Just How Ugly Is The Truth Of America's Unemployment: David Rosenberg Explains

Tyler Durden's picture

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
The Axe's picture

The markets tell another story....strength is off the grid.  Bonds higher--growth. copper higher growth..stocks higher growth....I can't listen to DR....markets tell another story..he has to be wrong...

d00daa's picture

Markets tell another story, until they don't.

 

But maybe you're right.  Maybe this time it's different.

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

You would have been a hoot in Weimar.

Problem Is's picture

DRosenberg Is Correct
Your markets are all POMO, ZIRP and QE 1,2, ..., n

if's picture

What was the Nasdaq telling you at +5k back in 2000 ?

fredquimby's picture

Personally, I think MoneyMcBags translation of the jobs number is far superior!!

http://whengeniusprevailed.com/

The most important point is that these numbers are SEASONALLY FUCKING ADJUSTED (bolding intentional, because, yes Money McBags is yelling) which means that they should TAKE IN TO ACCOUNT THE WEATHER because, you know, THAT IS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF SEASONALLY ADJUSTING SOMETHING.  Now look, Money McBags is no Willard Scott (and not just because he doesn’t have a GMILF fetish), but as far as he can tell, the weather this past January wasn’t any kind of anomaly (like Carrot Top’s career), it was just kind of an average January, or at least within one standard deviation of a normal January.  So given that, the seasonal adjustment should have seasonally adjusted for the fucking weather and thus this huge miss shouldn’t have been caused by a little snow.

Cindy_Dies_In_The_End's picture

Let Them Eat Hope.

 

Fight The Future.

RobotTrader's picture

Rosenberg always does an excellent analysis.

If he had focused all that intellect, time, and energy into watching the tape, he would have made a fortune being long stocks since the 2009 bottom.

lieutenantjohnchard's picture

so i presume you have made a fortune. where did you retire to?

Hephasteus's picture

Someplace where the gains aren't wiped out by a monetising global reserve currency.

A pygmy tribe in new guinea.

homersimpson's picture

Maybe if you focused all your intellect, time, and energy into  posting top ticking charts when they only support your viewpoint, you could be the next Robert Kiyosaki of stock market investing.

lieutenantjohnchard's picture

homer, that's his/her/robotdouche's modus operandi. he doesn't believe his own posts or writing, nor should anybody else. today he mocks rosie's skepticism. two weeks ago the douche was bearish, now he's bullish. tomorrow he'll be - well, who know, especially not him/her.

remember, he's 30% invested for all his bullishness in such stellar stocks as - wait for it - vz and hd. wow! the creativity of hours and hours of analysis and he comes up with the grand idea to invest in hd and vz.

topcallingtroll's picture

You pussies have never seen a recession until you have seen a third world recession. We got food stamps, homeless shelters, and when is the last time you saw a street urchin in america? 19th century? Life is good! At least you buggers arent pushing an ice cream cart or eating ruminant feedstocks. We can hedonic down a lot further than this. Cat food and dog food really arent that bad if i remember correctly as a curious kid.

merehuman's picture

hey, troll it must not have touched your door yet. I see people losing all they woerked for. I see folks divorcing, dying and living in tents. I see a slower  death by pieces as some of us have to give up their pets. Death by a thousand cuts for us Little people as we lose hope, knowing there  aint a damn thing we can do about it.

Help your neighbors, find strenght in union and share the sacrifice and the wealth, cause in the end after all is said and done , its each other we really need and should love and treasure.

HarryWanger's picture

Seems like Rosie has been grasping at straws trying to explain over the past few days why this was not a good report. We get it, Rosie. Apparently, the rest of the investment community sees it a different way. There were several unbiased opinions regarding the report and most conceded it was indeed a very good report. So, maybe it's time to move on to something else, like buying stocks.

morph's picture

By the rest of the investment community, you mean the FED.

bob_dabolina's picture

He does. And the Fed has gottin' it wrong for the last 30 years (really the last 100 years, but in particular they have really fucked up the last 3 decades)

Think about this. In 08 every major bank failed in reality. Had it not been for the tax payer the banking system epically failed. Let that ferment. That is how bad the Fed did. F -

iDealMeat's picture

Wasn't just the banks. Many, many people in the US over-leveraged.

Keynesian manipulated markets breed greed..

It all failed..

The only thing keeping the game going is Banana Ben Bucks.

yeee haw...

Quaderratic Probing's picture

Total failure gets pretty good bonuses these days... aside from the fact you get to keep your job.

lieutenantjohnchard's picture

harry, fourth request. when you made your 9% call on the u3 rate after you said you ran the numbers, did you base your analysis on the drop in the labor participation rate, organic job growth, or was it just a wild baseless guess?

HarryWanger's picture

I based it upon Gallup's twice a month poll of 30,000 individuals regarding employment. It's been remarkably consistent and pointed directly at 8.9-9.1% rate base upon their surveys.

lieutenantjohnchard's picture

and gallop's was based on the drop in the labor participation rate which undermines your economic bullishness.

d00daa's picture

It was the snow.

 

It's always the snow.

 

Don't expect a response.  He's a fucking moron.

lieutenantjohnchard's picture

i know. the world needs fools like harry. who else could we take money from on poker nights?

HarryWanger's picture

Gallup's poll was based upon a twice a month survey of 30,000 individuals and had nothing to do with labor participation rate. That's not the way their polling system is designed.

lieutenantjohnchard's picture

harry, you can't have no job growth and a falling u3 rate without reducing the labor participation rate at the same time. it's mathmatically impossible.

d00daa's picture

What exactly in Gallup's poll pointed to an 8.9-9.1% BLS ????????

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145922/gallup-finds-unemployment-slightly-jan...

 

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

Once again, I eagerly await your reply.

myshadow's picture

'several unbiased opinions regarding the report and most conceded it was indeed a very good report.'

 

 

Name two.

HarryWanger's picture

Calculated Risk

Washington Post

AP

ABC News

earnyermoney's picture

that's one as the requirement was "unbiased" sources. Clearly, WaPO, AP and ABC News fail this test.

d00daa's picture

1) Washington Post + ABC News + AP = ONE SOURCE (but you already knew that).

2) The fact that you attempt, with a straight face, to list the above as UNBIASED (Calculated Risk??? LMAO) sources is fucking laughable (but you already knew that, too).

HarryWanger's picture

CR gives the most unbiased look at economic data and analysis anywhere on the web IMO.

Judge Smales's picture

You must be joking, right? Since Tanta died, CR has essentially turned into another arm of the hopium-smoking MSM, only with a bizarre obsession with hotel RevPar. Used to be a great site, but now they've bought into the BS and can't be taken seriously.

Problem Is's picture

I was surprised by Bill at Calculated Risk's summary on unemployment...

I think he needs to look a little harder at the revisions to employment in 2010 and 700k+ unemployed being relabeled to discouraged or marginally attached...

300k... If you run out of unemployment benefits are you any less unemployed?

As per economists with phd's from the "right" schools labeling you are...

But then economists with phd's from the "right" schools usually have government jobs and wouldn't know what unemployment is from the safety of the tax payer teat...

subqtaneous's picture

Well, since you have your usual aversion to details (and Rosenberg), try David Stockman's numbers . . . ouch!

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1780974568&play=1


d00daa's picture

He's not making equity calls, you stupid fuck.  He's speaking reality:  THE LABOR MARKET IS ABSOLUTELY TRASHED.  STRUCTURALLY TRASHED.

 

Please explain away the anemic job "growth" since the "end" of the depression...  hell, why not start circa 2001??  Leaving your perverse tunnel-vision toward equity investing aside for just a split second, HOW THE FUCK IS THIS GOOD LONG-TERM FOR AMERICA IN GENERAL???

 

I eagerly await your reply, you mindless automaton.

homersimpson's picture

Another dumb HarryWanger comment sponsored by HarryWanger - where even eediots make money based off dumb luck.

Sophist Economicus's picture

Do you really think this guy 'makes money'?   Probably gets stopped out often...

earnyermoney's picture

"What’s really happening, of course, is the same thing that’s been happening in this country for the longest time — the folks at the top are doing fabulously well and they are not interested in the least in spreading the wealth around"

 

How many low paying jobs you going to create this year?

HarryWanger's picture

We're adding four production jobs and two admin jobs at the end of this month. Both pay well relative to similar positions at competitors. 

Arrinex's picture

You're right harry.  Where I work we've forecasted possibly adding 35-40 sales folks out of our 800 total current number. Unless this recovery is mostly based on certain sectors...

Oh, and did I mention I work for one of the big banks. I mean it's so hard for us to make money in this environment...right....

 

Sorry...had to troll...but dude, seriously. It's all smoke and mirrors with the recovery job numbers unless your getting TARP or work for the government.

gorillaonyourback's picture

it is smoke and mirrors, i have a plumbing company and the past 2 years i have been doing 80% commercial work, schools, hospitals, fire stations, etc. prior i was 80% residential.  the residential is at the same point but now there r so many people bidding on the government projects its ridiculous.  i did have 6 employees at the end of summer down now 2.  its the same all over for the construction field. i was not a fan of relying on government spending but if thats all you got,,,,.  lets hope harry optimism plays out, but i doubt it.

oldmanofthesee's picture

I'm a new "reader" Harry, and wonder why you ignore all the abuse, and come back for more, every day? Are you a tool of someone, or a Manchurian type, or.........just askin'.

Max Hunter's picture

There is no fundamental reason to buy stocks. Maybe a few select stocks but in general, until we no longer have 1.5 trillion deficit and 500 billion trade deficit my view of this economy's end game is still in place.

Pure Evil's picture

Shouldn't you be getting back to your highly successful home decorating business? Exactly how do you find the time to run your business and troll this and other websites spreading your propaganda?

I like you Hairy, I find your posts comical and quite entertaining, so don't give up.

merehuman's picture

I envision Harry in a room with 40 other government workers at a bank of computers going over diverse websites lying and messing with us. wherever truth arises it must be diverted , waylaid, obfuscated. Karma is coming, the poor fool Harry has sold something precious. Integrety is earned slow but fast to go. some of us, thats all we got.

AnAnonymous's picture

one after another apologist explaining just how good the employment data is if one strips out all the "bad",

 

That is a typical US way of thinking. Once all the counter-examples are removed, one is left with only examples supporting a point.

Once you remove the casualties, nobody died. Etc... Largely used in the US to show how universally good the US world order is.

Not surprised as it comes back home.

Rogerwilco's picture

There is a limit to the time businesses can squeeze workers. My brother works for an aircraft service company near DFW. For the past year they have been working six days a week, often 10-hour days. His annual bonus, usually several thousand dollars, was a paltry $300 this year and the CEO claimed bonuses were small because the company had to conserve cash.

When I talked with him yesterday, he said they are now working a shift on Sundays, but it's *only* six hours, and management has no plans to hire outside of replacements!

He's fed up and I can't blame him. Working seven days a week, even with big OT pay, gets old fast.

Sophist Economicus's picture

We've made the same decision in one of our businesses.    We're not hiring, using OT as the way to fill the gap.   It's a hard call.   You don't want to staff for peak demand periods in a shakey economic environment because you don't know when the bottom will drop out.    Many of my competitors are hurting, several have closed their doors - I could cherry-pick some great talent - but I won't in this environment.  

I told the guys they can either complain that they are tired during longer than normal weeks or they can complain about not being able to pay their bills working only 20 to 30 hours a week.    They understand, but it DOES GET OLD...