*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
July 2015 update for THIS REPORT found HERE.
July 2015 update for THIS REPORT found HERE.
July 2015 numbers were released Friday, August 7. Details HERE.
******************************************************************
July 2015 numbers were released Friday, August 7. Details HERE.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
All other jobs reports (2011 through 2014) indexed HERE
How Many Jobs Were Lost or Created in all of 2012?
The numbers listed below are those for January 2012. For latest reports, please click one of the links above.
How many jobs have been lost or gained during the Obama administration? Have more new jobs been created or have more jobs been lost since Obama took office in 2009 to date, 2012?
How has Obama done on jobs?
3,165,000 gained since "trough" of recession.
How Has Obama done on private-sector jobs?
3,663,000 gained since the "trough" of the recession.
How many jobs have been lost or gained during the Obama administration? Have more new jobs been created or have more jobs been lost under Obama to date?
Summary: We are still in negative territory in terms of the number of jobs since Obama took office. We still have 1,152,000 FEWER jobs now than when Obama was inaugurated and 549,000 FEWER jobs in the private sector than when Obama was inaugurated.
However, we are now adding jobs at a fair clip, with 159,000 MORE jobs total added per month since December 2010, and 181,000 MORE jobs added per month in the private sector since December 2010.
Here's a summary of data from the BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics). All numbers lost to the "trough" of the recession reflect ALL non-farm jobs lost between the time Obama took office and the lowest point of the recession in late 2009/early 2010 :
Note: All of the jobs numbers are NET numbers. In other words, we know that jobs are lost and added every month, in good years and in bad. The numbers reported here, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers, are "net" numbers; that is, the number of jobs gained after the number of jobs lost is subtracted. Or the number of jobs lost after the number of jobs gained is added.Seasonally adjusted:
- All jobs lost from the time Obama took office to "trough" (bottom of recession): .....4,317,000
- All jobs gained since "trough": ....3,165,000
Net LOSS in seasonally-adjusted jobs since Obama took office: ....1,152,000
"Raw:" numbers not seasonally adjusted:
- Jobs lost from the time Obama took office to trough: .....4,246,000
- Jobs gained since "trough": .....2,954,000
Net LOSS in raw unadjusted jobs since Obama took office: .....1,292,000
How many private sector jobs have been gained or lost since Obama took office?
Seasonally adjusted:
- Private-sector jobs lost to "trough" (bottom of recession): .....4,212,000
- Private-sector jobs gained since "trough": .....3,663,000
*(This is the number often used by Obama and the Democrats as the number of private jobs created since the "trough" of the recession . It is a correct number, but it is a seasonally-adjusted number. In "real" unadjusted numbers, 3,470,000 private sector jobs have been created since the "trough" of the recession.)
Net LOSS in seasonally-adjusted private-sector jobs since Obama took office: ....549,000
"Raw:" numbers not seasonally adjusted:
- Private-sector jobs lost to "trough": .....4,151,000
- Private-sector jobs gained since "trough": .....3,470,000
Net LOSS in "raw" unadjusted private-sector jobs since Obama took office: .....681,000
Breakdown of private and government jobs lost and gained? HERE!
Jobs increased 243,000 in total in January 2012 (vs. an increase of 203,000 in December). Private sector jobs continued to increase while government sector jobs continued to decrease. Private sector jobs increased by 257,000 (vs. 220,000 in December), while government jobs decreased by 14,000 (vs. a decrease of 17,000 in December).
Is it true that over 2 million private sector jobs have been created in the Obama administration as the Democrats claim?
Yes, if one is looking at numbers created from the bottom ("trough") of the recession. In fact, that number is now low. In seasonally adjusted numbers as of January 2012, 3,663,000 private-sector jobs have been created since the bottom of the recession. (Remember that job loss continued for about a year after Obama was inaugurated.)
How many workers have been laid off or hired (net) during the Obama administration?
Seasonally adjusted:
- Fewer people working (net) to "trough" : .....4,219,000
- More people working (net) since "trough": ....3,669,000
Net LOSS in seasonally-adjusted number of people working since Obama took office: .....1,550,000
"Raw:" numbers not seasonally adjusted:
- Fewer workers to "trough": .......3,627,000
- More workers since "trough": .....3,135,000
Net LOSS in "raw" unadjusted number of people working since Obama took office: .....492,000
Can you summarize the above?
- Obama was inaugurated in January 2009 when the economy was in free fall and we were losing about 700,000 jobs a month. Over 4,400,000 jobs were lost before Obama took office.
- The employment situation did not bottom out until late 2009 or early 2010. An additional 4,300,000 jobs were lost between the time that Obama took office and the bottom ("trough") of the recession.
- That's a total job loss of at least 8,700,000 jobs over approximately 2 years.
- Since the economy started to add jobs under Obama, 3,165,000 jobs have been added using seasonally-adjusted numbers (See below).
- Since the economy started to add jobs under Obama, 2,954,000 jobs have been added using "real" unadjusted numbers.
- We still need many more jobs to overcome the loss of jobs that started in 2008 and to make up for the increase in population since 2008. Over 49,000,000 people were laid off in gross numbers between Spring of 2008 and the end of 2009. (This number comes from the monthly JOLTS (Job Openings, Layoffs, and Turnover Survey). See bottom of post).
How did you come up with these numbers? Why isn't there one number instead of all of these?
Counting jobs or workers is very tricky. In seasonal numbers, we have still lost more jobs and workers in the first year of Obama's administration, when the economy was struggling to pull out of recession, than we have gained during the second and third years of Obama's administration when we have experienced job growth. We are still running a jobs/workers deficit of up to 1,500,000 in seasonally-adjusted numbers since Obama took office.
Job growth was brisk in the first months of 2011, slowed down towards the middle of the year, then picked up during the last months of the year. However, job growth, particularly private sector job growth, continued throughout 2011. We now have 23 months of private sector job growth.
There's usually no one number that explains everything, and most monthly numbers need to be seen as "trends", not absolutes. People use the unemployment rate, but even that can vary for so many reasons that don't really reflect the true state of the labor market.
A few explanations and more detail:
What is a "trough"? When did we hit the low point of jobs and workers? When did we hit the high point of unemployment?
I use the term "trough" to designate the lowest point of jobs or workers in this recession. The various counts reach their "troughs" in various months, so it may be a bit confusing. The unemployment rate reached its high point in October 2009. The seasonally adjusted number of workers reached its low point in December 2009, but so many workers had dropped out of the work force that the unemployment rate had actually come down. In raw, unadjusted numbers of workers and jobs, we reached our nadir in January 2010. The seasonally-adjusted number of jobs reached its low point a month later, in February 2010.
How Many Jobs were Lost from the time Obama took office until the "trough" of jobs lost?
- In seasonally adjusted numbers, employers reported 133,561,000 jobs in January 2009. At the trough of the recession in February 2010, there were 129,244,000 jobs. That's a loss of 4,317,000 jobs from the time Obama took office until the "trough" of the recession.
- In "raw" numbers (not adjusted for seasonal variances), employers reported 131,555,000 jobs in January 2009. At the trough of the recession in January 2010, there were 127,309,000 jobs. That's a loss of 4,246,000 jobs from the time Obama took office until the "trough" of the recession.
- In seasonally adjusted numbers, 142,187,000 people reported themselves as employed in January 2009. At the trough of the recession in December 2009, 137,968,000 people reported themselves as employed. That's a loss of 4,219,000 employed people from the time Obama took office until the "trough" of the recession.
- In "raw" numbers (not adjusted for seasonal variances), 140,436,000 people reported themselves as employed in January 2009. At the trough of the recession in January 2010, 136,809,000 people reported themselves as employed. That's a loss of 3,627,000 employed people from the time Obama took office until the "trough" of the recession.
What was the unemployment rate when Obama took office? How high did it go?
- For the record, when Obama took office in January 2009, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers was 7.8%, with 12,049,000 people reported themselves as unemployed and actively looking. In "raw" numbers not adjusted for seasonal variance, the unemployment rate was 8.5% with 13,009,000 people reporting themselves as unemployed and actively looking for work.
- At the trough of the recession in late 2009/early 2010, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers was 10.0% in October 2009 with 15,421,000 people (out of a labor force of about 153,822,000) reporting themselves as unemployed. In "raw" numbers not adjusted for seasonal variance, the unemployment rate reached a peak of 10.6% in January 2010 with 16,147,000 (out of a labor force of about 153,000,000) reporting themselves as unemployed and actively looking for work.
- Now, in January 2012, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers is 8.3%, a decline of .2% (two-tenths of a percent) since December 2011 with 12,758,000 (out of a labor force of 154,895,000) reporting themselves as unemployed. In unadjusted "raw" numbers, the unemployment rate is now 8.8%, an increase of .5% (five-tenths of a percent) compared to the unadjusted unemployment rate in December 2011. (This increase in the unadjusted "raw" unemployment rate is normal for any month of January. In fact, an increase of .5% is the lowest increase in the unadjusted "raw" unemployment rate in the month of January since 2005. It may mean that employers did not terminate as many seasonal workers in January as is usual.)
How many jobs have been created since the "trough" of the recession in late 2009/early 2010 to now, January 2012?
- In seasonally adjusted numbers, 3,165,000 jobs have been created since the "trough" of the recession in February 2010.
- In raw unadjusted numbers, 2,954,000 jobs have been created since the "trough" of the recession in January 2010.
How many more people reported they were working since the "trough" of the recession in late 2009/early 2010 to now, January 2012?
- In seasonally adjusted numbers, 3,669,000 more people are working since the trough of the recession in December 2009.
- In "raw" unadjusted numbers, 3,135,000 more people are working since the trough of the recession in January 2010.
Where does the number 49,000,000 laid off between spring 2008 and the end of 2009 come from?
- The BLS publishes a monthly JOLTS (Job Openings, Layoffs, and Turnovers Survey). It shows the number of people hired, the number laid off, the number of people who quit, and the number of job openings reported by employers every month.
- The numbers are gross numbers. In some seasonal jobs, people can get laid off and rehired several times during a year. Each of those layoffs and hires would be counted as an additional layoff or hire.
- The JOLTS series at this link should provide a graph which shows the number of layoffs over the past ten years. The table at the bottom shows that 24,181,000 people were laid off in total in 2008, and 26,784,000 received pink slips in 2009. Notice that these are much higher numbers than before 2008 or since 2009.
(Note: All of my employment number reports are based on monthly reports and data published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Monthly numbers reports are based on the monthly Employment Situation Report. The Employment Situation report includes month over month and year over year numbers of jobs and workers. My analysis is taken from the monthly BLS data copied to an Excel spreadsheet every month. I calculate detailed percentage increases/decreases, 3 month numbers, 2011 to date numbers, and I compare jobs numbers to those at the time of Obama's inauguration and at the "trough" of the recession. As the BLS revises its numbers as new information is available, I use the latest available numbers in my monthly articles, which means that those numbers may differ slightly from numbers published in previous months.)
Wow, well done and understandable. Thanks
ReplyDeleteIt is clear that spending has increased dramatically since President Obama took office. We can assume that the extra spending stimulus is attributed to creating some of the jobs.
ReplyDeleteHow much is the tax payer on the hook in additional debt for each job created?
Cost to the tax payer per job saved or created?
ReplyDeleteAbout $312,000 per job.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/cost-obamas-stimulus-plan-312500-job-vote-created-or-saved-and-guess-who-paying-it
Since Obama took office? Where were you during the Bush years? Please... don't come here and spew such absurd stuff. And it would have been much better, much more American to let people starve, wouldn't it?
ReplyDeleteI'm not going to get into the cost per job of the jobs plan (that the Repubs refused to pass anyway as they do want people to starve)..
Zerohedge has a snotty comment about the tax increases associated with the jobs plan: "You know anyone making over 200K a year is very wealthy" Yep. Anyone making over 200K a year is doing very, very well and should shut up and stop trying to convince himself and everybody else that he "earned" it all.
But I digress.
I'm not an expert on the Prez' jobs proposal, but I certainly do think that there is a value in improving our infrastructure.. it's called "investment". But I guess you don't understand that concept?
I know many, many people who benefited from the ARRA program, and they were able to spend money and buy things and help their family members who weren't doing as well during the worst of the recession two years ago. I'm not sure that any of those benefits.. those "third party" benefits were added into the counts for these various jobs programs. That's the whole Keynes thing... It's not just the direct recipients who benefit, but it's their neighbors, families, friends, workers, etc.
Middle Molly, you state . . . . "Please... don't come here and spew such absurd stuff." Then follow it with . . . . "I'm not going to get into the cost per job of the jobs plan (that the Repubs refused to pass anyway as they do want people to starve).."
ReplyDeleteJust as you agree you are not an "expert" in the Pres. job proposal . . . I am not an "expert" in hypocrasy . . . but . . . I know it when I read it. Nice job, "middle" Molly :-(
People who spew garbage about Obama spending and don't look at the spending in the context of Bush, the two unfunded wars, the catastrophic recession that was left to Obama and the Dems to fix are indeed spewing absurdity.
ReplyDeleteI'm not getting into the cost per job, because, as I tried to explain, it is next to impossible to calculate. And I personally know too many people who have been helped by stimulus work. Also, much of the stimulus was tax cuts and other programs that didn't directly create jobs. Many of the jobs that were created were involved with actually improving public buildings and infrastructure. How do you value improved infrastructure to a country?
The only way to really calculate the value of a stimulus is to estimate what the GDP would have been without such a stimulus and what it actually was. I'm not even going to estimate that.
Middle Molly, you do realize that a BIG part of the "Stimulus" was Bailout money for companies like GM and banks. If we wouldn't have given them this taxpayers money then they would have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, which lets them restructure and frees them up from paying their creditors for a while. The exact same effect would have happened but we wouldn't have wasted taxpayers money on it. How does this add value to the stimulus?
ReplyDeleteTax Cuts? All he did was extend the current tax rates that were going to expire. He did nothing to cut them. Check it out for yourself.
You can't restructure if you have no assets or capital. Bankruptcy does not mean that a company survives, and without an infusion of capital (which wasn't happening), it's unlikely that GM or Chrysler would have survived.
DeleteI suppose the payroll tax cuts do not count. I believe a Chapter 11 bankruptcy discharges all debt and nothing has to be paid back..it is a Chapter 13 bankruptcy that is a structured debt that has to be repaid over a period of time. The Stimulus Money was distributed to each state to use for infrastructure improvements/repairs etc. The TARP created during the Bush Administration and carried out by President Obama was used to "bail" out banks/Wall Street. I do believe that one stipulation was the TARP payment was to be paid back and this occurred though not all of it.
ReplyDeletePresident Obama was for allowing the tax cuts run out for those with a high income but not the middle class. However, the Norquist Pledger Republicans were all for defining the end of a tax cut as an increase and we know how they feel about tax increases.
Amazing that you can get put down on the internet just for posting some numbers and facts! Thanks for this info, wish it were up to date. I was looking at jobs in terms of some other things. Namely, the cost per taxpayer of corporate welfare (compared to cost per job created). Corporate welfare also costs the taxpayer about $302,000 according to the rather conservative Cato Institute, so it may be more, depending on what qualified as corporate welfare, to them. Dunno about you, but I'd rather be "paying" to create jobs than paying for bonuses to Fortune 500 CEO's. :) I've also been examining jobs from the point of view of USA's income inequality problem. These jobs that are being created are not being created due to the wasteful Bush tax cuts, which have been in effect for years (2000, I think) and we still bottomed out. The idea behind these cuts was that it would help the so-called "job creators" create jobs. To the contrary, "job creators" laid people off while collecting bonuses from the stimulus. :( I am glad to see that jobs are on the rise. I believe that unemployment will slowly recover, as well. Obama has done much for community colleges, but he needs to help university student costs, as well as primary education costs for the states. Only education will improve work conditions and jobs. Better stimulus plans in clean energy research would be good for our country, as well.
ReplyDeleteSorry, dagmatiqua, I just saw your comment today.. I don't know how I missed it, but I'm getting many comments and emails lately.
DeleteI will drop by in the next day or two to reply.
You say there are 157,000 jobs added every month. Well what happens to the 300,000+ first time jobless claims numbers every week? Do they cancle each other out? DA! NICE JOB DUD...
ReplyDeleteFlorida, first of all, this is an outdated post. The latest July numbers can be found HERE . August numbers will be released Friday.
DeleteI answer the question of the differences in first time unemployment claims and jobs numbers in several places. Try these posts:
They're Lying! 20 million people lost their jobs in 2011!
and Unemployment myths and mysteries
Fundamentally, weekly unemployment jobs are GROSS numbers. Monthly jobs numbers are NET numbers. In other words, every week, in good times and bad, people are laid off, and most of the people who are laid off file for unemployment. In every month, in good times and bad, some people are hired and some are fired.
When the number of people hired exceeds the numbers of people who are fired or who leave their jobs voluntarily, we have positive job growth, as we have had for the past 22 months. When the number of people fired or who quit exceeds the number of people who are hired, we have job loss. We haven't had job loss in total jobs since September 2010, when the last of the 2010 Census workers were laid off. We haven't had job loss in the private sector since February 2010.
People who don't understand these things are in danger of falling right into the Republican trap. I'm very glad you took the time to write and ask for an explanation.
Your number of 49,000,000 people were laid off between Spring of 2008 and the end of 2009. I can't substantiate that number anywhere. How did you arrive at that number?
ReplyDeleteThe information comes from the BLS JOLTS report (The Job Opening, Layoffs, and Turnover Survey). I added the information above in the post. Thanks for the question.
Delete