Gallup: Job Creation Index Continues to Hit New Highs

[WVPATX]

US Job Creation Index Continues to Hit New Highs

by RJ Reinhart

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Gallup Job Creation Index stands at +37 for March
• This is the third consecutive month the index has reached a record high
• Job creation strongest in Midwest (+39) and South (+38)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Gallup Job Creation Index rose to +37 in March from +35 in February. This is the third month in a row the index has hit a new record high after remaining relatively flat for much of 2016.

Since the start of the year, the index has already increased by four points -- the same increase seen throughout all of 2016. However, the index typically rises during the first quarter of the year, with two- to three-point increases seen during this period in most years since 2010.

These latest data are based on March 1-31 interviewing as part of Gallup Daily tracking.

The Gallup Job Creation Index is based on employed U.S. adults' perceptions of whether their employer is hiring or letting people go. The index is computed by subtracting the percentage of those who say their employer is cutting jobs from the percentage of those who say their employer is adding jobs. In March, 46% of employees said their company was hiring, up from 44% in February. Meanwhile, the percentage who said their company was letting workers go held steady at 9%.

While the index does account for the quality or types of jobs added or lost, or whether they are full or part time, it does provide one perspective on general hiring conditions in the U.S.

Job Creation Strongest in the Midwest and South

In March, the Job Creation Index was +39 in the Midwest, with the South following close behind at +38 -- setting record highs for both regions and making the Midwest the strongest region for job creation in the U.S. for the second consecutive month. The West, at +36, has lagged behind the Midwest and South for the past two months.

Job creation was weakest in the East in March, with the region scoring +29. The East has fallen behind the three other regions since November. Additionally, the East has trailed behind the rest of the country in 11 out of 15 months since January 2016. During that period, the East averaged an index score of +30, two points behind the South and four points behind the West and Midwest.

Workers' reports of hiring at their workplaces in the East have either been the lowest or tied for the lowest of all four regions since September. Only once between January 2016 and March 2017 did reports of hiring in the East rise to the top of the four regions -- 44% in August 2016 -- though the region tied that month with the Midwest and the South.

Bottom Line

The continued record highs in the Gallup Job Creation Index coincide with several positive economic signals. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' job creation estimates for January and February both exceeded expectations. Additionally, while currently down from record highs, the stock market has performed well over the past several months, and the Nasdaq composite ended the first quarter of 2017 with its best performance since 2013.

While the country as a whole has experienced record-high job creation, it has not occurred evenly across the country. The East has lagged behind other regions for at least seven months, with employers there reportedly hiring fewer new employees than in other areas.

These data are available in Gallup Analytics.

Gallup.com reports results from these indexes in daily, weekly and monthly averages and in Gallup.com stories. Complete trend data are always available to view in the following charts:

Daily: Employment, Economic Confidence, Consumer Spending

Weekly: Employment, Economic Confidence, Job Creation, Consumer Spending

Read more about Gallup's economic measures.

View our economic release schedule.

 

[atlkvb]

US Job Creation Index Continues to Hit New Highs

by RJ Reinhart

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Gallup Job Creation Index stands at +37 for March
• This is the third consecutive month the index has reached a record high
• Job creation strongest in Midwest (+39) and South (+38)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Gallup Job Creation Index rose to +37 in March from +35 in February. This is the third month in a row the index has hit a new record high after remaining relatively flat for much of 2016.

Since the start of the year, the index has already increased by four points -- the same increase seen throughout all of 2016. However, the index typically rises during the first quarter of the year, with two- to three-point increases seen during this period in most years since 2010.

These latest data are based on March 1-31 interviewing as part of Gallup Daily tracking.

The Gallup Job Creation Index is based on employed U.S. adults' perceptions of whether their employer is hiring or letting people go. The index is computed by subtracting the percentage of those who say their employer is cutting jobs from the percentage of those who say their employer is adding jobs. In March, 46% of employees said their company was hiring, up from 44% in February. Meanwhile, the percentage who said their company was letting workers go held steady at 9%.

While the index does account for the quality or types of jobs added or lost, or whether they are full or part time, it does provide one perspective on general hiring conditions in the U.S.

Job Creation Strongest in the Midwest and South

In March, the Job Creation Index was +39 in the Midwest, with the South following close behind at +38 -- setting record highs for both regions and making the Midwest the strongest region for job creation in the U.S. for the second consecutive month. The West, at +36, has lagged behind the Midwest and South for the past two months.

Job creation was weakest in the East in March, with the region scoring +29. The East has fallen behind the three other regions since November. Additionally, the East has trailed behind the rest of the country in 11 out of 15 months since January 2016. During that period, the East averaged an index score of +30, two points behind the South and four points behind the West and Midwest.

Workers' reports of hiring at their workplaces in the East have either been the lowest or tied for the lowest of all four regions since September. Only once between January 2016 and March 2017 did reports of hiring in the East rise to the top of the four regions -- 44% in August 2016 -- though the region tied that month with the Midwest and the South.

Bottom Line

The continued record highs in the Gallup Job Creation Index coincide with several positive economic signals. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' job creation estimates for January and February both exceeded expectations. Additionally, while currently down from record highs, the stock market has performed well over the past several months, and the Nasdaq composite ended the first quarter of 2017 with its best performance since 2013.

While the country as a whole has experienced record-high job creation, it has not occurred evenly across the country. The East has lagged behind other regions for at least seven months, with employers there reportedly hiring fewer new employees than in other areas.

These data are available in Gallup Analytics.

Gallup.com reports results from these indexes in daily, weekly and monthly averages and in Gallup.com stories. Complete trend data are always available to view in the following charts:

Daily: Employment, Economic Confidence, Consumer Spending

Weekly: Employment, Economic Confidence, Job Creation, Consumer Spending

Read more about Gallup's economic measures.

View our economic release schedule.

Don't post positive news like this PAX, you might cause some Leftists who are sure Trump's a failure already to run up their psychological counseling bills!

 

[atlkvb]

US Job Creation Index Continues to Hit New Highs

by RJ Reinhart

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Gallup Job Creation Index stands at +37 for March
• This is the third consecutive month the index has reached a record high
• Job creation strongest in Midwest (+39) and South (+38)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Gallup Job Creation Index rose to +37 in March from +35 in February. This is the third month in a row the index has hit a new record high after remaining relatively flat for much of 2016.

Since the start of the year, the index has already increased by four points -- the same increase seen throughout all of 2016. However, the index typically rises during the first quarter of the year, with two- to three-point increases seen during this period in most years since 2010.

These latest data are based on March 1-31 interviewing as part of Gallup Daily tracking.

The Gallup Job Creation Index is based on employed U.S. adults' perceptions of whether their employer is hiring or letting people go. The index is computed by subtracting the percentage of those who say their employer is cutting jobs from the percentage of those who say their employer is adding jobs. In March, 46% of employees said their company was hiring, up from 44% in February. Meanwhile, the percentage who said their company was letting workers go held steady at 9%.

While the index does account for the quality or types of jobs added or lost, or whether they are full or part time, it does provide one perspective on general hiring conditions in the U.S.

Job Creation Strongest in the Midwest and South

In March, the Job Creation Index was +39 in the Midwest, with the South following close behind at +38 -- setting record highs for both regions and making the Midwest the strongest region for job creation in the U.S. for the second consecutive month. The West, at +36, has lagged behind the Midwest and South for the past two months.

Job creation was weakest in the East in March, with the region scoring +29. The East has fallen behind the three other regions since November. Additionally, the East has trailed behind the rest of the country in 11 out of 15 months since January 2016. During that period, the East averaged an index score of +30, two points behind the South and four points behind the West and Midwest.

Workers' reports of hiring at their workplaces in the East have either been the lowest or tied for the lowest of all four regions since September. Only once between January 2016 and March 2017 did reports of hiring in the East rise to the top of the four regions -- 44% in August 2016 -- though the region tied that month with the Midwest and the South.

Bottom Line

The continued record highs in the Gallup Job Creation Index coincide with several positive economic signals. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' job creation estimates for January and February both exceeded expectations. Additionally, while currently down from record highs, the stock market has performed well over the past several months, and the Nasdaq composite ended the first quarter of 2017 with its best performance since 2013.

While the country as a whole has experienced record-high job creation, it has not occurred evenly across the country. The East has lagged behind other regions for at least seven months, with employers there reportedly hiring fewer new employees than in other areas.

These data are available in Gallup Analytics.

Gallup.com reports results from these indexes in daily, weekly and monthly averages and in Gallup.com stories. Complete trend data are always available to view in the following charts:

Daily: Employment, Economic Confidence, Consumer Spending

Weekly: Employment, Economic Confidence, Job Creation, Consumer Spending

Read more about Gallup's economic measures.

View our economic release schedule.

You also will not see this story posted anywhere in the MSM. nope sorry, doesn't "fit" the agenda.

 

[op2]

US Job Creation Index Continues to Hit New Highs

by RJ Reinhart

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Gallup Job Creation Index stands at +37 for March
• This is the third consecutive month the index has reached a record high
• Job creation strongest in Midwest (+39) and South (+38)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Gallup Job Creation Index rose to +37 in March from +35 in February. This is the third month in a row the index has hit a new record high after remaining relatively flat for much of 2016.

Since the start of the year, the index has already increased by four points -- the same increase seen throughout all of 2016. However, the index typically rises during the first quarter of the year, with two- to three-point increases seen during this period in most years since 2010.

These latest data are based on March 1-31 interviewing as part of Gallup Daily tracking.

The Gallup Job Creation Index is based on employed U.S. adults' perceptions of whether their employer is hiring or letting people go. The index is computed by subtracting the percentage of those who say their employer is cutting jobs from the percentage of those who say their employer is adding jobs. In March, 46% of employees said their company was hiring, up from 44% in February. Meanwhile, the percentage who said their company was letting workers go held steady at 9%.

While the index does account for the quality or types of jobs added or lost, or whether they are full or part time, it does provide one perspective on general hiring conditions in the U.S.

Job Creation Strongest in the Midwest and South

In March, the Job Creation Index was +39 in the Midwest, with the South following close behind at +38 -- setting record highs for both regions and making the Midwest the strongest region for job creation in the U.S. for the second consecutive month. The West, at +36, has lagged behind the Midwest and South for the past two months.

Job creation was weakest in the East in March, with the region scoring +29. The East has fallen behind the three other regions since November. Additionally, the East has trailed behind the rest of the country in 11 out of 15 months since January 2016. During that period, the East averaged an index score of +30, two points behind the South and four points behind the West and Midwest.

Workers' reports of hiring at their workplaces in the East have either been the lowest or tied for the lowest of all four regions since September. Only once between January 2016 and March 2017 did reports of hiring in the East rise to the top of the four regions -- 44% in August 2016 -- though the region tied that month with the Midwest and the South.

Bottom Line

The continued record highs in the Gallup Job Creation Index coincide with several positive economic signals. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' job creation estimates for January and February both exceeded expectations. Additionally, while currently down from record highs, the stock market has performed well over the past several months, and the Nasdaq composite ended the first quarter of 2017 with its best performance since 2013.

While the country as a whole has experienced record-high job creation, it has not occurred evenly across the country. The East has lagged behind other regions for at least seven months, with employers there reportedly hiring fewer new employees than in other areas.

These data are available in Gallup Analytics.

Gallup.com reports results from these indexes in daily, weekly and monthly averages and in Gallup.com stories. Complete trend data are always available to view in the following charts:

Daily: Employment, Economic Confidence, Consumer Spending

Weekly: Employment, Economic Confidence, Job Creation, Consumer Spending

Read more about Gallup's economic measures.

View our economic release schedule.

That graph must be wrong, after all it says things were getting worse when W was POTUS and then got better when Obama was POTUS. That contradicts everything WVPATX has ever posted on here, doesn't it?

 

[atlkvb]

That graph must be wrong, after all it says things were getting worse when W was POTUS and then got better when Obama was POTUS. That contradicts everything WVPATX has ever posted on here, doesn't it?

I didn't read that. I saw everything prior to June of 08 better than the majority of Obama's years until roughly September of 2014.

 

[WVPATX]

That graph must be wrong, after all it says things were getting worse when W was POTUS and then got better when Obama was POTUS. That contradicts everything WVPATX has ever posted on here, doesn't it?

No, your reading comprehension is very, very poor. Obviously, Obama inherited a financial mess created by both parties in government and by the private sector.

Obama's answer to the crisis was to continue Bush's TARP program and to add a few disasters of his own:

$850B stimulus that even liberal economists says did not work and that Obama acknowledged the shovel ready jobs were not shovel ready.

Cash for Clunkers, which did not work.

Obamacare, which obviously did not work.

Raising taxes.

Dramatically increasing job killing regulations.

Crush energy to achieve a .001% drop in global warming.

Increase the deficit by nearly $10T, more than all prior Presidents combined.

We have always come out of recession throughout our history. In fact, the recession officially ended in June, 2009. But we had anemic economic growth, the poorest since WWII. And Obama was only the 4th President in history to never achieve even one year of 3% GDP growth or more.

Using your argument, you could make the case that Bush was better for the economy than Clinton. After all, Bush inherited a recession. And later in Bush's term, we grew the economy at a faster rate than Bush inherited. But that is not how we judge economic performance under a President.

Obama's economic record is now history. And history has not been kind to our economic performance under Obama.

 

[atlkvb]

No, your reading comprehension is very, very poor. Obviously, Obama inherited a financial mess created by both parties in government and by the private sector.

Obama's answer to the crisis was to continue Bush's TARP program and to add a few disasters of his own:

$850B stimulus that even liberal economists says did not work and that Obama acknowledged the shovel ready jobs were not shovel ready.

Cash for Clunkers, which did not work.

Obamacare, which obviously did not work.

Raising taxes.

Dramatically increasing job killing regulations.

Crush energy to achieve a .001% drop in global warming.

Increase the deficit by nearly $10T, more than all prior Presidents combined.

We have always come out of recession throughout our history. In fact, the recession officially ended in June, 2009. But we had anemic economic growth, the poorest since WWII. And Obama was only the 4th President in history to never achieve even one year of 3% GDP growth or more.

Using your argument, you could make the case that Bush was better for the economy than Clinton. After all, Bush inherited a recession. And later in Bush's term, we grew the economy at a faster rate than Bush inherited. But that is not how we judge economic performance under a President.

Obama's economic record is now history. And history has not been kind to our economic performance under Obama.

You took care of Op2 better than I did Pax. I just read the graph you posted he obviously missed or didn't know how to read.

No matter, his false assertion is still just as wrong.

 

[moe]

US created only 98,000 jobs in March, vs 180,000 expected
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/07/march-nonfarm-payrolls.html

 

[WVPATX]

US created only 98,000 jobs in March, vs 180,000 expected
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/07/march-nonfarm-payrolls.html

US Job Creation Index Continues to Hit New Highs

by RJ Reinhart

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Gallup Job Creation Index stands at +37 for March
• This is the third consecutive month the index has reached a record high
• Job creation strongest in Midwest (+39) and South (+38)

More importantly, I will wait to judge his economic performance after his programs are passed. Much, much too early although consumer and business optimism is very high, much higher than under Obama.

 

[atlkvb]

US created only 98,000 jobs in March, vs 180,000 expected
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/07/march-nonfarm-payrolls.html

moe, when Obama had just 90,000 jobs created it was "celebrated" on the Left and by the Media. I saw no one deadpanning that it should have been 200,000 instead of less than 100,000.

So why this post? I thought you guys on the Left were all for "expanding" the middle class?

 

[op2]

"Cash for Clunkers, which did not work."

I don't know if Cash for Clunkers worked or not. Who cares, it was a small minor thing.

"Obamacare, which obviously did not work."

Obamacare worked better than what was in place before. It's still going to be replaced and maybe what they replace it with will work better yet or maybe not.

"Dramatically increasing job killing regulations."

That's an ironic thing to post in a thread that you started and that had a graph in the OP showing how job creation improved consistently throughout Obama's reign.

"Crush energy to achieve a .001% drop in global warming."

Crush energy? Really? Energy is thriving like never before.

"Increase the deficit by nearly $10T, more than all prior Presidents combined."

The exaggeration on the amount aside, it was cute how you thought you could compare raw numbers for POTUSs throughout history and not have anybody notice such a comparison was bogus. I guess that means can say Obama is one of the top POTUSs for creating jobs since he created more jobs than most other POTUSs (no matter that he had a larger base to build from) and that more technology was created under Obama than under any other POTUS (no matter that he was POTUS during a time when technology was being invented at a high rate no matter who was POTUS).

What matters in terms of deficit is its amount relative to GDP.

 

[atlkvb]

"Cash for Clunkers, which did not work."

I don't know if Cash for Clunkers worked or not. Who cares, it was a small minor thing.

"Obamacare, which obviously did not work."

Obamacare worked better than what was in place before. It's still going to be replaced and maybe what they replace it with will work better yet or maybe not.

"Dramatically increasing job killing regulations."

That's an ironic thing to post in a thread that you started and that had a graph in the OP showing how job creation improved consistently throughout Obama's reign.

"Crush energy to achieve a .001% drop in global warming."

Crush energy? Really? Energy is thriving like never before.

"Increase the deficit by nearly $10T, more than all prior Presidents combined."

The exaggeration on the amount aside, it was cute how you thought you could compare raw numbers for POTUSs throughout history and not have anybody notice such a comparison was bogus. I guess that means can say Obama is one of the top POTUSs for creating jobs since he created more jobs than most other POTUSs (no matter that he had a larger base to build from) and that more technology was created under Obama than under any other POTUS (no matter that he was POTUS during a time when technology was being invented at a high rate no matter who was POTUS).

What matters in terms of deficit is its amount relative to GDP.

Op2, the entire fallacy of your post is your assumption that Presidents create jobs and deficits.

Neither is true. They do promote the environment that either encourages or grows both, but no President "creates" jobs, and no President "creates" debt.

Obama did preside over deficits, (some of his commission due to failed policy priorities) and he did preside over some economic expansion (but much less than at any other time in our history)

However there is not one job he created, or one penny he proposed to spend that wasn't created or spent by either consumers & businesses in the private sector or Congressional appropriators spending money sent into them by U.S. taxpayers.

It's no different for Trump either. All he's doing is creating the environment where the private sector can grow and generate revenue for the Government.

 

[WVPATX]

"Cash for Clunkers, which did not work."

I don't know if Cash for Clunkers worked or not. Who cares, it was a small minor thing.

"Obamacare, which obviously did not work."

Obamacare worked better than what was in place before. It's still going to be replaced and maybe what they replace it with will work better yet or maybe not.

"Dramatically increasing job killing regulations."

That's an ironic thing to post in a thread that you started and that had a graph in the OP showing how job creation improved consistently throughout Obama's reign.

"Crush energy to achieve a .001% drop in global warming."

Crush energy? Really? Energy is thriving like never before.

"Increase the deficit by nearly $10T, more than all prior Presidents combined."

The exaggeration on the amount aside, it was cute how you thought you could compare raw numbers for POTUSs throughout history and not have anybody notice such a comparison was bogus. I guess that means can say Obama is one of the top POTUSs for creating jobs since he created more jobs than most other POTUSs (no matter that he had a larger base to build from) and that more technology was created under Obama than under any other POTUS (no matter that he was POTUS during a time when technology was being invented at a high rate no matter who was POTUS).

What matters in terms of deficit is its amount relative to GDP.

1. Cash for Clunkers did not work
2. Obamacare did not work. It did not bring down costs. It hurt job creation pretty dramatically. People lost their doctors, their hospitals, their insurance plans, etc.
3. U6 unemployment under Obama averaged over 10%. U6 takes into account those that quit looking for jobs and those that wanted full time jobs but could only find part time (see Obamacare for part of this reason). More importantly, Obama inherited a financial mess and as I said, we always recover from recession. So his job creation numbers will look good given the very low base with which he started. Just as Bush's won't look good because his Presidency ended with a recession and lost jobs. Also, Obama's labor participation rate was atrocious. More importantly, his GDP growth rate is simply terrible.
4. Obama's EPA greatly helped to kill coal as Obama promised. Oil and gas did very well on private lands that Obama could not touch. It did not do nearly as well on public lands and actually tanked.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/15/oil-gas-production-federal-land-tanked-under-obama/

5. You can make whatever excuses you want for the amount of debt piled up by Obama. It was enormous, simply enormous. The stimulus of $850B carried forward with Reid's use of continuing resolutions. Obama will go down in history as the largest creator of debt in our history. Beyond dispute.