A quick note on today’s employment situation report:

Consensus of 90 economists surveyed by Bloomberg is for additional 165,000 workers for February (January was 157,000 gain) . The jobless rate is expected to hold steady at 7.9%, although a potential improvement would not surprise me.

Note that ADP numbers were very good: 198k private sector jobs added in February, almost 20k above consensus. January was revised upwards by another 23,ooo, making the private sector gains for the 1st month of the year 215k. Consider that ADP 2 month average to start the year of 207k compares quite favorably versus the 2012 average of 144k. (Note ADP’s correlation with BLS is spotty at best)

As always, I am watching Hours worked, Wages, and Temp help. This month, watch the revisions as well.

My guess? I have no opinion . . .

~~~

Employment situation report released at 8:30am

 

 

UPDATE: Payrolls added 236k; Unemployment falls to 7.7%

Category: Employment

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

8 Responses to “NFP Day: Consensus 165k”

  1. stonedwino says:

    Good news, I guess, but I don’t get “The Big Picture”….If we look at the “real” economy, there is very little connection between what we see on Wall Street and the supposed improvement in the labor market, yet the real economy and retail sales are seemingly going nowhere fast. What’s you take BR?

  2. mathman says:

    Meanwhile, overhead, day in and day out some group is spraying toxic chemicals (all around the world) into the air to keep the planet cool and wet for another day with no regard for the effect on trees, the ocean, the effect on the climate or us. It’s called ge-engineering and it’s happening without any consensus, testing (including analysis) or afterthought for consequences (and it’s been going on for quite a while:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FDoW8sJ7HMI#

  3. Mentalist says:

    Rick Santelli is quite a character. On Cnbc’s panel this morning, Rick implied the jobs report numbers should help make a case for the fed to stop with QE. Nothing wrong with having that viewpoint at all. I just find it interesting that he sides with the numbers when it seems to support his personal view in regards to the feds actions but called them “fishy” when released right before the presidents re-election. Aren’t the same metrics being used? His comment to the panel about keeping the “hammer and sickle” on the flag in referring to fed policy was hilarious.

  4. VennData says:

    Fishy!? It’s an Asian Carp from these Chicago guys I tell you. Lies. Lies. Lies.

    – Jack Welch

  5. Mike in Nola says:

    So are the big numbers a good news = bad news item for equities?

    Everyone pretty much agrees that QE3 is propping up equities so anything bringing the end of QE3 closer could be a negative.

  6. CSF says:

    A solid report though not stunningly good. Hours worked up .1 hours. Pay up a little. Some decent construction jobs added. On the other hand, the labor force shrank, so not much animal spirit yet. The 236K new jobs aren’t much higher than the 200K added in Feb 2012., and remember that job gains really slowed last spring. Seasonal adjustment issues? Time will tell. At any rate, I don’t think this report tells the Fed to reduce QE any time soon.

  7. tenaciousd says:

    This can only mean one thing. You better start hiring now, employers, before it becomes a laborers’ market. Hire now of be priced out forever!

  8. albnyc says:

    The loss of FT jobs and rise of PT paints a less rosy picture, unless I’m reading them wrong. Also drop in participation rate. A job is a job, if you’re counting them for the BLS, I guess, but not so if you need to make a living.