Stock market tips and experiences

[DrVenture]

What I understand is what I posted. That white collar, particularly tech industries, over-hired and are now making corrections. That and FED rate hikes have had an impact on the labor market at the high end. Where we differ is in the definition of "job recessions". I have seen real job recessions. And context. This comes across as a pullback in the face of record profitability, and FED rate hiking from near zero to mid 5's.

The chart that you posted shows an unemployment rate (all occupations) of 4.4% - higher than a year ago, but still historically low. August of 2023 was 3.9% - extremely low. In October of 2009 the same figure was 10%. Context is everything.

As an individual interested in economics, I am sure you know that rate hikes, to lower inflation, have the consequence of impacting the job market. Which they appear to have done to the tune of .5% over the past 12 months. Not a huge number, when still well under 5%. This also means that the lowering of rates now underway, has a strong potential to reverse any losses associated with the FEDs effort to quash inflation. Thus, recent data points need to be taken in that context.

[DrVenture]

Originally Posted by kudos

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/21/b...s-economy.html

"Numbers"

It is behind a paywall. But, the headline says it all. No one is arguing the "numbers". The pushback is two fold. Firstly, an objection to the characterization that Powell said that the numbers are "fake". he did not. Secondly, that these numbers represent anything but a typical response to two years of rate hikes having the expected result of lowering inflation and impacting the labor market.

We are still at 4.4% unemployment. New data may show a trend otherwise, but that data does not exist as of yet. And may actually go the opposite direction, due to aggressive rate lowering. All remains speculation until the numbers are collected and a trend line emerges.

I make no predictions, but this labor impact was telegraphed by the Fed for more than two years. making it appear cause and effect. And it is the data that they have been looking for to lower rates more aggressively.

I am certainly not making any investment moves based on anything that I have observed. I doubt anyone else is, either.

[kudos]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

No one is arguing the "numbers".

The numbers were "fake" when months later they realized they were completely wrong. Also, how they categorize full-time jobs these days or lengths to determine if someone is unemployed or not still throws everything off.

[DrVenture]

Originally Posted by kudos

The numbers were "fake" when months later they realized they were completely wrong. Also, how they categorize full-time jobs these days or lengths to determine if someone is unemployed or not still throws everything off.

.

Except nothing about the way they do those calculations has changed. And if it did, they would be fully transparent about that.

Here is a thorough article regarding the hows and whys of economic data revisions. It is nothing new, been going on for a very long time.

https://journals.ala.org/index.php/d...view/6383/8404

From the link (2017) "There’s a small rub, however, in the Payroll Employment Number: It is a very rough estimate and is revised the following month—and then again the month after—as more information arrives at the BLS. These revisions can be large and may materially change the picture of the economy. Here’s an example: The first release (October 3, 2008) of the September 2008 nonfarm payroll employment data indicated a loss of 159,000 jobs. The second release (November 7, 2008) of the September 2008 employment data indicated a loss of 284,000 jobs. The third release (December 4, 2008) of the September 2008 data indicated a loss of 403,000 jobs."

Sound familiar?

We will have to agree to disagree and look back in 6 months to see where we are. Anyone like to make any predictions?

[other_evolved]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

As an individual interested in economics, I am sure you know that rate hikes, to lower inflation, have the consequence of impacting the job market. Which they appear to have done to the tune of .5% over the past 12 months. Not a huge number, when still well under 5%. This also means that the lowering of rates now underway, has a strong potential to reverse any losses associated with the FEDs effort to quash inflation. Thus, recent data points need to be taken in that context.

So many people do not understand this point. In order to combat inflation, rates go up, and pain is the point and the cure. It's like chemotherapy.....try to kill of the bad without killing off too much of the good.