Business News
US economy loses jobs for first time in four years
Feb 1, 2008, 18:21 GMT
Washington - The US unemployment rate dipped slightly to 4.9 per cent in January but the economy lost jobs for the first time in more than four years, the Labour Department said Friday amid continuing concerns about an economic slowdown.
President George W Bush acknowledged the loss of 17,000 jobs in January was another 'serious sign' that the US economy was weakening and urged Congress to approve a stimulus package agreed to last week between Bush and congressional leaders.
'For the first time in 52 months we didn't create jobs,' Bush said in addressing business leaders in Kansas City, Missouri. 'The sooner this (stimulus) package makes it to my desk ... the better off our economy is going to be.'
The US House of Representatives this week approved 150-billion- dollars worth of tax relief to boost consumer spending. The Senate has sought to make changes and on Thursday postponed a vote on the package to next week.
Unemployment fell 0.1 per cent from a high of 5 per cent in December. But the Labour Department revised its estimate for jobs created in December to 82,000, up from an earlier estimate of 18,000. The loss in jobs for January reflected declines in the construction and manufacturing sectors, while jobs were added in health care, the department said.
US economic growth slowed sharply to 0.6 per cent annualized in the fourth quarter of 2007, prompting the US Federal Reserve to slash its key interest rate by 0.5 points to 3 per cent on Wednesday - its second cut in nine days to calm financial markets and buoy the economy.
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in Business
- 1. US unemployment drops further, but figures disappoint
- 2. Japan stocks down as euro debt outweighs positive US data
- 3. Iraq resumes oil flow after pipeline blast in Turkey
- 4. Spanish bond auction lifts eurozone worries, sinks Japan stocks
- 5. ECB holds rates, rules out early exit from emergency measures
Older Talkback
page: 1
I always wonder what was said before the democrats voted to go into Iraq....'hey, guys! We can get this president to get rid of Saddam, and then we can use it to get him thrown out at the next election!'
How'd THAT work out?
Now, we spent 11 billion a month on this war, and I'd really have to ask what the end game looks like. Nonetheless, Hillary and the others RAN to greenlight this, knowing full well the consequences. Heck, it'd be worth voting democrat just to see the result!
Bush has had record employment, record tax receipts, record household wealth for most of his term in office. Too bad about the deficit, but there were about 20 dem senators that could have capped this anytime they wanted, but did not.
Now, the next guy gets to step up....
page: 1
Bush's gift - a huge deficitFeb 3rd, 2008 - 04:52:57
This guy started the Presidency with a surplus, promised a series of deficit reductions, and now leaves large deficits going forwards thanks to his failure to wrap up Iraq in a timely manner. 'Success', this is NOT! Domestic spending is gutted, the interest on the debt will rise eventually despite an interest rate cut for now, and our borrowings from other countries to keep the economy going will grow. It's even worse at the State, County and City level, where they relied on revenue-sharing and cannot run deficits.
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/02/AR200802020204 2.html
But even in the unlikely event that he were to get his way, the budget deficit would jump sharply, from $163 billion in 2007 to about $400 billion in 2008 and 2009 -- partly the result of the new economic stimulus plan. Such deficits would rival the record deficit of $412 billion of 2004, though administration allies argue that shortfalls of that size now represent a smaller share of the overall economy and are thus more manageable.
Still, the new budget underscores Bush's inability to get control of spending over the course of his seven-year tenure, a failure that has concerned even his conservatives allies. The problem is projected to get worse in coming years with the retirements of the baby-boom generation, a big obstacle to the ambitious tax-cutting or spending plans of the leading presidential contenders.
Report this comment