The Long Term Investor

POOR......AMAZON. Year to date they have a gain of 2.9%. They continue to DRAG. I have NO plans to sell any of my holding.

They are in the middle of one of their years where they POUR tons of money into CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS and EMPLOYEES. As a company their focus is always very much to the future of their business. There will come a time when we will start to see negative commentary if they do not show some gains in the stock. It is a ways off....I would guess another 6-12 months. They have a very loyal shareholder base and their performance over the past 6 years has been outstanding.

It will be interesting to see how they do over 2022. If this performance DRAG continues for another YEAR or more......I would not want to be the new CEO. The knee jerk reaction will be to compare him with Bezos and to blame him for the stock lingering.

Their performance is on my RADAR......but.......I dont have any concerns at the moment and with this being such an OUTSTANDING company.......I do not have any plans at the moment. This lingering performance would have to last for.......at least......another 2 years......or more..... for me to "consider" doing anything.

The STOCK SPLIT arrow is STILL in their quiver.........if it was me I would have used it long ago.

 

Speaking of one of the 10 stocks that I hold above......Amazon. I try to NOT get too focused on individual stocks. I PREFER to try to focus on the performance of my PORTFOLIO as a whole. I am very happy with my current portfolio and how it is performing over the past year or two.....especially compared to the SP500.

I have tried....over my investing life....to follow this same course. I try to be very forgiving of individual holdings if the portfolio as a whole is meeting my goals. At times some companies are performing well and others not so well....that is just reality. It is FOOLISH to always be jumping in and out of companies due to short to medium term performance. I think that is a weakness that many investors have....focusing on individual stocks and not a s much on their portfolio as a whole.

If I am achieving my goals..........average 10% or more over the long term and try to beat the SP500 each year.......I am inclined to NOT make any changes to a portfolio. I know from the data that very few investors can average 10-11% over the long term. I would guess that the average investor averages about 2-5% long term.....although....I am too lazy to look up the data at this moment. I KNOW that I am well over the 10-11% range over my investing lifetime........so....I will do what I always do.....NOTHING. If it is not broke.....dont try to fix it.

I have also learned to NOT go looking for issues when there really are NONE. That just creates investor self-doubt and eventually FLAILING around and CHURNING your own account.

EVEN when I do make a few changes.....I DO NOT change my general portfolio and investing STYLE. I stick with what has worked for me and my family for a long time.......2-3 generations of investors.

 

SORRY Amazon shareholders....by talking about the company today it is now DOWN to +1.85% year to date for 2021.

Markets have turned very mixed.....more to the negative side than positive. I am looking for a last hour bounce. I may still be looking for it after the close. Who knows.

 

Sounds good Zukodany. I like that you are buying a company that you own and use the product.

LOL......today in the last hour or less we had a MARKET FREAK-OUT. It is actually funny. I ended the day in the RED after what started as a pretty good day. The only consolation was a bit of a beat on the SP500 by 0.11%.

 

This one is for you Zukodany.

Elon Musk trolls Jeff Bezos as he widens his lead as the richest person on Earth

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/11/investing/elon-musk-richest-person/index.html

(BOLD is my opinion OR what I consider important content)

"New York, NY (CNN Business)Elon Musk's personal wealth is now $222 billion,widening his gap as the richest person in the world according to Bloomberg's Billionaires Index. Musk's personal wealth skyrocketed an extra $10.6 billion after a secondary share sale by investors, announced last week, valued SpaceX over $100 billion, CNBC reported.

Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon (AMZN), follows Musk with a net worth of $191.6 billion. Musk tweeted a second place medal at Bezos early today.

Thanks to both Musk's Tesla shares and his majority stake in privately-held SpaceX, where he serves as CEO, Musk has accumulated vast wealth.

Musk gained $8.6 billion since Friday's closing and more than $52 billion year-to-date, the Bloomberg Billionaires Index says.
Tesla (TSLA) shares are also climbing, as they recover from a rocky year. They are up 13% year-to-date, far less than its 743% gain in 2020. Still, that's a big improvement from when they were down 22% for the year in May.

Musk got $0 in pay in 2020, according to a company filing, but he did receive stock options during the year that are now worth $22 billion. And those options are worth far more due to the rise in stock price.

Musk and Bezos — the two richest men on earth — are embroiled in a billionaire space race. Even before it launched the first tourism mission to space on Inspiration4 in September, Musk's SpaceX won massive NASA and US military contracts and flew the most powerful rocket in operation.

Bezos, who founded Blue Origin in 2000, and billionaire Virgin-brands owner Richard Branson, both traveled to space last summer.

A June ProPublica report found that some billionaires, including Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, pay minimal income tax compared to the vast majority of Americans, despite their immense wealth. Nothing revealed in the report was illegal.

Meanwhile, the US economy is still recovering from the Covid-19 recession. Median household income fell 2.9% in 2020 to $67,521, the first statistically significant decline since 2011. September's job report marked the second straight month in which the economy added far fewer jobs than expected"

MY COMMENT

WTF.......is with that last paragraph. It is like it has nothing to do with this article and they just decided to past it on the end. Musk is a MONSTER business person. It is so refreshing that he is not all caught up in all the CELEBRITY BS and other "stuff" that all the CEO types and tech types are captive to in their lives.

 

I hope this little article is true.

Home prices will grow a further 16%' by end of next year: Goldman forecast

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/home...-of-next-year-goldman-forecast-203019920.html

(BOLD is my opinion OR what I consider important content)

"If you thought home prices couldn't go any higher, hold on to your hat: Goldman Sachs (GS) economists are forecasting even more price increases in the year ahead.

"Our model now projects that home prices will grow a further 16% by the end of 2022," wrote a Goldman Sachs team of economists led by Jan Hatzius in a recent note.

"Of all the shortages afflicting the U.S. economy, the housing shortage might last the longest," he said.

Home prices are currently up 20% year-over-year. The boom in prices was spurred by tight housing inventory, low interest rates, and household migration patterns during the pandemic. Millennials buying first time homes has only exasperated the demand for homes.

Meanwhile investors with cash on their hands are trying to hedge against inflation by purchasing hard assets like real estate, thus driving prices higher.

"The supply-demand picture that has been the basis for our call for a multi-year boom in home prices remains intact," wrote Hatzius.

"Housing inventories remain historically tight, and surveys of home buying intentions remain at healthy levels," the note goes on.

Numerous experts have predicted not to expect a housing crash like in 2008, given that the current market is so different. But home buyers may expect to see a leveling off in prices, especially if the Federal Reserve starts tapering its balance sheet and increasing interest rates in the future.

'Homebuilders continue to face headwinds'
The supply of homes has increased modestly since the spring, though still well below pre-pandemic levels.

Supply chain issues are slowing down efforts to get new homes on the market.

"Homebuilders continue to face headwinds that were present before the pandemic — especially a lack of construction workers and a lack of available plots to build on — and the pandemic has exacerbated those problems," said Hatzius.

His team points to further delays from supply chain disruptions, lumber shortages, and now economy-wide labor shortages.

'Relaxing the zoning rules and other regulatory constraints'
There is a solution to the national housing shortage which could help ease prices.

"Economic research shows that relaxing the zoning rules and other regulatory constraints that have impeded homebuilding for decades would boost supply and lower prices and rents. But in practice, this has been difficult politically," the note says.

California recently banned single-family zoning statewide, making way for more multi-family dwellings.

However, "nationwide changes seem unlikely for now, and limited state and local changes are only a partial step toward relieving the housing shortage," writes Hatzius."

MY COMMENT

Sounds good to me.....I will take money and make money anywhere I can with ANY asset that I happen to own. If stocks want to go up....great. If they linger and houses increase....great. If inflation drives up the price of my art and collectables and hard assets.....great. I dont care where or how I make money.....I just care about increasing NET WORTH somehow.

If house prices are up by 16% nationwide next year they will probably be up by 20-30% minimum in my very HOT housing market. So I would be glad to make $200,000 to $400,000 next year in additional net worth.

It is the same thing as looking at your portfolio as a whole.....not the individual stocks. I dont just look at my portfolio as a whole....I look at ALL my assets as a whole. I will take any money that.......ANY.....of the markets want to give me.

I know there are a lot of homeowners on here that have seen significant increases in value this year. Lets hope we continue to rack up the gains in house appreciation over the next year or more.

 

I believe this is actually a distinct possibility.

Morgan Stanley Sees Stocks Suffering on Souring Consumer Outlook

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/morgan-stanley-sees-stocks-suffering-184747046.html

(BOLD is my opinion OR what I consider important content)


Morgan Stanley Sees Stocks Suffering on Souring Consumer Outlook
"(Bloomberg) -- Souring consumer confidence could soon catch up to stock market investors if this earnings season is clouded by downward guidance revisions.

There’s been an “uncharacteristically” wide divergence between how consumers and investors feel about the economy after the surge in delta virus cases this summer, said Lisa Shalett, chief investment officer of Morgan Stanley Wealth Management.

“We believe that corporate profit forecasts are vulnerable, especially if consumer sentiment translates into less spending and more savings,” she wrote in a note to clients.

Typically consumer sentiment moves in tandem with the stock market, as consumption makes up two-thirds of U.S. GDP. But while multiple measures of consumer confidence have plunged since a peak in July, the benchmark S&P 500 has soared, standing just 4% off an all-time high.

Consumers appear to be weighed down by the slow recovery, inflation worries, and political wrangling in Washington, while investors are more focused on positive earnings revisions and subtle changes in the Federal Reserve’s policies, Shalett said.

“Critically, the Fed and investors have embraced the view that inflation is transitory -- a view not shared by consumers. If consumer sentiment doesn’t quickly improve, it could be a signal of market weakness that would be sparked by disappointing earnings, weaker spending and higher savings rates,” she warned.

Metrics that track consumer expectations for the future show that consumers don’t see their concerns about inflation and the labor market recovery as temporary, she said. If that sentiment translates into real action, in the form of less spending and more savings, that could weigh on corporate profit forecasts, and ultimately weigh on stocks."

MY COMMENT

What I see that has the potential to tank the markets and cause a nasty correction is the forward looking statements that will come with earnings. If many companies play it COY and decide to low ball the forward looking stuff......there......... "COULD"...... be very negative reaction over the next months. I can see a situation where companies either low ball the forward looking statements or refuse to give forward info. If enough companies do that it could snowball the markets into a nasty correction.

Now even though I see that as a "possibility".....do I care. No not really. My primary concern is fundamental data over the longer term....not trying to call the next correction.....nasty or not.

You never know how this sort of "stuff" is going to play out. I have seen times in my life when the economy SUCKS.....yet as a stock investor I made great money. On the other hand the economy can BOOM and for some reason the markets just flail around and linger. That is the way it works over the short term.........1-12 months.

 

This was the market today.....and.....I suspect it will be the markets for the rest of the year or longer. We are just in a volatile market period.

Stock market news live updates: Stocks drop as investors await earnings, crude oil reaches 7-year high

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-market-news-live-updates-october-11-2021-113244923.html

(BOLD is my opinion OR what I consider important content)

"Stocks ended lower on Monday as investors mulled ongoing signs of inflation and supply-related challenges and awaited more data on corporate earnings.

The S&P 500, Dow and Nasdaq dropped to erase earlier gains. Treasury yields advanced across the curve, and the benchmark 10-year yield hovered around 1.61%, or its highest level since June.

U.S. West Texas intermediate crude oil futures extended gains after logging a seventh straight weekly advance, jumping to top $82 per barrel at session highs and add to concerns over rising energy, commodity and input prices. WTI crude futures reached highest level since 2014, while Brent crude was at its highest since 2018 after topping $84 per barrel.

Stocks have traded choppily over the past several weeks as investors contemplated the equity market implications of ongoing price increases against a backdrop of decelerating economic growth. Elevated demand and supply-side shortages have pushed up the prices of commodities from oil and natural gas to cotton, and labor shortages have raised the specter of lasting increases in wages and higher costs to employers. Last week's September jobs report "had an inflationary feel with strong wage growth, a rise in the workweek, and a drop in [labor force] participation," Neil Dutta, head of U.S. economics at Renaissance Macro Research, wrote in an email last week.

This week, investors will receive the Bureau of Labor Statistics' latest Consumer Price Index and Producer Price Index, each for September. Increases in core consumer prices, excluding food and energy, are expected to remain elevated on a historical basis, coming in just slightly below June's 30-year high in price increases. Producer prices, meanwhile, are expected to have accelerated further last month.

"'Stagflation' was the most common word in client conversations this week as equity market volatility remained elevated," David Kostin, Goldman Sachs chief U.S. equity strategist, wrote in a note Monday morning. "Stagflation is not our economists' base case expectation, but the weak historical performance of equities in stagflationary environments helps explain why investors are concerned."

Over the last 60 years, the S&P 500 has returned 2.5% on median per quarter, but has fallen by 2.1% during periods of stagflation, or times with high inflation and weak GDP growth, Kostin added.

"Despite near-term uncertainty, we expect the equity market will continue to rally as investors gain confidence that the current pace of inflation is 'transitory,'" Kostin said.

For investors, the pick-up in third-quarter earnings season this week will help offer further company commentary around the impacts of rising prices across the recovering economy. The big banks are on deck to report this week, with names including JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Bank of America (BAC), Morgan Stanley (MS) and Goldman Sachs (GS) each due to post quarterly results."

MY COMMENT

If earnings disappoint......it will be a brutal short term. If they BEAT.....the markets likely....will not care. That seems to be how it works out. That is just the REALITY of living and investing during a time when the economy has NOTHING to do with stocks and funds. ALL....of the issues that we are facing short term.....are outside the markets and news oriented. Add in earnings NERVOUSNESS on top of all that is going on......and you have very ERRATIC short term potential.

All in all......I would rather to see the sentiment that we are seeing compared to EUPHORIA. this stuff tells me that the BULL MARKET has a long way to run......but......there will be nasty corrections along the way. SO......

I continue to be fully invested for the long term as usual.

 

I get TIRED of all the short term stuff. Too bad there is little to nothing put out anymore about long term investing. People are just EXHAUSTED by all the short term SCREAMING. the long term stuff always seems so simplistic.......but it must not be.....since the vast majority of people can not pull it off.

Why Boring Stocks Outperform Over The Long Term

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes...utperform-over-the-long-term/?sh=212cbd83606d

(BOLD is my opinion OR what I consider important content)

"For as long as people have been investing in the stock market, they have been told that with the expectation of higher returns should come the expectation of higher risk. So, it’s not surprising that many investors think high-risk, high-volatility stocks will outperform lower-risk stocks over time. However, in reality, less-risky stocks have outperformed riskier stocks and the stock market consistently over time. It may be time for investors seeking superior long-term returns to rethink that return-risk relationship of stocks.

Research going back to Nobel Laureate William Sharpe in the 1960s says that future returns are related to risk. However, while that relationship supports investing across major asset classes — i.e., stocks outperform bonds, bonds outperform cash, etc. — it doesn’t necessarily support the returns of individual stocks. Research has shown that low-risk or low beta (volatility) stocks outperform high-risk stocks.

The Allure Of Over-Priced, High-Volatility Stocks

According to the efficient markets hypothesis, the stock market is thought to be highly efficient. If that’s so, why do low-risk stocks consistently outperform high-risk stocks? Could it be that investors tend to overvalue the more exciting “headline” stocks, opting for a slight chance of hitting it big? Early investors in Google and Amazon generated great returns on relatively small investments. Investors looking for the next Google or Amazon seem willing to overpay and drive up valuations of companies with similar characteristics.

That might explain why investors will flock to a company that’s growing at 20% even if that growth is already priced into the stock. It shouldn’t be a shock to them then if the stock drops extensively when the company reports lower results, which is often the case. However, if you invest in a company growing at 10% while the market expects just 5% growth, the stock will likely fare much better.

It’s A Race Of The Hare Vs. The Turtle

While it’s true that low-volatility stocks produce nowhere near the outsized returns of risky, high-volatile stocks in sharply rising markets, they also tend to fall less when the market declines. It’s that downside protection that explains why low-volatility stocks can outperform high-volatility stocks over time. Over the long term, the negative impact of losses to investment returns can far outweigh the positive impact of gains.

In research comparing the total returns of the least volatile stocks to the most volatile stocks from 1990 to 2011, the least volatile stocks consistently outperformed the most volatile. The researchers, Nardin L. Baker and Robert A. Haugen, explain how high-volatility stocks are attractive to professional money managers who are under pressure to dress up their portfolios with market-leading headline stocks to please their shareholders. This not only drives up valuations but also exposes their portfolios to more significant downside risk.

In a more recent study, S&P Global found that the S&P 500 Quality index, made up of companies with strong returns on equity and low volatility, not only provides greater downside protection than the S&P 500 index but also outperforms during periods of extreme volatility. From the record highs on February 19, 2020, to April 15, 2020, the S&P 500 fell 18%. During the same period, the S&P 500 Quality index fell by less than 15%.

People Don’t Want Boring Stocks

The other reason low-risk stocks outperform is they are boring. The allure of headline stocks and the market’s big daily gainers draws attention from low-key stocks, which are underrepresented, for example, in the growth portfolios of many mutual funds. Mutual fund managers need to deliver for their end investors by beating their benchmarks, so they might load up on a few high-flyers hoping one of them pays off.

Meanwhile, this avoidance of boring companies by some retail and professional investors has the effect of suppressing their stock prices. This is true even for many high-quality companies that deliver consistent returns and grow shareholder value. They’re just not exciting enough to own. Investors don’t see the risk story in high-quality companies, so they don’t see the return potential. As a result, investors will underpay for a quality company that will continue to grow its intrinsic worth over time.

Boring Is Better For Long-Term Investors

Quality companies are typically well-established with strong brands and a competitive advantage in growing industries. They’re known for generating predictable earnings growth regardless of economic conditions. They’re financially stable with solid balance sheets, which makes it much less likely they’ll run into financial trouble. Most importantly, they operate at the highest levels of management efficiency, enabling them to generate sustainable earnings and free cash flow that can be compounded over time. That is the key to attractive long-term returns.

Boring? Yes, investing in low-volatility, quality companies might not get your adrenaline pumping. But that shouldn’t be the objective of a long-term investment strategy. Protecting your downside while compounding your returns, in the long run, should be.

MY COMMENT

This is the GUTS of my portfolio strategy over my entire lifetime.......and.....my mother before me. Invest in.....BIG CAP, DOMINANT, WORLD MARKETING, ICONIC PRODUCT, GREAT MANAGEMENT, DIVIDEND PAYING.....companies. The CREAM OF THE CROP.....the best of the best.

Other than this.....I let.......TIME......do the rest of the heavy lifting.

 

Actually NO. I think Musk is a visionary CEO. I also think it is REFRESHING that he is not captive to all the celebrity and woke BS that the typical CEO spouts these days. I have no problem with what a CEO believes or supports in their personal life.......as long as he/she does NOT treat the company like something he/she owns and imposes their personal views on company business. The owners of the business are the shareholders not the CEO. The function of the CEO is to manage the business and make money for the REAL owners.......the shareholders. Of course, in the modern business world, we know that boards often act as a rubber stamp and companies get involved in social and political issues. I think this is ASININE. Why would a CEO or business manager want to piss off half their potential customers?

Now Musk is seen as somewhat eccentric.......but I think of all the BIG BILLIONAIRE CEO types.....he is actually the most down to earth and definately the most business and engineering focused. He is also FEARLESS and not captive to social pressures....at least in my view. I think he has REAL PASSION for his companies. Something that is very rare with most CEO types....in my opinion. ALL most of them (in the big well known company world) are really concerned with are their POWER....their compensation......and their celebrity. for my money the best CEO is invisible, driven to make the company succeed, and is an old time company-man type of person......a motivator and DRIVER of the business. Another company that I believe the management fits my profile is NVIDIA.

YES......I know....fantasy-land.....but I can dream.

 

Here is another very Simplistic article.....but....it is the TRUTH.

How saving $737 a month could make you a millionaire

https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...-month-could-make-you-a-millionaire/49260539/

(BOLD is my opinion OR what I consider important content)

"The good news is, you may not need to invest as much as you think to hit your $1 million target. In fact, depending on when you start investing and what your returns look like, it's easily possible to become a millionaire with just $737 a month. Here's how.

How to become a millionaire by saving $737 per month
If you want to become a millionaire by saving $737 per month, there are two things you need to do:

• Invest that amount consistently every month for 30 years
• Earn an average 8% annual return

This should leave you with just over $1 million at the end of your 30-year period. And, for many people, taking both of these steps are reasonable.

After all, if you wanted to retire a millionaire at 67, you'd have to start investing $737 per month by age 37. Most people are well into their careers at that point and Americans aged 35 to 44 have a median annual salary of $58,188 – so that would be just about 15% of your income. That's what most experts typically recommend setting aside for retirement.

Of course, if you start earlier, you could reduce the amount you must save to hit your $1 million target. Someone who starts saving at 25 and who wants to retire at 67 would need to invest just $273 per month. The problem is, it's too late for a lot of people to go back in time. But, even if you're well beyond your 20s, saving just $737 per month still makes it possible to achieve your goal.

If you're older than 37, of course, you'll need to bump up the amount you're investing. But with government help in the form of retirement tax breaks as well as a 401(k) match if your employer offers one, saving $1 million may still be in reach if you can invest a bit more each month.

You'll also need to earn an 8% average annual return to be on target. With the S&P 500 producing average annual returns of around 10%, that should be easily doable – even if you just invest in index funds that track the performance of the market. You do, however, need to be sure you're exposing yourself to an appropriate level of risk and building a diversified portfolio – whether that includes stocks, bonds, cryptocurrencies, ETFs, or a mix of all different investment types.

Now, $1 million may not necessarily be enough for retirement, but it is definitely a good start – and it's much more than most people end up with. So if you're 37 years old or younger, start investing your $737 per month today to get on track to a seven-figure nest egg. And if you're older, figure out your magic number and get to work so you can have the financial security becoming a millionaire provides.

MY COMMENT

So here you go. If you start at age 25 all you have to save is $273 per month to hit that $1,000,000. Basically the cost of your coffee or some other item that you buy each day. Sure, saving that money can crimp your lifestyle a bit.....but as you progress in age and income it will seem like peanuts after a while.

For those that did not start at an early age the most important thing is to actually START at some age.......not just sit there saying...."woe is me"....and never do anything. You just have to bite the bullet and......JUST DO IT. Have that money automatically invest, so you never see it. Later when you are in your 60's and look around at all the people scrimping by on Social Security....you will be very glad that you did.

Combine this little bit of savings with home ownership and by the time you retire you will probably have two sources that will provide you with at least $2,000,000 in available money for retirement. Of course I am assuming that you dont use your house as a piggy bank and you simply pay your payment and over your life end up with a paid off house that you owned for 30-40 years.

People can retire with a house that is a BIG pool of cash. For example....the first three houses we bought:

House 1 - We bought for $16,000 in 1974. Two bed, one bath, big kitchen, dining room and living room, plus a 4 season poarch off the kitchen that was an eating area. The basement had a very high ceiling so if someone bought this house and wanted to use it to raise a family you could easily put another bedroom, bath, and family room in the basement. The value of that house now....if we had made our payment for 30 years and owned it now free and clear........$400,000.

House 2 - We bought for $44,000 in 1977. Three bed, kitchen, living room, dining room, two bath. Value now $750,000.

House 3 - We bought in 1978 for $92,000. Four bed two bath, living room, study, dining room, kitchen. Value now OVER $1,000,000.

YOU....can do it. YOU can retire with about $2,000,000 on a regular job. Just have a monthly savings plan and some time before age 35 buy a house that you can raise a family in and pay off over the life of the mortgage.

 

Typical open today. I was dead FLAT when I looked but that was before the above posts. I was 5 stocks UP and 5 stocks DOWN and at about negative $100. Probably a bit more in the negative now. Another day in the life of a long term investor.

 

MORE jobs data out today.......not that anyone will care.

Americans quit their jobs at a record pace in August

https://www.wect.com/2021/10/12/americans-quit-their-jobs-record-pace-august/

(BOLD is my opinion OR what I consider important content)

"WASHINGTON (AP) — One reason America’s employers are having trouble filling jobs was starkly illustrated in a report Tuesday: Americans are quitting in droves.

The Labor Department said that quits jumped to 4.3 million in August, the highest on records dating back to December 2000, and up from 4 million in July. Hiring also slowed in August, the report showed, and the number of jobs available fell to 10.4 million, from a record high of 11.1 million the previous month.

The data helps fill in a puzzle that is looming over the job market: Hiring slowed sharply in August and September, even as the number of posted jobs was near record levels. In the past year, open jobs have increased 62%. Yet overall hiring, as measured by Tuesday’s report, has actually declined slightly during that time.

The government said Friday that job gains were weak for a second straight month in September, with only 194,000 jobs added, though the unemployment rate fell to 4.8% from 5.2%. Friday’s hiring figure is a net total, after job gains and quits, retirements and layoffs are taken into account. Tuesday’s report, known as the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS, includes raw figures, and showed that total hiring in August fell sharply, to 6.3 million from 6.8 million in July.

The data is “highlighting the immense problems businesses are dealing with,” said Jennifer Lee, an economist at BMO Capital Markets, in an email. “Not enough people. Not enough equipment and/or parts. Meantime, customers are waiting for their orders, or waiting to place their orders. What a strange world this is.”

The jump in quits strongly suggests that fear of the delta variant is partly responsible for the shortfall in workers. In addition to driving quits, fear of the disease likely caused plenty of those out of work to not look for, or take, jobs.

As COVID-19 cases surged in August, quits soared in restaurants and hotels from the previous month and rose in other public-facing jobs, such as retail and education.

Compared with a year ago, the number of people quitting their restaurant and hotel jobs has almost doubled.

Quits also rose the most in the South and Midwest, the government said, the two regions with the worst COVID outbreaks in August.

When workers quit, it is typically seen as a good sign for the job market, because people usually leave jobs when they already have other positions or are confident they can find one. The large increase in August does include some goods news: It likely reflects the fact that with employers desperate for workers and raising wages, many workers feel they can get better pay elsewhere.

But the fact that the increase in quits was heavily concentrated in sectors that involve close contact with the public is a sign that fear of COVID also played a large role. Many people may have quit even without other jobs to take.

The sharp increase in job openings also has an international dimension: Job vacancies have reached a record level in the United Kingdom, though that is partly because many European workers left the U.K. after Brexit."

MY COMMENT

This is DISMAL info for small business. BUT....it is the re-opening. The beginning of the re-opening. We need to let things run their course. the big danger is that government will take various actions and make things worse. For example....tax increases. this is a HORRIBLE time to be increasing taxes.

It will be interesting to see what the FED does and when they do it. They are getting very mixed signals from the economy.....as you would expect.

 

I am sure your view is mainstream and shared by many duckleberry. Your opinions are welcome anytime.....as are the opinions of anyone else.