.1 million over the past three years. It's now down to about its 2017 level.
13 thoughts on “Hiring falls by 270,000 in October”
Comments are closed.
I see the Trump Recession on the horizon.
Trumpcession. It's got to be the word of the year for 2025.
We were constantly told that hiring was anemic under Trump because the economy was at full capacity. And yet Biden keeps crushing Trump's numbers despite the economy being vastly stronger than it ever was under Trump.
If you want a job you can get one. To the extent the "working class" are struggling and unhappy, it's because they are not up to actual working. Often that's because they are dysfunctional, drug addled, drunk, or suffering various forms of mental illness which makes them unsuitable for work. I no longer believe it is in my interests to make excuses for them. In my own extended family, this dynamic is playing out right now with several people. It's hard to watch up close but they are just lost. There is no economic policy or government program which can help them. Nor are there any which caused their problems.
It's all on them and they are failing.
Preposterous. It's largely true that if a non-handicapped person wants a job they can get one. However, for a lot of people that means a job that doesn't pay well and that they hate. That's pretty much the recipe for "struggling and unhappy"; working too hard at a job you hate for not enough pay to be even moderately comfortable.
Yeah - I don’t like mowing grass either. I wouldn’t want to do it all day every day all summer. My HOA hired a company to do it. They shovel the snow last week too. I also had some window washing company go through my neighborhood last year. I talked to the young men as they were working inside my home. They were not the brightest group of people. There’s no place for them really.
Back in the Old Brick'n'Mortar Days, hiring would go up around the Holiday Season. But with most shopping done online, all it takes is software, clerks need not apply. Moreover, "AI" has taken over the advisory role of the more knowledgeable sales staff.
I know this is irrelevant, as the graph only goes out to October.
You do realize that Amazon needs a massive increase in their staff for the holidays, as does all of the shippers and other logistic companies, This largely offsets the decreases in the extra staff needed at brick and mortar companies.
I admit there should be some effect, but isn't Amazon roboticiizing heavily? and they can always overwork their existing people harder, so added hiring might actually be minimal.
Trump in a couple of years as his tariff-induced recession sets in: I inherited a bad economy from Biden.
Arrrggghhh!! If you're going to show a time series depicting some change over a particular period in time, ALWAYS extend the graph past the period in question. What happened before Jan 22? It's important context. In this case, Jan 22 was near the peak of the post-pandemic boom, so of course it's not going to be able to continue at that rate. It's grossly misleading to start your graph at that point.
Dude, chill. If he's showing you the 2000-2019 average with that dotted line there, what's the point of having the graph go back that far as well? The point of the chart was to show that we're basically coming back down post-pandemic to the pre-2020 average, off a Jan 22 high. Pretty straightforward, IMHO.
Donald Trump loves to talk about how low unemployment was when he was in office (until it wasn't, but that's a different story). And it's true. If you make a graph of unemployment starting on Jan 20, 2017, unemployment drops steadily for the first three years. You could add a line showing the average over the previous 10 years and it would look even better. It's only by extending the graph back that you can see that unemployment had been dropping steadily for 7 years. Nothing special happened on Trump's watch. Context is important. One of the easiest ways to lie with statistics is to misrepresent the context.