US created lower-than-expected 156,000 jobs in September

Job creation edged lower in September as the labor market showed there still may be room to run.

Nonfarm payrolls increased 156,000 for the month and the unemployment rate ticked up to 5 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday. Economists surveyed by Reuters had expected 176,000 new jobs and the jobless rate to hold at 4.9 percent. The total was a decline from the upwardly revised 167,000 jobs in August (compared with the original number of 151,000).

"This is within the broad range of expectations," said Mark Hamrick, senior economic analyst at Bankrate.com. "The main point is, slow and steady does win the race for this recovery, which began in the summer of 2009."
Average hourly wages pushed higher, rising 6 cents to an annualized rate of 2.6 percent. The average work week also inched up one-tenth to 34.4 hours.


A broader measure of unemployment that includes those who have stopped looking for jobs as well as those working part-time for economic reasons was unchanged at 9.7 percent.

The number of workers considered not in the labor force fell by 207,000 to 94.2 million, the number in the labor population surged by 444,000 and the level of the employed jumped by 354,000, according to the household survey. The employment-to-population ratio rose to 59.8 percent, a half-percentage point gain from a year ago.
Professional and job services led the way with 67,000 new jobs while health care added 33,000 and restaurants and bars contributed 30,000.

The report comes at a critical time for the Federal Reserve as the U.S. central bank looks to resume getting rates back to normal. The Fed last hiked rates in December, the first such move in more than nine years. However, it has held off since then amid a variety of global and domestic concern.

Traders expect the Fed to hike again in December.

"This is a solid number," Cleveland Fed President Loretta Mester told CNBC. "This is very consistent with what we expected to see, certainly with my forecast."

Traders pushed chances for a December rate hike higher, from 63.9 percent prior to the payrolls report to 70.2 percent afterward.

Get the market reaction here.

Odumbass' cum dumpsters are now suppose to post and defend their lord and master

Why? You didn't attack anything, fool.

Why did you find the article interesting?

DId you read it?

Where did you find it?

See how this works?

Why? You didn't attack anything, fool.

Why did you find the article interesting?

DId you read it?

Where did you find it?

See how this works? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Sure I did...we need 250,000 jobs created per month. We didn't get what we need, that is bad. Is it my fault you are too fucking stupid to know that?

Since we are asking a whole fucking bunch of questions, let me ask why you think sheep are companion animals?

Charts are from the bureau of labor statistics. Obama:

...and Hack-In-A-W-Bush:

...and Hack-In-A-W-Bush: Originally Posted by Prolongus

Hey you stupid cocksucker, what do you know about labor participation rates and income growth?

I'll bet nothing...

You are always on your knees swallowing whatever jizz your liberal masters shoot down your throat...

You're a sucker...

Sure I did...we need 250,000 jobs created per month. We didn't get what we need, that is bad. Is it my fault you are too fucking stupid to know that?

Since we are asking a whole fucking bunch of questions, let me ask why you think sheep are companion animals? Originally Posted by Marshall2.0

There's always talk about job creation which I believe is a farce. I am yet to see anything that states who created these jobs, what type of jobs were created and how many were filled. I also don't see any evidence of the unemployment rate changing in accordance with job creation. I've come to the conclusion that job creation generated by the Government doesn't exist.

Jim

So what was the purpose of this thread? There have been some good months of employments and some bad. What's the overall Unemployment rate?

The high rollers must be spending their money on the election instead of job creation.

More people entered the workforce during September.

Hey you stupid cocksucker, what do you know about labor participation rates and income growth?

I'll bet nothing...

You are always on your knees swallowing whatever jizz your liberal masters shoot down your throat...

You're a sucker... Originally Posted by Marshall2.0

What do you know about statistics, DICKBREATH? Truth hurts...like a barbed wire fence post up your PUSSY, Marshall Dickbreath.

More people entered the workforce during September.

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Typical little dipshit. How about posting the entire article that graph came from.

Jim


http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/13/news...-of-the-union/

What do you know about statistics, DICKBREATH? Truth hurts...like a barbed wire fence post up your PUSSY, Marshall Dickbreath. Originally Posted by Prolongus

But Bunghole, you left out this statistic

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...ion-rate-drops

Yep, almost 1/3 of the population quit looking for work ProlapsedBunghole. And you're not a Libertarian voting for Gary Johnson. You're a puke libtard voting for Clinton. But so is Bill Weld Bunghole!!!!!!! What a dumbfuck.

So what was the purpose of this thread? There have been some good months of employments and some bad. What's the overall Unemployment rate? Originally Posted by Luke_Wyatt

Go fuck yourself, and stop wasting everyone's time and spamming threads with your ignorance. The rate is mentioned in the OP. Learn to fucking read, you moron.