Economy
Related: About this forumFor 10 straight months, monthly job growth has alternated between positive and negative - excellent graph
The US labor market right now can be defined by one word: Whiplash, Yahoo Finance, 4/4/26https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-us-labor-market-right-now-can-be-defined-by-one-word-whiplash/ar-AA208SXY

On its face, that looks like a sharp turnaround. In context, it looks more like another violent swing in a labor market that has become unusually hard to read. And that whiplash nature of the labor market is the real story in the economy right now.
For 10 straight months, monthly job growth has alternated between positive and negative. The past three months alone went from a gain of 160,000 to a loss of 133,000 to a gain of 178,000.
Each report feels huge. Each report also says less on its own.
If the current swing in monthly job gains and losses were a stock chart, technicians might call the green trend lines on the chart above a broadening megaphone pattern: wider swings, more disagreement, less clarity.
And while technical analysis doesn't work with economic data, that framing isn't a bad way to think about the labor market. The monthly data swings are becoming more extreme, even as the longer-term trend continues to weaken.
More at link
bucolic_frolic
(55,220 posts)Making a flatline into troughs and peaks so they have bragging rights on the high notes?
LetMyPeopleVote
(180,054 posts)On the whole, the job market is all but frozen, with little in the way of hiring or turnover. And for recent college graduates, its even worse.
The April jobs report looks good â but thereâs rot underneath.
— TheBlackPage (Woke, DEI forever against fascism) (@theblackpage.bsky.social) 2026-04-03T17:16:38.915Z
On the whole, the job market is all but frozen, with little in the way of hiring or turnover. And for recent college graduates, itâs even worse.
www.ms.now/opinion/jobs...
https://www.ms.now/opinion/jobs-report-reaction
?resize=560,695
Overall, the job market is all but frozen, with little in the way of hiring or turnover. And for recent college graduates, its even worse, which might help explain Trumps faltering support among this cohort. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, more than 40 percent of college graduates between the ages of 22 and 27 hold jobs that typically dont require a college degree. That high a share is usually seen only during economic downturns and their immediate aftermath, and is comparable to rates seen in the aftermath of the Great Recession.....
Economists are increasingly predicting stagflation a period of low growth and high inflation for the U.S. No surprise, consumer sentiment is all but in the toilet, with the University of Michigans consumer sentiment survey at near-record lows and huge numbers of Americans say they believe the country is heading in the wrong direction.....
At the same time, the extreme corruption of the Trump administration is also giving companies a license to raise prices and otherwise treat their customers like chumps without a choice. The gutting of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has left Americans with nowhere to turn when a credit card issuer or bank does them wrong. The de facto refusal to enforce antitrust statutes will almost certainly raise costs for Americans as well.
As Ive pointed out before, Trumps economy in many ways resembles to a multi-level marketing scheme. The only people making out here are the wealthiest of the wealthy, who are benefitting from tax cuts, while Trump performs his lifelong serial con bait and switch on the rest of us. This months job numbers are almost certainly offering more of the same they look good on first glance, but dig beneath the surface, and the rot quickly becomes apparent.
progree
(13,004 posts)1. "Yes, the April jobs report released Friday "
It was the March jobs report. (Yes, a trivial error)
2. The graph is labelled "on private nonfarm payrolls"
No, that graph and that 178,000 jobs number is all nonfarm payrolls, not private nonfarm payrolls --
see https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143643223#post47 for the numbers and links. Where CNBC made the same mistake (first pointed out by Wiz Imp) Yes, it's not a big difference.
3. "But over the last six months, job growth has averaged just 89,000 per month weak sauce by any measure. "
It's not an average 89,000 jobs per month, it's 89,000 total over the 6 months, which is 14,833/month average. Again #47 has the numbers and the links
4. "And a large part of the reason the overall unemployment rate fell to 4.3% is because 400,000 people exited the workforce entirely."
That's true. I just want to mention here is what's even worse is that the labor force fell by 1,408,000 over the past 3 months -- yes an astonishing 1.4 million over 3 months. I mention that in https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143643223#post48
LetMyPeopleVote
(180,054 posts)progree
(13,004 posts)for what the (Federal Reserve) staff thinks is "overstatement due to overcounting", there is effectively zero job creation in the private sector.
# Nonfarm PRIVATE Employment (Establishment Survey, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001?output_view=net_1mth
Monthly changes IN THOUSANDS
2024 126 135 143 63 45 78 -8 -27 142 -4 116 212 < --PRIVATE
2025 -76 40 67 99 20 -45 65 -20 68 13 72 -7 < --PRIVATE
2026 180 -129 186 < --PRIVATE
Last 3 months: 237k = 79k/month, Last 6 months: 315k = 52.5k/month
Back in December, he said the staff thinks the BLS is overestimating job growth by about 60,000 per month
https://www.federalreserve.gov/mediacenter/files/FOMCpresconf20251210.pdf
(search for the word "distorted" where that part begins)
Anyway, so if you subtract 60k from 52.5k, you get essentially zero (actually a bit negative)
Just to be clear, he did not say or indicate that they are "cooking the books" but rather the numbers may be "distorted by very technical factors". And he did mention the big downward revision announced in September as evidence of the job numbers being overestimated.
Various articles I've seen is the one big problem as far as growth estimates too high is the birth-death model used to estimate the amount of net job creation amongst new businesses not covered by the survey.