Live data from Hacker News

US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

bloomberg.com

291–300 of 376 posts

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#291
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US would lose out significantly if this were applied by everyone worldwide. The whole of Europe + Anglosphere have surrendered their whole tech related sectors to US companies, an enormous wealth transfer.

Most US tech related companies are actually headquartered in Ireland (for tax purposes)

> Most US tech related companies are actually headquartered in Ireland (for tax purposes)

Regional headquarters. That helps with their taxes in Europe. It wouldn't work to avoid taxes on money made in the US.

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#292
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really is this simple and this chart of Net Worth Held by the Top 0.1% demonstrates it well - https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WFRBLTP1246

That chart seems to demonstrate that there was a lot of inflation in the early 2020s, which I assume is not your point.

You thought that graph mirrored inflation? That $4 in 2000 was $24 today?

I find that difficult to believe.

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work for a regional manufacturing company in the US and we have been booming since COVID (nearly doubling every year) and have not seen a slow down. Manufacturing firms seem to be doing really well, here (midwest US).

This is all dependent on the company owners. A multi-million dollar company I help start, in the Midwest USA, had manufacturing, customer service, R&D, and shipping all in the same state. After being bought by Texas VCs, everything moved out of the area. They don't want to run and build a business, they want to make X millions in Y years. To do this, manufacturing moved to South Korea, customer service to some Asian…

> Jobs are not being lost because of unskilled people, they are being lost to help the rich get richer.

Indeed, imagine you're part of the wealthy elite. What you want is to be able to move your cash around the world, chasing cash growth. You also want yourself to be able to travel wherever you wish with your Gulfstream. Why would they care about local midwest job growth ?

Solutions exist, but it's too communist.

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#294
post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how this chart can be true at all. Does this include ghost listings?

Very likely which is the point of the ghost jobs and gives the illusion that the OP is falling for. Companies (especially publicly traded ones) do not want analysts at banks or hedge funds using their careers page as a good / bad signal. Therefore, it is cope.

Fake job listings, possibly, but doubt. Fake low unemployment too?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE

OK, how about employment, if the jobs are fake, this should be down:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYEMS

"Cope" is ignoring every stat that disagree with what you want to believe. We aren't in a great economy, It looks like it is flattening, but not bad, not shrinking, and there is an abundance of jobs.

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#295
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Half the US" very rarely means "slightly less than half of the states in the US" without any qualifiers. And yes, Moody's Analytics chief economist is generally known for making wildly inaccurate predictions. Regardless, your take on all of this is what I called doomer FUD, which goes well beyond Zandi's take.

Nice - anything to offer up other than name calling? Do you have any ideas of your own related to the displayed data and narrative?

Sure, I already offered some thoughts up-thread.

And I didn't call the parent poster any names, just pointed out that the assessment he was relying on was nonsensical (and probably designed solely to generate ad revenue and brand awareness) and his conclusions were extremely pessimistic compared to the consensus.

Should I have invented my own biased metric (maybe based on land mass since very few of the larger US states are experiencing a recession based on the source provided) as a counterpoint?

What are your ideas concerning the displayed data and narrative?

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#296
post #259
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Half the US" very rarely means "slightly less than half of the states in the US" without any qualifiers. And yes, Moody's Analytics chief economist is generally known for making wildly inaccurate predictions. Regardless, your take on all of this is what I called doomer FUD, which goes well beyond Zandi's take.

You’re getting very worked up arguing about a 6% difference. Please grow up. You can call people doomers all you want, but that doesn’t change the fact that the economy is getting worse.

I'm not worked up about anything, just pointing out that a contrived metric isn't all that meaningful but feeds into the preconceived notions of people like the parent poster who seem to love to submit drive-by comments about how terrible everything is.

The economy is not doing great. That doesn't mean the "economy is completely fucked and we are in a race to steal and horde all the data before people catch on", which is an absurd statement on numerous levels.

And don't tell me to grow up, especially when you've completely missed the point.

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FOMO. https://www.axios.com/2025/08/21/ai-wall-street-big-tech Have we forgotten this? It'll find its niche, but it isn't yet a truly transformative one.

That is a lot pressure to put on a conjunction. It is up there along with 'it will never be'. In all seriousness ( and some disclosure ), I like this tech so I am mildly biased in my stance. That said, I almost fully disagree with yours. As much as I dislike Nadella, his last blog entry is not that far off. Using LLMs for stuff like email summaries is.. kinda silly at best. The right use cases may have not emerged ye…

"it already has been transformative.."

Yea, at being a search interface. But what else? Not that it can't be, but the failure rate for AI is absurd right now. What happens if it collapses and all its used for is answering questions on your phone and maybe better search of your emails? That seems to be a real and probably likely outcome. What then? Ironically, I think it will improve the economy because there are a lot of decisions that are on hold until we know what LLMs will be used for. Probably isn't going to be good for SEs either way.

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#298
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The writing is on the wall for AI. It is coming fast and it is transformative. That your company is still trying to ramp up AI adoption and processes for 2026 supports my point. But we've been blaming AI for a couple years now, yet I suspect it's still too early in the adoption curve to have a meaningful impact on hiring compared to more boring explanations.

Even if AI wasn't being used for daily tasks by general employees, it's being used by HR and staff sourcing firms to sort through applications, so it already has had a large (negative) impact on hiring. Maybe we should do an "Ask HN" for those in HR or adjacent roles to poll for experiences there.

"it's being used by HR and staff sourcing firms to sort through applications"

I think you are correct, but is anyone happy about the current situation? I suspect it will change and that change very likely will intentionally not involve AI. I suspect it will be an economic solution, not a technological one.

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give a few examples, please. Also, I'm curious, what you feel you're getting out of your support of the Trump regime?

The first that comes to mind was the Keystone XL Pipeline. Biden cancelled it with EO 13990 when it was pretty much done. Would have been thousands of jobs, Canada wanted it too, it's safer than trucking/transporting by train. All just cancelled on a whim. Then there's EO 14008 that put a moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands and offshore waters. (fed land is 25% of oil production) Regardless of your…

> The first that comes to mind was the Keystone XL Pipeline.

> Biden cancelled it with EO 13990 when it was pretty much done.

I'll admit to not being an expert on the Keystone XL Pipeline, but at least according to the timeline on wikipedia[1], the reason Biden was able to cancel it with an executive order was because Trump had approved it with an executive order, after people had tried and failed for years to get it approved the proper way (through the legislative and executive branches).

And even when Trump personally tried to make it happen, there were still years of court battles stopping construction, so when Biden came into office and ended it, it was in fact not "pretty much done" but apparently 8% done[2]

Seems like it again comes back to Trump just doing what he wants, and it was in fact him trying to unilaterally make it happen that caused that last four years or so of disruptions?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#History

[2] https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-keystonepipelinexl...

Re: US Job Openings Decline to Lowest Level in More Than a Year

#300
post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> engaging in centralized economic planning for giant bets on AI If they're centralizing economic planning on that, then there's probably at least some economic planning that they would be doing to keep a relatively stable regulatory regime in place. Which, y'know, isn't the case. Ultimately the world has reached a point where social systems in both business and government are run the same way. Probably because they'…

There were purges aplenty during the Communist times, to make way for loyalist bureaucrats. What's taking place is the incipience of not just a stable regime but a calcified one. - A non-independent monetary authority - A Department of Labor that uses data from a single private vendor instead of its own payroll tax records and surveys to measure unemployment - A pro-monopoly consumer protection bureau scaling back un…

> There were purges aplenty during the Communist times, to make way for loyalist bureaucrats. What's taking place is the incipience of not just a stable regime but a calcified one.

If it were calcified, you'd probably have a lot more willingness to bet on a business decision being profitable. There'd be a very obvious, solid understanding of market rules and there would be little likelihood of them changing.

The problem with Trump - well, in this regard; there are plenty of others - is that he is used to operating as an absolute monarch, with his previous "kingdom" being the Trump Organization. That kingdom existed purely for his benefit and there wasn't really any consideration of peers like you'd have with actual kings who rule over countries with societies and borders. The only decisions he had to make right were the ones benefitting him, and whether or not they did that was quite evident.

Now he's a leader of a country that does have borders and a society. There are parties with interests that he must satisfy. You can tell he's never had to do that before and part of how he handles that is to just bully those parties into submission, but the other way is to use his status to make proclamations that supposedly have some sort of force to them to placate the other interests.

An example would be the proclamation that institutional investors will be banned from buying single-family homes. That's meant to placate his working-class base, most of whom can't afford a home. Do we know how far he'll go in enforcing that proclamation? No. It directly contradicts some of the other positions he's been identified as supporting, and is unlikely to be enforceable on a mass scale, but if he does sign some sort of order telling the DoJ or SEC or whoever to investigate purchases of that sort of real estate by institutional investors, well, you could end up at the wrong end of a government investigation, particularly if you have somehow pissed him off. Which isn't particularly hard to do, either.

Thus, you can say the regulatory regime over single-family residential real estate market is now less stable than it was before. We don't know what will happen. And that makes it hard to make a business decision around it.

Post reply on HN