Live data from Hacker News

U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

reuters.com

111–120 of 276 posts

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#111
post #11

All 3 stock indexes record high opening. Consumer confidence 20 year high. Enormous USMCA trade deal finally passed by US Congress after the House sat on it for a year. Reuters just salivating over finding something they can spin as negative about the current economy.

>Enormous USMCA trade deal finally passed by US Congress after the House sat on it for a year.

The House didn't sit on it. It has been undergoing the normal process. USMCA is replacing NAFTA. NAFTA took six years to negotiate and ratify.

So far, USMCA has taken about two.

The final negotiations weren't even finished until mid-December.

Mexico ratified the final version of USMCA last month after negotiations had ended, and Canada has yet to vote on it.

If anyone has been telling you that the House has been holding things up, they are either wrong or deliberately lying to you.

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#112
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ummm what are pension funds?

Indeed, "what are pension funds"? I don't have a pension. No one I know personally has a pensions. The younger or non-tech people I know have little to none in their 401k.

No one in tech has a pension.

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Technologists live in a world of negative unemployment I would amend that to say: "Many technologists live in a world of frequently negative unemployment"

That won't last forever. I know Mozilla and Digital Ocean just had layoffs.

... and there are many many HR departments going on a hunt for these people that got laid off

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#114

This happened yesterday: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-16/u-s-to-ch... I can't help but see a relationship here between bad economic news and attempts to curb the release of such.

It looks like you're completely misinterpreting this change.

Status quo ante: big media get advance access in a closed room to the new economic news, with electronics to prepare stories and prepare optimized communications to friends.

New procedure: big media still get advance access in a closed room to the new economic news, but without the electronics.

How is this an attempt to curb the release of bad economic news?

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#115
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ummm what are pension funds?

Indeed, "what are pension funds"? I don't have a pension. No one I know personally has a pensions. The younger or non-tech people I know have little to none in their 401k.

Worse, many of those with pensions find themselves one day without one... Look at the hundreds of bankrupt orgs that have somehow, been able to simply walk away from their obligations. The only people who hold pensions these days are govt workers. People who do not contribute to the economy.

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#116
post #11

All 3 stock indexes record high opening. Consumer confidence 20 year high. Enormous USMCA trade deal finally passed by US Congress after the House sat on it for a year. Reuters just salivating over finding something they can spin as negative about the current economy.

Except, of course, as people are finally starting to notice and point out, high stocks only benefit the top 10% of society, and are a useless indicator for the vast majority, who have little to no holdings.

That 10% number has certainly been making the rounds, almost like a talking point. However, that’s literal nonsense.

> People are finally starting to notice and point out.

Incorrectly.

Every person in America with a pension or a retirement account has significant exposure to the stock market. Universities and their endowments, which make institutionally awarded need based financial aid possible directly benefit from the stock market. Casualty (and other) insurance companies directly benefit from the stock market which affects their profitability and thus their ability to write policies at reasonable rates; it also affects the reinsurance market which can mean the difference between a large housing development being built or not, or a new industrial plant opening or not.

This “only benefits the top 10%” talking point is so ridiculous as to not be worthy of comment, but since it keeps popping up from people who have a political interest in talking down the economy, it should be addressed before more people actually start to believe that tripe.

The origin of that “10%” number was from a CNBC report that said “the richest 10% own 85% of individually traded stocks.” However that statistic conveniently excludes mutual funds — which generally consist of a basket of individually traded stocks packaged together. So if I own $1 million in a Fidelity mutual fund, I am not considered as owning “individually traded stocks.” So, to use that “only benefits the top 10%” number, then that would say that the stock market doesn’t benefit me because I only own shares in a mutual fund. Which is complete baloney.

When Trump calls out fake news, this is exactly the kind of thing he’s referring to: a statement that a rising market only benefits the top 10% because they own 85% of individually traded stocks — while that is completely false because everyone that owns shares of a mutual fund (the majority of American families in fact,) doesn’t benefit.

And your statement “the vast majority” don’t own stocks, that’s also a lie, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/266807/percentage-americans-own...

Even if Gallup was off by 10%, which would be a huge margin or error, that’s still nowhere close to a “vast” majority. Now to be fair, you did stick in a qualifier there “little” but that is meaningless. How much is “little?” And how do you know how prevalent “little” vs. “none” is? It’s just a meaningless distraction to protect against the fact that the majority of Americans own stock and even those that don’t own stock benefit from a good economy. Very low unemployment means tighter labor market which means wage competition.

It would seem that the economy could be absolutely perfect but those of different political stripes would be wishing its downfall just to win an election. Didn’t Bill Maher or one of those hosts actually wish for a recession so it would make it easier to beat Trump? Some sick people that would wish for people to lose their jobs and homes in order to beat Republicans.

We can have honest policy debates. But let’s not trade in misrepresentations to win political points.

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#117
post #16

This happened yesterday: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-16/u-s-to-ch... I can't help but see a relationship here between bad economic news and attempts to curb the release of such.

That works other way too. The Media baron running for President influencing the framing of standard bureaucratic changes. We only see, what we want to see!

The AP has more context about this: https://apnews.com/cde6768a1c300c7d167f19f676d0d515

The FT also gives useful analysis: https://www.ft.com/content/e3ec2f00-3886-11ea-a6d3-9a26f8c3c...

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A coworker told me he thinks as long as people think it might crash it won’t crash.

Or the crash may be a slow burn crash. Like bitcoin. Heck after 2.5 years, the price is still 50% higher than it was.

Or we could stagnate for 30 years, like Japan, and be forced to start drawing down before it has a chance to grow. You don't get a Mulligan.

The current fetishisation of index funds - which I am entirely complicit in - seems to be based on drawing long-term extrapolations from a relatively short timescale in a relatively narrow market which didn't actually have funds that tracked indices, saw the rise of modern computing, and followed the most destructive wars in the Western world.

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#119
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what percentage of the poorest 50% of Americans have even $5,000 in any kind of retirement savings?

With platforms like robinhood, and the trend toward lowering the bar to investment, even people like me ( <3% of income is "disposable" (which in and of itself probably isnt true as I have student debt)) can start doing SOME investment. Ive been poor my whole life, and have made a point since my teens to keep savings. Only recently did I begin investing however. This is a result of benig surrounded by people who don'…

I'm curious by how you define being 'poor' since you say you had savings as a teen.

When I was a teen, being poor meant that even if you put that $12 away for another day, it'll just be used the next day to fill your tank. It's not really saving money if you're just putting off buying gas for your car.

Re: U.S. job openings post biggest drop in more than four years

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good god, is this supposed to be ironic? Imagine trying to paint Reuters as biased. Next thing you’ll be telling me that the Associated Press is biased as well. And really? USMCA? You mean NAFTA 2.0? Imagine acting like “passing” USMCA has any meaning. It’s just NAFTA. Tell me when we pass the TPP. Oh wait, we messed up and now that ship has sailed without us. This is news whether you like it or not. Sorry, there is…

Most news organizations are biased one way or another. About 90% of reporters are left of center, that probably also applies to Reuters. They do keep the spin to a minimum, I’ll give them that.

> About 90% of reporters are left of center

How would one even go about defining what center is? And when we say "left of center," how far to the left are we talking about?

Post reply on HN