ECONOMY BOOMING: Unemployment Rate Drops to 18-year Low

Originally published at: https://www.hannity.com/media-room/economy-booming-unemployment-rate-drops-to-18-year-low/

U.S. employers extended a streak of solid hiring in May, adding 223,000 jobs and helping lower the unemployment rate to an 18-year low of 3.8 percent from 3.9 percent in April.

Average hourly pay rose 2.7 percent from a year earlier, a slightly faster annual rate than in April, the Labor Department reported Friday. But pay growth remains below levels that are typical when the unemployment rate is this low.

"The economy and labor market appear to be firing on all cylinders, with all sectors showing strength..."

Still, the report shows that the nearly 9-year old economic expansion — the second-longest on record — remains on track. Employers appear to be shrugging off recent concerns about global trade disputes.

Friday’s report showed that hiring in the United States is benefiting a wider range of Americans: The unemployment rate for high school graduates reached 3.9 percent, a 17-year low. For black Americans, it hit a record low of 5.9 percent.

“The economy and labor market appear to be firing on all cylinders, with all sectors showing strength,” said Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist at Capital Economics.

Source: FoxNews.com

Thanks obama

2 Likes

https://www.timesofisrael.com/hundreds-of-prominent-us-economists-warn-against-voting-trump/

What about the number of people out of the workforce?

When exactly did we break 40% unemployment, do you have the graph/link :wink:

Did I miss the purge of accountants at the BLS such that we can finally trust the numbers again?

does it matter?

How can you calculate “real” unemployment without it?

1 Like

Looks like the number of people not in the labor force has been increasing over the last year.

Last May in was 94,788, 000 and this may it has increased to 95,689, 000.

Someone better let Sean Hannity know, as he was very concerned that so many people were out of the labor force and now that the number is increasing I bet he is going to be triple pissed off.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t16.htm

1 Like

lib opinion is righchere

libs say it does not matter because you are only taking about 80 year old people that arnt looking for work. It likely made sense to you then -under Obama’s administration - so you should be happy with that today.

Just two years ago it was the most important metric. What changed?

Why then are so many “beautiful clean coal” coal miners out of work?

Are you being obtuse? Yes, we libs understand the out of workforce number and had no problem with it. Today we have no problem with it. We just find it humorous that you used to love the metric but today you finally understand its insignificance. Just betrays your partisanship.

2 Likes

Baby Boomers retiring over the last several years have been the main reason why the labor participation rate has been declining. The labor participation rate is now at 62.7%.

I’m digging it but let me just say this, I hope in the long run…money didn’t buy our happiness today.

There are some of us conservatives who wanted other conservatives to explain how some people should be counted in the workforce even though they didn’t want, nor need a job.

That’s complete and utter tripe. For years conservatives cited the not in workforce stat as if it were far more important than the unemployment rate. Liberals tried to educate you conservatives on the facts of that number and you all plugged your ears and only now you realize what it means?

That means it took you eight years to understand the significance of a simple statistic despite it being explained to you many, many, many times.

No, I don’t think you conservatives are that mind-numbingly dumb. The more parsimonious explanation is you knew all along that your support of the out of the workforce stat.

So you tell me, we’re conservatives too dumb to be educated over a period of eight years what a simple statistic meant OR were they always just playing politics?

That’s what they all used to tell us. :grin:

No it isn’t. I’m conservative, and I know that jumping on the “look at all these out of the workforce” bandwagon is crap.

House wife who has a husband with a very good paying job and doesn’t need to nor want to work. Out of the work force counted in those numbers.

College kid (like mine) that has scholarships that pay tuition, supplies and room and board. Doesn’t need to work, doesn’t want to – must concentrate on studies.

Guy gets tired of working 50 hours a week and sells his auto repair shop for a boat load of money. His wife as a good paying job. He doesn’t need nor want a job.

I’m one who has said this all through the bamma years. You can’t just look at the number not in the work force and start jumping up and down saying look at the numbers. Older american’s retire (three of my neighbors are that way. Don’t want a job, don’t need a job).

That’s why you never boad brush. There ARE some conservatives who have said this over and over again.

During the bamma administration, and now during the Trump administration.

Number you need to look at (and it’s not mentioned anyplace in the thread) is the discouraged worker. Those who actually want a job.