Job growth may not curb unemployment rate: White House

[thundley4]

A new White House economic forecast showed Thursday the US economy is set to start producing job growth this year at a rate of 95,000 per month, but that the unemployment rate will remain high.
President Barack Obama's annual economic report to Congress said the economy is on the verge of pulling out of a period of steep job losses stemming from the worst recession in decades.

But the report also said that the unemployment rate may not come down much from the current level of 9.7 percent, and may even rise because of labor market growth and the return of more discouraged workers to the labor force.

The White House forecast, most of which was previously released with budget documents, calls for growth in gross domestic product of around 3.0 percent in 2010 and an average unemployment rate of 10.0 percent.

"Because projected GDP growth is only slightly stronger than potential growth, relatively little decline is projected in the unemployment rate during 2010," the report prepared by the president's Council of Economic Advisors said.

"Indeed, it is possible that the rate will rise for a while as some discouraged workers return to the labor force, before starting to generally decline. Consistent with this, employment growth is projected to be roughly equal to normal trend growth of about 100,000 per month."

Christina Romer, who heads the president's council, told reporters she expects the trend on job creation to turn position "by the spring."

Breitbart

This sounds like a lot double talk gobbledy gook to me.  We're going to add almost 100k/month, but the unemployment rate isn't going to  go down.  Sounds a lot like the jobs "created or saved" BS that this administration pawned off on us.

[Celtic Rose]

If more people can become employed and somehow not effect the unemployment rate, then maybe we have an issue with how the unemployment rate is calculated.

[DefiantSix]

If more people can become employed and somehow not effect the unemployment rate, then maybe we have an issue with how the unemployment rate is calculated.

Unless we're seeing further telegraphing from the Ø-ministration that they're going to monkey further with the statistics.

Oh my...  I said, 'monkey'.  Was that wassis of me? 

[Lacarnut]

Breitbart

This sounds like a lot double talk gobbledy gook to me.  We're going to add almost 100k/month, but the unemployment rate isn't going to  go down.  Sounds a lot like the jobs "created or saved" BS that this administration pawned off on us.

In order for the unemployment figures to go down, more than a 100k jobs must be created each month because that is the number of people that enter the job market each month. In other words, the 90k that the gov. projects will be below the number of new people that enter the work force.

[thundley4]

In order for the unemployment figures to go down, more than a 100k jobs must be created each month because that is the number of people that enter the job market each month. In other words, the 90k that the gov. projects will be below the number of new people that enter the work force.

Combine that with more layoffs and that 95K isn't much.