Unemployment

Latest story

163 Shares169 Views

The ‘China Shock’ Offers a Lesson. It Isn’t the One Trump Has Learned.

by

When Congress voted to normalize trade relations with China at the beginning of this century, U.S. manufacturers braced for a stream of cheap goods to begin flowing into U.S. ports.Instead, they got a flood. Imports from China nearly tripled from 1999 to 2005, and American factories, with their higher wages and stricter safety standards, couldn’t compete. The “China shock,” as it has come to be known, wiped out millions of jobs in the years that followed, leaving lasting scars on communities from Michigan to Mississippi.To President Trump and his supporters, those job losses are an object lesson in the damage caused by decades of U.S. trade policy — damage he promises that his tariffs will now help to reverse. On Wednesday, he further raised duties on imports from China, well beyond 100 percent, even as he suspended steep tariffs he had imposed on other trading partners.Few economists endorse the idea that the United States should try to bring back manufacturing jobs en masse. Even fewer believe that tariffs would be an effective tool for doing so.But economists who have studied the issue also argue that Mr. Trump misunderstands the nature of the China shock. The real lesson of the episode wasn’t about trade at all, they say — it was about the toll that rapid economic changes can take on workers and communities — and by failing to understand that, Mr. Trump risks repeating the mistakes he claims he has vowed to correct.“For the last 20 years we’ve been hearing about the China shock and how brutal it was and how people can’t adjust,” said Scott Lincicome, a trade economist at the Cato Institute, a libertarian research organization. “And finally, after most places have moved on, now we’re shocking them again.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 138 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Employers Added 228,000 Jobs in March, but Outlook Is Clouded

    by

    U.S. employers accelerated hiring in March, a surprising show of strength that analysts warned might be the high-water mark for the labor market as the Trump administration’s economic policies began to play out.Employers added 228,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department reported on Friday, a figure that was far more than expected and was up from a revised total of 117,000 in February. The unemployment rate rose to 4.2 percent, from 4.1 percent.The data, based on surveys of households and businesses conducted in the second week of March, do not reflect the sweeping tariff announcement that rattled markets this week, or the full extent of the job cuts resulting from President Trump’s efforts to reduce the federal work force.The market reaction to the report was scant, as traders were preoccupied with the threat of a trade war. The S&P 500 fell 6 percent on Friday. The glum investor mood followed Thursday’s huge sell-off, the biggest since the height of the pandemic, over the rollout of Mr. Trump’s worldwide tariff campaign.Still, Mr. Trump was quick to seize on the report as proof that his economic agenda was working. In a post on social media Friday morning, he wrote: “GREAT JOB NUMBERS, FAR BETTER THAN EXPECTED. IT’S ALREADY WORKING.”Unemployment rate More

  • 88 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Layoffs and Unemployment Grow Among College Graduates

    by

    When Starbucks announced last month that it was laying off more than 1,000 corporate employees, it highlighted a disturbing trend for white-collar workers: Over the past few years, they have seen a steeper rise in unemployment than other groups, and slower wage growth.It also added fuel to a debate that has preoccupied economists for much of that time: Are the recent job losses merely a temporary development? Or do they signal something more ominous and irreversible?After sitting below 4 percent for more than two years, the overall unemployment rate has topped that threshold since May.Economists say that the job market remains strong by historical standards and that much of the recent weakening appears connected to the economic impact of the pandemic. Companies hired aggressively amid surging demand, then shifted to layoffs once the Federal Reserve began raising interest rates. Many of these companies have sought to make their operations leaner under pressure from investors.But amid rapid advances in artificial intelligence and President Trump’s targeting of federal agencies, which disproportionately support white-collar jobs, some wonder if a permanent decline for knowledge work has begun.“We’re seeing a meaningful transition in the way work is done in the white-collar world,” said Carl Tannenbaum, the chief economist of Northern Trust. “I tell people a wave is coming.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Jobs Report Is Steady, but Impact of Federal Cutbacks and Tariffs Looms

    by

    Employers added 151,000 jobs in February, the Labor Department said, based on surveys taken as Trump administration policies were still rolling out.It might be a moment of hush before chaos ensues, or it may be business as usual.U.S. employers added 151,000 jobs in February, the first full month under the new Trump administration, the Labor Department reported on Friday. The gain extended a streak of job growth to 50 months. The unemployment rate ticked up slightly, to 4.1 percent, from 4 percent in January.The report showed a decline of 10,000 in federal employment. But it was based on surveys conducted in the second week of February, as the Trump administration’s mass firings, buyouts and hiring freezes at federal agencies were still unfolding.The survey has likely not registered “more than a sliver of the full impact from federal government layoffs,” said Preston Caldwell, chief U.S. economist at Morningstar. “That should change in next month’s job report.”The monthly change in federal government jobs.

    Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesA similar waiting game is in store for those hoping to ascertain the effects that President Trump’s tariffs — those imposed and those still threatened — may have on global trading partners, business investment and employment.Even without the shake-up in foreign trade and federal employment, private-sector hiring has slowed substantially from the blowout pace of 2021 to 2023. That has left labor market analysts and financial commentators gearing up for a potential cooling in economic growth this year.Unemployment rate More

  • 100 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Fired Federal Workers Face a Sluggish Job Market

    by

    Unemployment is low, but there isn’t much room to move around — especially for those with highly government-specific skills.For about a year now, the labor market has existed in a state of eerie calm: Not many people were losing their jobs or quitting, but not many of those seeking work were getting job offers.The mass layoffs now underway across the federal government, along with its employees who are voluntarily heading for the exits, could disrupt that uneasy equilibrium.While unemployment is relatively low at 4 percent, those losing their positions could face a difficult time finding work, depending on how well their skills translate to a private sector that does not seem eager to hire.“Federal workers all across the country are starting to look, and it’s impacting people everywhere,” said Cory Stahle, an economist at the job search platform Indeed. “It’s hard to think this isn’t going to stress test the labor market in the coming months.”On the eve of the Trump administration, the federal government’s executive branch employed about 2.3 million civilians. It’s not clear how many of those will end up being cut, and how many will get their jobs back after lawsuits over those terminations work through the courts.But impact of the pace at which government spending is being slashed, along with instructions from the White House budget office for agencies to slice even deeper, could be meaningful.Are you a federal worker? We want to hear from you.The Times would like to hear about your experience as a federal worker under the second Trump administration. We may reach out about your submission, but we will not publish any part of your response without contacting you first.

    We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Hiring Slowed to 143,000 Jobs in January

    by

    U.S. employers added 143,000 jobs last month, somewhat fewer than forecast, while unemployment fell to 4 percent and hourly earnings rose.Can a labor market be hot and cool at the same time? That’s the picture painted by the latest federal hiring figures, which show a step down in job creation last month — as well as a drop in joblessness.Employers added 143,000 jobs in January, slightly fewer than expected, the Labor Department reported on Friday. But with large upward revisions to the prior two months and a decline in the unemployment rate to 4 percent, American workers still appear to be in good shape.“We have robust fundamentals, and relatively moderate hiring, but it’s very judicious,” said Gregory Daco, the chief U.S. economist with the accounting firm EY-Parthenon. “The unemployment rate is historically low, but frozen in the sense that you’re not seeing much churn — businesses are being cautious as to how they manage their work force.” More

  • 163 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    The report will revise figures from 2023 and 2024. Here’s what to know.

    by

    The Labor Department’s latest monthly report on hiring and unemployment will include revisions for previous months. The revised figures should provide a more accurate picture of the U.S. job market, but they could also sow confusion.The monthly job figures are based on two surveys, one of employers and one of households. Those surveys are generally reliable, but they aren’t perfect. So once a year, the government reconciles the numbers with less timely but more reliable data from other sources.Figures in the employer survey will be revised sharply downward to align with data from state unemployment offices showing that employers added hundreds of thousands fewer jobs in 2023 and 2024 than initially reported. The updated figures should show slower but still healthy job growth in those years.The other change applies to the household survey. It will reflect an updated methodology that the Census Bureau considers a better reflection of recent immigration in its population estimates. That will show up as a huge, one-month jump in virtually every measure that is based on them, and preclude comparisons with previous months. But measures based on ratios — like the unemployment rate and the labor force participation rate — should be mostly unaffected. More

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Friday’s Jobs Report Will Be Confusing. Here’s How to Make Sense of It.

    by

    The Labor Department’s January survey will include revisions making data for previous months look stronger in some cases and weaker in others.The Labor Department’s latest monthly report on hiring and unemployment will include revisions for previous months that should give a more accurate picture of the U.S. job market — but that could also sow confusion.When the data is released on Friday, one major measure of employment will be revised up. Another will be revised down. Some historical numbers will be revised, but others won’t. And the updates, though part of a routine process, will be taking place in a political environment where both sides have at times expressed skepticism of government economic statistics.“There is going to be a massive amount of confusion,” said Wendy Edelberg, director of the Hamilton Project, an economic policy arm of the Brookings Institution.Here is what economists say you will need to know about the revisions to make sense of the numbers.The revisions are part of a longstanding annual process.The monthly job figures are based on two surveys, one of employers and one of households. Those surveys are generally reliable — they involve a number of interviews far larger than a presidential election poll, for example — but they aren’t perfect. And so, once a year, the government reconciles the numbers with less timely but more reliable data from other sources. Similar processes are in place for revising other government statistics, like gross domestic product and personal income.“Revisions are how statistical agencies achieve both timeliness and accuracy,” said Jed Kolko, who oversaw economic statistics at the Commerce Department during the Biden administration. “Near-real-time data like the jobs report later get revised to match other data sources that are more accurate but take longer to collect and publish.”The revisions being released on Friday were scheduled far in advance and will use methodologies that were announced ahead of time, allowing economists, including Mr. Kolko and Ms. Edelberg, to publish detailed forecasts of what the new figures will show.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 88 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Employers Add 256,000 Jobs in December

    by

    A December gain of 256,000 blew past forecasts, and unemployment fell to 4.2 percent. But markets recoiled as interest rate cuts seemed more distant.Employers stuck the landing in 2024, finishing the year with a bounce of hiring after a summer slowdown and an autumn marred by disruption.The economy added 256,000 jobs in December, seasonally adjusted, the Labor Department reported on Friday. The number handily beat expectations after two years of cooling in the labor market, and the unemployment rate edged down to 4.1 percent, which is very healthy by historical standards.The strong result — unclouded by the labor strikes and destructive storms of previous months — may signal renewed vigor after months of reserve among both workers and businesses. Average hourly earnings rose 0.3 percent from November, or 3.9 percent over the previous year, running well above inflation.“This employment report really crushes all expectations,” said Scott Anderson, chief U.S. economist at BMO Capital Markets. “It kind of wipes out the summer slump in payrolls we saw from June to August before the big Fed rate cut in September.”The apparent turnaround in employment growth, however, dampens chances of further interest rate cuts in the coming months. Investors already expect Federal Reserve officials to hold steady at their meeting in late January. For monetary policymakers, the robust growth means that additional easing could reignite prices and stymie progress on inflation.“The Fed is like, ‘We think this is a good labor market, we want to keep it that way, we don’t want it cooling further,’” said Guy Berger, director of economic research at the Burning Glass Institute. “What they haven’t said is, ‘We want to heat the labor market back up.’”Unemployment rate More