Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 366 posts

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#301

Post by octo888 »

zzgo wrote: post #247
giantg2 wrote: post #145

I'm about to lose my job too. The job market looks terrible.

I've been unemployed for months. In the last couple of weeks, I've been rejected for jobs as a pool cleaner, shelf stocker, and a state job requiring me to check multiple email accounts and watch security cameras. I've also recently been rejected as an overnight courier and software tester. Whatever you imagine the job market to be like, I assure you it's worse.

Shelf stacking requires psychometric tests, another online test, a group assessment, individual assessment then 3 hours of free labour on the shop floor for another assessment! What world are we living in

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#302

Post by bgnn »

issafram wrote: post #256

I used to have multiple recruiters reach out to me daily on LinkedIn regarding software engineering positions. And this was for multiple years. That hasn't been the case for the last 3 or 4 months. None of this surprises me and it shouldn't for others.

It's crazy hot now in semiconductors. Anyone with couple of years experience is approached by recruiters daily.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#305

Post by fendy3002 »

ajmurmann wrote: post #166
shafyy wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even better one: real wages, and income and wealth inequality.

Why does wealth inequality matter? If my real wealth doubles and Elon's real wealth doubles, inequality went up, yet everyone is tremendously better off. I think we are using inequality as a very bad proxy for poverty but we have much better metrics for that. I suspect people just dislike it for emotional reasons. I want to point out that Sweden has more billionaires per capita than the US. Yet everyone is fine with…

it matters when "something" become scarce that normal person need to compete with the richests to get, or if one day the richests decided they want something and suddenly those things become scarce. Let's not kid ourselves, majority of politics can be bought by billionaires and when some day fresh waters become scarce or wheat is, it'll be monopolized by the richests. We already get this in some way with housing.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#306

Post by kranke155 »

pixl97 wrote: post #97
kranke155 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the incentive. There is a reason the media focuses on easily juiced metrics.

Add in that most media companies these days are a branch of large corporations and it's easy to see where their incentives lie.

It’s always been the case, save for rare exceptions (ie early internet) that the rich and powerful own the means of information.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#307

Post by kranke155 »

ajmurmann wrote: post #179
kranke155 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the incentive. There is a reason the media focuses on easily juiced metrics.

That is part of it but it goes beyond it. I have a group of friends who are pretty much all nerds and every once in a while we end up discussing how desirable different countries are to live in. Because we are nerds metrics will be pulled out. You just need to look at so much and depending what you personally care about things can be very misleading just because you scoped some metrics wrong. It's not obvious to ever…

Yes but there are less easily juiced metrics, which no government or media company likes to talk about, because they are less easily juiced.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#308

Post by StackRanker3000 »

ajmurmann wrote: post #166
shafyy wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even better one: real wages, and income and wealth inequality.

Why does wealth inequality matter? If my real wealth doubles and Elon's real wealth doubles, inequality went up, yet everyone is tremendously better off. I think we are using inequality as a very bad proxy for poverty but we have much better metrics for that. I suspect people just dislike it for emotional reasons. I want to point out that Sweden has more billionaires per capita than the US. Yet everyone is fine with…

Sweden has more billionaires per capita, because it’s fairly friendly to businesses and there have been quite a few success stories over the last century.

The US however have more millionaires per capita and SUBSTANTIALLY more people in poverty per capita.

Sweden’s Gini coefficient is 0.276 (2024), the US’ is 0.418 (2023). The US has a lot more income inequality.

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#309

Post by StackRanker3000 »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #267
ajmurmann wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does wealth inequality matter? If my real wealth doubles and Elon's real wealth doubles, inequality went up, yet everyone is tremendously better off. I think we are using inequality as a very bad proxy for poverty but we have much better metrics for that. I suspect people just dislike it for emotional reasons. I want to point out that Sweden has more billionaires per capita than the US. Yet everyone is fine with…

Lots of leaps of logic here. I'm certainly not fine with Sweden having a higher disparity of wealth but I don't live in Sweden so I can't effect much change there. We're also ignoring how many safety net benefits Sweden provides its population, ostensibly because it reasonably taxes its wealthy. If Swedes are ok with their situation, it's probably because it's being handled adequately. The issue with disparity is it'…

Just to be clear, I don’t think it’s fair to say that Sweden has higher disparity of wealth than the US: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44453264

Re: Private sector lost 33k jobs, badly missing expectations of 100k increase

#310

Post by robertlagrant »

hx8 wrote: post #70
darth_avocado wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Median disposable household income is probably the best measure If I used to make $78k as a full time IT employee, but now have to work two jobs to make $78k, I still have same household income but I’m considerably worse than before. A combination of hours worked, wages earned and household debt together would paint a much more accurate picture.

I'm not sure household debt is a great indicator. Someone that has a mortgage will have much more household debt than a renter, but also not have to pay rent. This would need data to contextualize.

Similarly debt that got you a medical degree is different to debt on a shiny new car. A subsistence farmer in the DRC might have less debt than a college graduate, but that doesn't matter if the college graduate's earning prospects are excellent.

(No comment on the current reality of medical debt, of course. Just a general principle.)

Post reply on HN