On the Jobs Front


Finally, some “good” news for President Barack Obama: only 11,000 jobs were lost in November. That’s still too many—we need employment growth—but economists had been expecting over 100,000 job losses, so the numbers dramatically beat expectations. The New York Times‘ David Leonhardt calls this “some very good news” but warns, “It’s probably best to be conservative,” and notes that he’d be “surprised if this rate of progress continues in coming months.” Paul Krugman is even less sunny, arguing that the “good” news is actually bad news, because it will reduce pressure on politicians to do more to combat unemployment. Floyd Norris, also at the Times, isn’t so counterintuitive:

In my Off the Charts column in Saturday’s newspaper, I will cite one economic indicator that shows the unemployment rate has peaked. Whether or not that turns out to be the case, I think the bad days for jobs are very close to being over, and that this will not be a jobless recovery.

Why?

One reason is the sheer abruptness of the decline in employment during the recent recession. (Yes, I think it is over.) After Lehman Brothers failed, the unemployment rate rose at a faster clip than at any time since 1975. There was something approaching panic among employers. They feared sales would collapse and that credit would be unavailable. In that spirit, they cut every cost they could. Imports plunged because no one wanted to add inventory. Ad spending collapsed. And people were fired.

That has left many companies in a position where they may need to add workers quickly for even a small increase in business.

Call me the optimist.

At least we found one! The president will be visiting Allentown, Pennsylvania today and plans a major jobs speech on Tuesday. This news should make giving that speech a little bit easier.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.