It's the jobs, stupid

Two much-anticipated Labor Department numbers that I just heard on TV. The first is the increase in the number of jobs in the month of January: 112,000. The second is the upward revision of the dismal number of new jobs from December: from 1,000 to 12,000. Both announcements were disappointing to those who believed that Bush's tax-cutting "economic stimulus" would translate into job creation.
The 112,000 figure for January fell 60,000 short of the prediction of forecasters, and was 40,000 short of the number of new jobs needed merely to keep pace with the number of new workers entering the labor force each month. There will of course be some trumpeting of the 112,000 figure as being the highest in many months, but those months were awful. In fact, the figure demonstrates that the stimulus has translated into increased profits for companies and increased money in the hands of the rich, but not into real recovery for the workers, i.e., jobs. (In addition, of course, the figures for workers' real income shows them losing against inflation, as is noted in the immediately preceding post.)
The second figure, the upward revision of December's new-jobs figure to 12,000 confirms how dreadful that month really was for new employment. It was thought that the revision might be substantial, that the 1,000 figure was way off the mark. But no, we're now certain, December was indeed terrible, as was the 47,000 figure for the preceding month.
These two announcements gave rise, immediately, to an upward spurt in the cost of a euro against the dollar. The traders know what Bush apologists still deny: That the "recovery" of the US economy is hype, and the GDP increases are due to consumer borrowing and warmaking. Classic smoke and mirrors.