Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

(June 2025) U.S. payrolls increased 139,000 in May, more than expected; unemployment at 4.2%

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by ETGator, Jun 6, 2025 at 8:45 AM.

  1. ETGator

    ETGator Long-Time Gator Stuck In East Tennessee Moderator VIP Member

    15,050
    9,540
    3,213
    Sep 15, 2007
    Once again, the lesser ADP Report from Wednesday had commentators like Cramer of MSNBC wringing their hands . . . which means today's numbers were almost guaranteed to be better than what Cramer predicted. LOL! :)

    U.S. payrolls increased 139,000 in May, more than expected; unemployment at 4.2%

    They have beaten expectations for several months now.

    All the guarantees we kept hearing of a pending recession? I don't hear them as much.

    However, I remind everyone these numbers can fluctuate month to month.

    Still, for now, still good news.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  2. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    32,363
    2,148
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    Mostly because the government has backed down or paused the things people were saying would lead to recession. "TACO" has been Trump's best economic move. The courts might even kill the tariffs altogether.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. G8tas

    G8tas GC Hall of Fame

    6,129
    1,121
    553
    Sep 22, 2008
    Thankfully Trump keeps backing down which is helping. What happened to all of the right wingers jumping in threads saying "lets wait for the revised numbers" that we used to see every month for 4 years?

    The March and April numbers were revised down btw
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. ETGator

    ETGator Long-Time Gator Stuck In East Tennessee Moderator VIP Member

    15,050
    9,540
    3,213
    Sep 15, 2007
    The numbers from the previous month often are revised down as more data becomes available.
     
  5. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    32,363
    2,148
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    Another underrated development was the SCOTUS saying the Fed was unlike all those other agencies where the president can fire whoever he wants whenever he wants, trying to preempt a fight with the Fed. Will it work? Who knows.
     
  6. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    32,363
    2,148
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    They were revised down for the last two months in this case FWIW
     
  7. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    18,321
    2,384
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    I think the thread title needs to be adjusted to reflect the 95k in downward revisions for the last two months.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2025 at 9:12 AM
  8. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    18,321
    2,384
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Not usually by 95k over those two months (adjustments used to be about 50% up and 50% down, post-Covid, they are about 2/3 down and 1/3 up). That is a pretty massive downward revision.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2025 at 9:12 AM
  9. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    32,363
    2,148
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    I remember in the Obama years people leaving the work force was supposed to be bad (Republicans were making the argument and questioning the unemployment methodology), that is why unemployment stayed stable. I have no judgement on whether those people exiting the workforce is good or bad. I'm sure there are plenty of federal employees opting for early retirement or siting on their buyouts for awhile and the like.
     
  10. ETGator

    ETGator Long-Time Gator Stuck In East Tennessee Moderator VIP Member

    15,050
    9,540
    3,213
    Sep 15, 2007
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    18,321
    2,384
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    It is funny when you try to deflect by comparing apples (regular adjustments for the prior two months as numbers are finalized) with suspension bridges (data carefully selected from the larger adjustments made during the multi-year adjustment processes that come up every few years to account for new methodologies).

    BTW, is there somebody here who can change your thread title to reflect my commentary on the regular monthly adjustments? It is only fair and would increase the accuracy of the thread title....
     
  12. ETGator

    ETGator Long-Time Gator Stuck In East Tennessee Moderator VIP Member

    15,050
    9,540
    3,213
    Sep 15, 2007
    The title is accurate. I took it straight from the CNBC article, same as I usually do.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    11,969
    1,511
    1,718
    Apr 8, 2007
    Massive downward revisions to the March and April report, overestimated by 95,000 jobs... I bet this report will be the same...
     
  14. dangolegators

    dangolegators GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 26, 2007
    That 139k jobs becomes 44k jobs when you subtract the March and April revisions from it. And if May is revised like March/April, it becomes negative jobs.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. ETGator

    ETGator Long-Time Gator Stuck In East Tennessee Moderator VIP Member

    15,050
    9,540
    3,213
    Sep 15, 2007
    This monthly Report has inherent issues but it's the widest anticipated and used. The details can tell you a lot more than just the headline number usually. One thing that has been happening for awhile: the differences between full-time and part-time workers.

    [​IMG]

    The trend has been to lose full-time jobs and many of those people take 2 or even 3 part-time jobs. Again, full-time workers went down while part-time workers increased. That's a huge problem as I see it. Families trying to make ends meet with multiple part-time jobs (usually no health insurance or other benefits).

    I just follow this monthly and we can look back and see, historically, what patterns emerge.
     
  16. gator_jo

    gator_jo GC Hall of Fame

    4,451
    429
    273
    Aug 9, 2024
    Yeah, JP Morgan recently reduced the probability of a US recession from 60% to 40%. They also cite Trump's signature "policies" as one of the main reasons for economic weakness.

    Of course, the weak jobs report this thread references makes it seem possible that we'll see the likelihood of recession revised back upward.

    Good job, Donny?



    The probability of a recession has fallen to 40%
    May 27, 2025
    • J.P. Morgan Research has reduced the probability of a U.S. and global recession occurring in 2025 from 60% to 40%.
    • However, a period of sub-par growth could lie ahead, especially as the U.S. tariff shock could still be material.

    What Is the Probability of a Recession? | J.P. Morgan Research
     
  17. dangolegators

    dangolegators GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 26, 2007
    Kinda goes to show how resilient the US economy is if it can withstand all the uncertainty, incompetence, and wild policy swings of the Trump admin without going into recession. I still think 2025 will be a weak year for the economy. Whether it's a recession year remains to be seen.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    90,902
    27,359
    14,613
    Apr 3, 2007
    That happens.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. ETGator

    ETGator Long-Time Gator Stuck In East Tennessee Moderator VIP Member

    15,050
    9,540
    3,213
    Sep 15, 2007
    Those kinds of analysts tell you, with reasonable certainty (and straight faces), the market is definitely going up from here . . . unless of course something happens and it comes down. I skipped the report when I saw his takeaway:

    2025-06-06 at 18.01.11.jpg
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  20. gator_jo

    gator_jo GC Hall of Fame

    4,451
    429
    273
    Aug 9, 2024
    The stock market really isn't the same thing as the economy though, is it?*

    And you denied all credibility of the JP Morgan report when it referenced headwinds to the economy? Interesting. You haven't been paying attention to Donald Trump's back and forth tariff plan irrational chaos then, I take it?


    * To be fair, analysts probably are factoring in another round of the same thing we saw in Trump's first pseudo-presidency; deficit-funded, debt-exploding tax cuts** (mostly to the rich) which will boost the economy in the immediate term, but will obviously have to be paid off later. By someone else, that is. Ya know - the Trump way.


    ** These tax cuts are also probably expected to fuel gains in the stock market as they will again largely be going to the rich and corporations. We'll probably see a repeat of huge amounts of stock buybacks. Just more evidence that anyone referencing headwinds to the economy, but expecting gains in the stock market has credibility. They've seen this happen before, after all.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2