July Jobs and the Fed

Friday, August 03, 2012

US Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke (Karen Bleier/AFP/Getty)

Fed chairman Ben Bernanke is stuck between the economic hawks, who are worried about high inflation, and doves, who want to spur employment. Peter Coy, economics editor for Bloomberg Businessweek, discusses this morning's jobs report and whether it will spur the Fed into further action.


Peter Coy

Comments [17]


gary from queens: Republicans (actually, Alan Greenspan/Ben Bernanke) did cause the current economic mess we are in. Democrats (actually, Ben Bernanke) has continued the same bad economic policies that are keeping us in the economic mess we are in.

By the way, MEMO to Democrats: Obama did not "inherit" the bad economy from Bush. He CHOSE to deal with it by running for President. By allowing the Fed Chairman to continue his awful economic policies, the economy continued to stagnate. If Romney is elected, he will be no different from Bush or Obama.

Aug. 03 2012 03:28 PM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

RL - really irritates you that the other side of the debate is now represented on this thread, eh, bro?

"Yes, I do have a job." LOL, you're does come as a bit of a surprise.

So, let's all chill with the attacks. We're just expressing our opinions.

Aug. 03 2012 11:09 AM
gary from queens


what is sad is that you have no rebuttals----just ridicule.

I work at home. Consultant. the only reason i'm able to post now is because business is slow at the moment. (One reason you dont see me post every day.)

And if it's a global recession, then how is it that Sweden and Chile and Canada are doing well? Answer: they are doing when conservatives prescribe.

Aug. 03 2012 10:49 AM

wow, I'm sorry I missed the fun. Yes, I do have a job. Looks like just the kooks toughing it out this morning. MC, Gary, jgarbuz - you guys are yelling at yourselves alone. This comments board looks really sad for you 3. Can't find anyone to take the bait.

No one mentioned that the recession is global. Nothing is getting better here until it gets better everywhere. How about you guys start fixing Europe, so we can have some export jobs, instead of exporting jobs.

Meanwhile, thanks for the laugh this morning. Keep up the good b*#%tching. You guys are sad.

Aug. 03 2012 10:40 AM
gary from queens


WHAT? The unemployment (ie bad number) is always revised UPwards. rarely downwards.

that indicates politics at work

Aug. 03 2012 10:29 AM
gary from queens

@MrD from NYC

The Dems passed two huge stimulus bills. We are now averaging one trillion dollar deficits.

If you're referring to Obama's "Jobs" bill, that was just an election year ploy to show Republican callousness.

In fact, Obama's Jobs Bill appropriates a tiny miniscule of funds as compared to "Stimulus 1 and 2. It is not intended to do anything, except help Obama demagogue the the jobless economy-----HIS economy

Aug. 03 2012 10:25 AM
John A.

Gary and Martin,
you missed the tiny little detail of Congress shutting itself down for the entirety of 2011. We need more Republican message in this forum - a tiny bit of truth is still shining through.

Aug. 03 2012 10:25 AM
Hugh Sansom

A few points:

1. Monthly reports have consistently been revised _down_ in subsequent months for on the order of a year.

2. The unemployment numbers commonly reported (there are several unemployment figures) indicate people _looking_ for work, not people collecting compensation.

Aug. 03 2012 10:24 AM

Hey call your senator and ask them to vote yae on Ron Pauls Audit the Fed Bill (which passed the house overwhelmingly and Harry reid is trying to kill)

the guest is a shill

Aug. 03 2012 10:20 AM
MrD from NYC

I don't see why the GOP sould complain about the rise in unemployment since a lot of the job loss is from government jobs. Seems to me that they are purposely stalling the jobs number by refusing to take up the stimulus package.

Aug. 03 2012 10:17 AM
gary from queens

But the Republicans CAUSED the economic mess Obama is in!!!

WRONG. Republican deregulation could not have caused the recession because there was nothing of the sort in the run-up to the crisis. In fact, it was Bush who publicly called for financial regulation-----namely, reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the central culprits in the crisis-----no fewer than 17 times before 2008.

What brought down the economy was overregulation of the mortgage industry through the Community Reinvestment Act, which controlled bank underwriting, and HUD, which controlled the underwriting of Fannie and Freddie and primary lenders. Now what's retarding the recovery is Obama's re-regulation of that sector.

And far from triggering the recession, the Bush tax rate cuts of 2003 sparked a 46-consecutive-month boom in small-business job gains.

Aug. 03 2012 10:15 AM
jgarbuz from Queens

Alas, I'm afraid as hard as Obama is trying, if he can't get unemployment to below 8% as he promised in the beginning of his term, his goose will probably be cooked. If a miracle occurs, and that unemployment number falls below 8% before November, he might squeeze through.

I have nothing against the man. He's a good man. But ultimately, the proof is in the pudding. If he can't pull it down to below 8%, regardless of the reasons, the electorate will probably give the empty suit a chance.

Aug. 03 2012 10:15 AM
gary from queens

Let's talk about this!

The administration that doesn't want layoff notices required by law going out days before the November election is telling defense contractors they don't have to send them for the cuts required by sequestration.

The heads of major defense contractors testified recently before Congress that they are bound by law to give employees 60 days' notice if their jobs are going to be terminated as a result of sequestration cuts scheduled for Jan. 2. A law that SENATOR Obama co-sponsored.

Obama is violating his own law because he doesn't want layoff warning notices could go out to hundreds of thousands of workers just days before the presidential election.

The Department of Labor is playing election year political games to save the boss' political skin. And here we are accepting this latest number----Mr. Shameless Rosey Scenario Peter Coy, notwithstanding

Aug. 03 2012 10:13 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

No, Anna (!) he said it was a quirk... NOT more car sales, but a retooling schedule change.
Do you actually listen to your guests....or just plow ahead with your Obama talking points???

Aug. 03 2012 10:13 AM
gary from queens

Unemployment rose to 8.3% No one is surprised.

But joblessness is merely the symptom of an economy that is not growing. It is not growing because job creators-----investors-----know that Obama's tax "armegeddon" will kick in next January, if he's re-elected. So they're sitting on their money or investing it outside the US.

Among the exceptions are the new energy producing states, and on non-federal lands----where Obama isn't holding up drilling permits. The economy is booming in THOSE areas of the country, and no doubt are the source of any increase in jobs that may be reflected in the jobs data due out any minute.

Obama is obsessed solely with tax fairness. When asked if he would accept increased gov revenues by lowing the marginal rates of top earners, he said no, because the system must be fair. Obama, like the left, are more concerned about the distribution of wealth, and not how wealth is created. What do you think the "You Did Not Build That" was all about? It was to justify----with the most ridiculous and banal arguments----his fairness thesis. But his method of leveling is fixated on reducing the wealth at the top, rather than raising it among those near the bottom. And that is why we have 1.5% growth.

It is only among the liberal intelligencia, as economist Thomas Sowell recently observed, who feel government is smart enough to pick the winners and losers. Romney will rely more on the free market. He will reform the tax code in a revenue neutral manner to curbing spending. He promised to repeal the Dodd-Frank Act and Obamacare. Romney has put forth a plan that, according to Columbia Business School's Dean Hubbard, would create 12 million jobs in the first term of a Romney presidency.

Let's just hope he will not also be a big government spender like Bush, and his worse cohort (by a factor of 4), Obama.

Aug. 03 2012 10:09 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan



(Yes, Axelrod hates it when people look for ruins their unemployment numbers.)
A nice parody of the pretzel-twisting spin aided and abetted by the MSM and Obama Public Radio.

Aug. 03 2012 09:58 AM
gary from queens

Abbott and Costello explain Obama's unemployment Accounting System.

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.

ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It's 9%.

COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?

ABBOTT: No, that's 16%.

COSTELLO: You just said 9%.

ABBOTT: 9% Unemployed.

COSTELLO: Right 9% out of work.

ABBOTT: No, that's 16%.

COSTELLO: Okay, so it's 16% unemployed.

ABBOTT: No, that's 9%...

COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 16%?

ABBOTT: 9% are unemployed. 16% are out of work.

COSTELLO: IF you are out of work you are unemployed.

ABBOTT: No, you can't count the "Out of Work" as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.


ABBOTT: No, you miss my point.

COSTELLO: What point?

ABBOTT: Someone who doesn't look for work, can't be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn't be fair.

COSTELLO: To whom?

ABBOTT: The unemployed.

COSTELLO: But they are ALL out of work.

ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. And, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.

COSTELLO: So if you're off the unemployment roles, that would count as less unemployment?

ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don't look for work?

ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how you get to 9%. Otherwise it would be 16%. You don't want to read about 16% unemployment, do ya?

COSTELLO: That would be frightening.

ABBOTT: Absolutely.

COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to bring down the unemployment number?

ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.

COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?

ABBOTT: Correct.

COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?

ABBOTT: Bingo.

COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.

ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like an economist.

COSTELLO: I don't even know what the hell I just said!

ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like a politician.

Aug. 03 2012 08:30 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.