The California Employment Development Department released the latest job estimates today. According to these estimates, July saw San Diego hit its highest year-over-year rate of job loss in the downturn to date. Between July 2008 and July 2009, the region lost 55,100 jobs, a decrease of 4.2 percent.
The following graph shows how many jobs were gained or lost in the three housing bubble-related sectors I like to highlight — construction, finance, and retail — along with all other sectors. While the trouble started in the housing-beneficiary sectors, the growth of that green bar shows that losses have mounted outside those sectors over the past year.
Hi Rich
Thanks for the great
Hi Rich
Thanks for the great graphs on VOSD. You continue to mention that unemployment is not a leading indicator. Wouldn’t it be a drag on the economy, though? Particularly real estate, since you kinda have to have a job now to buy a house.
jpinpb wrote:….you kinda
[quote=jpinpb]….you kinda have to have a job now to buy a house.[/quote]
You need a job now to buy a house? We will fix that.
US Senator Chris Dodd
House Member Barney Frank
jpinpb wrote:Hi Rich
Thanks
[quote=jpinpb]Hi Rich
Thanks for the great graphs on VOSD. You continue to mention that unemployment is not a leading indicator. Wouldn’t it be a drag on the economy, though? Particularly real estate, since you kinda have to have a job now to buy a house.[/quote]
Hi JP – 90% of the labor force still has jobs… the actions they take or don’t take can have a huge impact on the economy. There are a lot more inputs to economic activity than just how many people have lost their jobs. (And btw another one of those inputs is the vast amount of stimulus and money printing).
Look at RE right now… there are more people buying homes now than a year ago, even though unemployment is way worse. By no coincidence, I should add that housing is probably the #1 benefactor of money printing this time around, via the Fed buying down mortgage rates.
rich
Yes, Rich. Good point.
Yes, Rich. Good point. People are buying now. However, would you agree the reasons people are buying could have something to do w/it? I mean, we’ve seen some pretty big drop in prices, the Government is sponsoring it w/8k credit and 10k credit if you buy new, plus some people on the sidelines are sick of waiting and are just thinking it’s time. Some of our very own Piggs pulled the trigger, as it is enticing.
As you say, not everyone is unemployed. But when we’ve exhausted through the fence sitters and we have remaining the people who walked that can’t buy and investors that are overleveraged and/or overextended, that’ll be just about the time the banks will scratch their heads trying to figure out what to do w/all the foreclosures.
Rich, do you think that as the government says, we are at bottom? Do you think, hence, the government will stop pumping money in this through credits and bailouts? Do you think our economy is stable enough to not see further unemployment? 90% employed. Why should we not factor in the U6 figure? They are part of our economy.
You’re mixing together a
You’re mixing together a whole bunch of topics here…. I’m not sure what to say to all that, as my original argument was that unemployment isn’t a leading indicator and the data supports that premise tremendously. It doesn’t mean that the bottom is in, just that unemployment doesn’t tell you one way or the other.
As for whether the recession is actually over, I don’t have very strong feelings about it but it wouldn’t surprise me that much if it was, which is to say that economic activity could start to increase again. If that is the case, though, it’s yet another fake and unsustainable (and probably weak) recovery based on trying to borrow our way to prosperity, so we are just teeing up another crisis soon enough down the road.
As for whether SD housing has bottomed (I can’t tell if you are asking about that too), maybe in a couple of the most beaten down places, but in aggregate, my guess is a big no on that one.
rich
Just a quick question, but
Just a quick question, but isnt that second graph from 2007 (Sd job gained/lost 2006-2007?) ? I am thinking the wrong graph sneaked in there, but maybe that is the real graph. God knows the BLS data sure seems like a blast from the past.
Yikes, I fat-fingered the
Yikes, I fat-fingered the image URL and it was pointing to an old version of that chart. It’s fixed now, thanks for catching that DWCAP!
rich