Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
But that's not the question. The question is whether you are adding enough jobs to keep up with new entrants to the work force.
|
I thought the question is whether the 59,000 new jobs is good or bad news. You said no, for the reasons above. I said, it's good news for those newly employed, but also dissappointing news because the market had expected more and that our reasons are related. What question are you answering?
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop Yes. Which is why the market reaction does not really matter.
Whether the stock market goes up or down on a given day is, in the end, not really all the important, and doesn't have much to do with a company's valuation and ability to raise money.
|
Conventional wisdom was that the numbers would be about 90,000 jobs better today and this would push the market above 10,000. Once that seal is broken, whether rationale or not, many watchers believe that we would see substantial market gains.
You are right that the movement of the market in any given day is fairly insignificant. But the movement of the market as a whole is hugely significant for the reasons I previously discussed (i.e., cheap money).
Anotyher related point, the market does not react retrospectively. It reacts prospectively (6-12 months) and often times has self fulfilling prophesies. So if the numbers were better today and we broke 10,000, and 2 months from now we were at 10,500, most would agree that this would have a snowball effect for job creation.
