American Economics Thread

Sinnavuuty

Senior Member
Registered Member
If five of my web developer Chinese friends in Texas are saying that job market is bad, obviously there is significant bias in my personal annecdote. But when over 100 of them across 10 separate professions, four different ethnicities, both genders, three separate educational levels, 1-20 years of experience level, and eight different states are all saying that the market is bad, I think that it is more likely that some one has been fudging with the data.
All of these concerns were reinforced by Friday's jobs report; As Zero Hedge noted, the report told us that the US lost a staggering 438,000 full-time jobs last month:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Starting at the top, while the number of employed workers did rise by 168K, looking closer at the composition of this increase is disastrous: that’s because it consisted of an increase of 527K part-time jobs, offset by a 438K plunge in full-time jobs.

This means that since last June, the US has added just over 2 million part-time jobs, and lost over 1.5 million full-time jobs.
If you want a low-paying part-time job, it’s still pretty easy to find one. But high-paying jobs are disappearing fast. The president of a company that finds positions for white-collar workers says the market is in “bad shape” right now:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Economists largely agree that the labor market is “cooling,” but one recruiting industry veteran says that is a significant understatement.

Brian Howard is the founder and president of the Howard Group, a boutique search firm located in Overland Park, Kansas, that has been in business for more than 30 years, which companies hire to recruit candidates in an array of white-collar positions.

He said the job market is in “bad shape.”
I would say “bad form” is an understatement.

I came across an article about a man with an MBA who couldn't find a job despite applying to over 1,500 jobs:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Marcial Quinones, 48, used to have few problems getting jobs in the 1990s without a high school diploma. Now, after what he estimates is over 1,500 applications since the early 2010s, he can’t land any stable job in his field even with an MBA.

Quinones, a father of four who lives in rural eastern Pennsylvania, said he’s struggled to land a long-term job in tech or counseling. He has held part-time positions and built his own inventory software to sell to companies, though he rarely gets interviews, even after redoing his résumé two dozen times.
There are a lot of people looking for work right now. For many Americans, low-paying part-time jobs aren’t enough because the cost of living continues to rise. Thanks to the rising cost of living, the percentage of American households with children who are “food insecure” has reached a very alarming level:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Now, the inflation crisis under the Biden-Harris administration has intensified this issue even more. It was especially families with
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that suffered during Covid-19 as school lunches disappeared and they have been hardest hit again in 2022 and 2023.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
the USDA just published its
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on the issue, showing that last year, almost 18 percent of households where children lived were food insecure, up from 17.3 percent in 2022 and 12.5 percent in 2021.
In many of these families, at least one adult is actually working. But in many cases there is simply not enough money to cover even basic needs. Right now, American workers have so little disposable income that even dollar stores are really struggling:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Dollar Tree stocks plunged to a 9-year low earlier this week, after the chain delivered a disappointing earnings report.

Earlier this year, the company announced it would close 600 Family Dollar stores in 2024, after it struggled to integrate the chain into its business.

Dollar General, which is the biggest dollar store in the US and is located mostly in low-income, rural areas, also reported dismal sales last month and saw its stock plummet.
 

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Based on personal experience this job market is the worst i've experienced since I entered the work force 14 years ago.

If five of my web developer Chinese friends in Texas are saying that job market is bad, obviously there is significant bias in my personal annecdote. But when over 100 of them across 10 separate professions, four different ethnicities, both genders, three separate educational levels, 1-20 years of experience level, and eight different states are all saying that the market is bad, I think that it is more likely that some one has been fudging with the data.
Why are we trying to extrapolate struggles at the top of the payscale to the overall economy?

Higher interest rates, lower than projected profits, and an increasingly competitive environment has led to a more scrutinous hiring environment. This is not a bad thing. Moreover, this article really indicates a return to normal, and as the article's own data shows, white-collar hiring rates are almost always below blue-collar.

1725982592543.png

Or do you guys really think that what Intel and Boeing need are more executives? If we do suspect that the economy is on the edge, we should ask ourselves. Where is the tipping point? Which industry? Company? People like J.P. Morgan love to whine but his insituttion gives basically zero specifics.

Mind you this isn't the first time people have complained about the "bad economy". In hindsight, 2014-2019 were great economic times. Houses were more affordable and there was robust wage growth, but were people happy? Some economists, just like today, yes. Citing great economic figures, low unemployment, and solid economic growth (especially compared to Europe).

But others were whinging and writing doomer articles literally every day.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


And you can see this in data. Real income increased consistently, peaking in 2019.

1725985028957.png

In 2024 real wages are still higher than in 2007, right before the Great Recession. Similarly, people love to bemoan about the Labor Force Participation Rate, but objectively it has been recovering.

1725985112723.png

So yes, you can complain about how it's still below pre-pandemic levels, but logically speaking it's getting better relative to 2022, not worse. So really you should be talking about how United States is recovering rather than declining. Similarly, while hiring has cooled, CAPEX is up.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But let's look at the complaining about how BLS constantly "revises" figures. Frankly, that's a good thing. I don't really care about headlines.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Taking their latest report into consideration, a revision of -25,000 and -61,000 results in employment numbers going from over 300,000 down to just over 200,000. Is there anyone really who's gonna tell me that's a horrible number? But let's dig deeper. Are the gains outweighing the losses by industry?

1725985718566.png
1725985726389.png

Realistically speaking there are no huge losses, sectors are mostly stable with a slight decreases and slight increases depending on the industry, with big gains in some industries.

But again, I've heard these arguments before. "The jobs that are lost are high quality jobs, and the jobs that are gained are blue-collar jobs." That's literally all I've heard from the normal people in 2012-2019 as I went through college, started working professionally, and eventually settled down in government. Yet somehow we've ended up in a position where big companies, especially tech, have far more workers today than they did 5 years ago. Funny how that works.

Speaking more broadly and in a more general sense...

I think people need to be more objective about the numbers here. Unemployment is low, regardless of how fudged the numbers are, when there is a recession and unemployment is high you can actualy feel it. In a visceral way that impacts your bottom line besides feelings of pessimism. On the other hand, political and economic interests almost never acknowledge economic prosperity unless it is in their direct interest. After all, every 2 years the American electorate gets together to complain about everything wrong with the economy, foreign policy, their neighborhood, and how the other political party is responsible for it. Doesn't mean it's actually that way.

This does not mean that there aren't problems in United States. Every country has problems and United States is going through a particularly polarizing period of seeings its global influence decline while domestic issues have only gotten worse, but this isn't America's greatest challenge. Not even close. In the 1970s and 80s, United States was reeling from the triple whammy of the Vietnam War, end of the civil rights era, and crippling stagflation.

Guess who won the Cold War?

This explains to me why China is largely biding its time and not being confrontational in both the political and economic space. Which to me, suggests that the Chinese government is treating United States as an all powerful hegemon that took a stumble, not as a power that's about to collapse. Not even close. It is a clever and level-headed approach.

Now let's imagine for a second, for the sake of argument that Kamal Harris is actually hyper competent and Democrats win all three major chambers of the US Government that they can win. Does United States have the capacity to rejuvenate its military, to makes it social services solvent, to start fixing its industrial base, to make significant progress on homelessness, border security, drug crisis, and housing affordability?

Does United States the economic potential to do so? Of course.

Now let's, again as a thought exercise, imagine that Kamala Harris is just barely competent enough to steer the ship in the right direction on all of those things even if no significant progress is made. Would this not be a significant accomplishment in a mere 4 years? Just putting the ship on the right path would already make United States a much greater threat to China.

Now realistically, is that possibility realistic? To expect Kamala Harris to do just enough to put U.S. on the right trajectory? Of course it's realistic. After all, United States has healthy demographics, it has a huge economy and it has pretty decent economic growth. Consider just how incompetent Trump was. That's how low the bar is.

Now consider the strengths of the US Economy. United States can literally buy and import whatever it needs if it can't make something. United States can access any number of engineers it needs, it can entice any number of companies to do business in United States, and it can print endless money to afford it. The lingua franca of the world is also English and many aspire to immigrate to United States.
 

Attachments

  • 1725983256701.png
    1725983256701.png
    83.8 KB · Views: 3

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Now consider the strengths of the US Economy. United States can literally buy and import whatever it needs if it can't make something. United States can access any number of engineers it needs, it can entice any number of companies to do business in United States, and it can print endless money to afford it. The lingua franca of the world is also English and many aspire to immigrate to United States.
In general, I agree that the US is not some dying zombie that China can just wait out; its power is only waning in comparison to China, but not in absolute terms, so the only way to beat it is still to outgrow it economically and technologically.

However, from this last paragraph, it'd seem that it's invincible, while it is factually being overtaken or has already been overtaken by China in pretty much all critical tech fields. Can the US buy whatever it needs? It can't if it's a world-leading tech made in China with restrictions. It can cobble up all the technologies from its underlings but that is becoming less and less sufficient in the tech war. Can it access any number of engineers and/or companies? If it could, it could buy out the talent from under China and have the US lead in 5G, EVs, nuclear tech, heck it can buy them all up and leave China without enough engineers for anything, right? But it's not happening nor is there a path for it to happen. There are many who do not aspire to immigrate to the US and those are usually the highly vaunted and respected top scientists in China who are force-multipliers in the tech war.
 

proelite

Junior Member
Similarly, while hiring has cooled, CAPEX is up.

So basically you wrote all that to agree with me that the job market for white-collar jobs is bad.
Of course, companies overhired during the pandemic. That's why there is so much competition in the job market right now.
I've not said such competition is indicative of the overall economy. I believe there is an imbalance between people's expectations and the available opportunities in both China and US.
 

chgough34

Junior Member
Registered Member
Immigration to the US is not only about some “innate” level of human capital but about the improved environment that exists in the U.S. as compared to other countries - Jensen Huang simply could not have created Nvidia in Taiwan - the capital markets and talent depth and market scale simply don’t exist in Taiwan.

An example of this is that lower ranking math Olympiad scorers that migrate to the U.S. end up publishing more papers than higher ranking math Olympiad scorers that stay.

Human capital alone, simply isn’t enough, no matter how numerous. There are substantial other factors - agglomeration and scale effects, physical capital stock, firm management practices, the business environment, financial markets, among others that allow for any level of comemrcial success. And a substantial portion of human capital isn’t even formal education, it’s experience in the workforce, and the lack of firm scale and a bad business environment ends up having deleterious effects for decades into the future due to the lost experience/human capital.

 

SanWenYu

Captain
Registered Member
Higher interest rates, lower than projected profits, and an increasingly competitive environment has led to a more scrutinous hiring environment. This is not a bad thing.
LOL. All these is “not a bad thing” for the US but at the same time a disaster for China? China does not even have high interest rates. The principles in economics must have discrimination against the non-western nations.
 

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
LOL. All these is “not a bad thing” for the US but at the same time a disaster for China? China does not even have high interest rates. The principles in economics must have discrimination against the non-western nations.
What are you even talking about?
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Immigration to the US is not only about some “innate” level of human capital but about the improved environment that exists in the U.S. as compared to other countries - Jensen Huang simply could not have created Nvidia in Taiwan - the capital markets and talent depth and market scale simply don’t exist in Taiwan.

An example of this is that lower ranking math Olympiad scorers that migrate to the U.S. end up publishing more papers than higher ranking math Olympiad scorers that stay.

Human capital alone, simply isn’t enough, no matter how numerous. There are substantial other factors - agglomeration and scale effects, physical capital stock, firm management practices, the business environment, financial markets, among others that allow for any level of comemrcial success. And a substantial portion of human capital isn’t even formal education, it’s experience in the workforce, and the lack of firm scale and a bad business environment ends up having deleterious effects for decades into the future due to the lost experience/human capital.

For the bold part, that's not what that says. It says compared to migrants to other countries. That's not Chinese people who stay in China.

In general, this is correct. That's why India's unable to challenge China and the US, which supposedly has "unlimited" ability to draw global talent, is getting run down by China in the tech war. It's definitely not just population but the whole equation that makes China innovate faster than anyone else.
 
Last edited:
Top