Wall Street closes higher after payrolls report

[rooster59]

Wall Street closes higher after payrolls report

By Chuck Mikolajczak

 

Traders work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange shortly after the opening bell in New York, U.S., December 4, 2017. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

 

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks advanced on Friday, buoyed by a solid payrolls report for November that locked in expectations for an interest rate hike from the U.S. Federal Reserve next week and raised optimism about economic prospects in 2018.

 

Technology stocks such as Microsoft <MSFT.O>, Apple <AAPL.O> and Oracle <ORCL.N> helped pace the advance, as they continued to rebound from a selloff in the sector earlier in the week.

 

Nonfarm payrolls rose by 228,000 jobs last month amid broad gains in hiring as the distortions from the recent hurricanes faded, Labor Department data showed, topping expectations calling for a rise by 200,000 jobs.

 

Average hourly earnings rose 0.2 percent in November after dipping 0.1 percent the prior month, but fell shy of the estimated 0.3 percent rise.

 

"It’s hard to find much fault with it. I guess if you are looking to find fault it would be that the wage growth isn’t as fast as we would like it to be and came up a little bit short," said JJ Kinahan, chief market strategist at TD Ameritrade in Chicago.

 

"It’s a great report overall."

 

The Dow Jones Industrial Average <.DJI> rose 117.68 points, or 0.49 percent, to 24,329.16, the S&P 500 <.SPX> gained 14.52 points, or 0.55 percent, to 2,651.5 and the Nasdaq Composite <.IXIC> added 27.24 points, or 0.4 percent, to 6,840.08.

 

For the week, the Dow rose 0.4 percent, the S&P advanced 0.35 percent and the Nasdaq fell 0.11 percent.

 

The jobs data cemented expectations the Fed will raise rates at its meeting next week as traders now see a 96.2-percent chance of a quarter-point hike, according to Thomson Reuters data.

 

"The focus is moving to what the Fed is going to do next week, what the composition of the board is going to look like," said Rob Stein, CEO of Astor Investment Management in Chicago.

 

U.S. President Donald Trump signed legislation to fund the federal government for two more weeks, averting a government shutdown while Congress negotiated a longer-term budget deal, temporarily removing a potential headwind for stocks.

 

Microsoft rose 2.02 percent as the biggest boost to the S&P 500. The S&P technology sector <.SPLRCT> was up 0.4 percent and was on track for its fourth straight day of gains, erasing all of the nearly 2-percent decline suffered by the sector to start the week.

 

Alexion Pharmaceuticals <ALXN.O> jumped 7.2 percent and was the best performer on the S&P, after a report said hedge fund Elliott Management wanted the company to take steps to boost its stock price, including by exploring a sale. The gained lifted the S&P healthcare sector <.SPXHC> 1.1 percent.

 

Shares of American Outdoor Brands <AOBC.O> tumbled 9.5 percent after the Smith & Wesson firearms maker provided a disappointing earnings forecast. Shares of peer Sturm Ruger <RGR.N> also dropped 8.0 percent.

 

Advancing issues outnumbered declining ones on the NYSE by a 1.47-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.23-to-1 ratio favored advancers.

 

About 5.85 billion shares changed hands in U.S. exchanges, compared with the 6.53 billion daily average over the last 20 sessions.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-12-09

 

[riclag]

The market is doing fantastic, since a year ago.My stock and mutual funds have soared,now only if the Thai bht would go back up to US 36 again.

 

Fingers crossed

Edited December 9, 2017 by riclag

[tonray]

39 minutes ago, riclag said:

The market is doing fantastic, since a year ago.My stock and mutual funds have soared,now only if the Thai bht would go back up to US 36 again.

 

Fingers crossed

Yeah...what a cluster*****. I moved from Malaysia when the Ringgit was 3 to the dollar and the Baht was 36 to the Dollar. Three years later and the Ringgit is 4 to the dollar and the baht 32.5......man my timing sucks !

[Watchful]

As the article states some companies, namely firearm manufacturers, are NOT doing so hot.

 

Their problem is one of politics. Sales of firearms skyrocketed when Obama was in office, as people feared he'd appoint liberal judges unconcerned about the 2nd amendment.  Trump appears to keep his promises so there is no urgent need to buy a firearm now and sales have soften. 

 

The other interesting news on the jobs report is the growth of jobs in the manufacturing sector. Under Obama we were losing 1000+ each month. The Dems told us this was nothing to worry about because we are transforming to a "service sector" economy.  Problem, of course, is you can't raise a family on the wages paid to those flipping burgers or working at Wal-Mart. 

 

Trump's merciless attack on Federal regulators has already paid big dividends. The Obama administration was hostile to small business and hurt them badly.  Naturally, they were hostile to big business was as well, but big business has the lawyers to fight back. It was the small guys that the Obama administration able to push around. 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Watchful

[pegman]

23 hours ago, Watchful said:

As the article states some companies, namely firearm manufacturers, are NOT doing so hot.

 

Their problem is one of politics. Sales of firearms skyrocketed when Obama was in office, as people feared he'd appoint liberal judges unconcerned about the 2nd amendment.  Trump appears to keep his promises so there is no urgent need to buy a firearm now and sales have soften. 

 

The other interesting news on the jobs report is the growth of jobs in the manufacturing sector. Under Obama we were losing 1000+ each month. The Dems told us this was nothing to worry about because we are transforming to a "service sector" economy.  Problem, of course, is you can't raise a family on the wages paid to those flipping burgers or working at Wal-Mart. 

 

Trump's merciless attack on Federal regulators has already paid big dividends. The Obama administration was hostile to small business and hurt them badly.  Naturally, they were hostile to big business was as well, but big business has the lawyers to fight back. It was the small guys that the Obama administration able to push around. 

Fact, more jobs were created in Obama's last 10 months in office than Trump's first 10 months. Wage growth sucks under Trump.

[riclag]

48 minutes ago, pegman said:

Fact, more jobs were created in Obama's last 10 months in office than Trump's first 10 months. Wage growth sucks under Trump.

"It’s hard to find much fault with it. I guess if you are looking to find fault it would be that the wage growth isn’t as fast as we would like it to be and came up a little bit short," said JJ Kinahan, chief market strategist at TD Ameritrade in Chicago.

 

"It’s a great report overall."

 

jeepers, that  sounds ok to me .

Edited December 10, 2017 by riclag

[ilostmypassword]

On 12/9/2017 at 1:31 PM, Watchful said:

As the article states some companies, namely firearm manufacturers, are NOT doing so hot.

 

Their problem is one of politics. Sales of firearms skyrocketed when Obama was in office, as people feared he'd appoint liberal judges unconcerned about the 2nd amendment.  Trump appears to keep his promises so there is no urgent need to buy a firearm now and sales have soften. 

 

The other interesting news on the jobs report is the growth of jobs in the manufacturing sector. Under Obama we were losing 1000+ each month. The Dems told us this was nothing to worry about because we are transforming to a "service sector" economy.  Problem, of course, is you can't raise a family on the wages paid to those flipping burgers or working at Wal-Mart. 

 

Trump's merciless attack on Federal regulators has already paid big dividends. The Obama administration was hostile to small business and hurt them badly.  Naturally, they were hostile to big business was as well, but big business has the lawyers to fight back. It was the small guys that the Obama administration able to push around. 

You got some proof of these claims?

[Watchful]

17 hours ago, pegman said:

Fact, more jobs were created in Obama's last 10 months in office than Trump's first 10 months. Wage growth sucks under Trump.

 

You neglected to mention that Trump had to contend with 5 hurricanes. 

 

But you'll just say I'm making excuses.  So then, let's compare Trump's first 11 months to Obama's first 11 months in office.  Who has to make excuses then?

 

BTW, if current trends continue, even with the hurricanes, Trump's job gains for his first entire year will be higher than Obama's final year.

Edited December 11, 2017 by Watchful

[Watchful]

11 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

You got some proof of these claims?

Here you go...

 

https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2017-12-06/us-private-sector-adds-190-000-jobs-in-november-adp

[ilostmypassword]

11 minutes ago, Watchful said:

Here you go...

 

https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2017-12-06/us-private-sector-adds-190-000-jobs-in-november-adp

I should have been clearer in my question. It was about this:

"Trump's merciless attack on Federal regulators has already paid big dividends. The Obama administration was hostile to small business and hurt them badly.  Naturally, they were hostile to big business was as well, but big business has the lawyers to fight back. It was the small guys that the Obama administration able to push around. "

[Watchful]

3 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

I should have been clearer in my question. It was about this:

"Trump's merciless attack on Federal regulators has already paid big dividends. The Obama administration was hostile to small business and hurt them badly.  Naturally, they were hostile to big business was as well, but big business has the lawyers to fight back. It was the small guys that the Obama administration able to push around. "

Sure, here you go....

 

http://www.industryweek.com/regulations/removing-pebbles-regulatory-stream

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

29 minutes ago, Watchful said:

Sure, here you go....

 

http://www.industryweek.com/regulations/removing-pebbles-regulatory-stream

 

 

Wow! research from MAPI which is short for Manufacturer's Alliance for Productivity and Innovation. Clearly an impartial source. The report included cost of regulations such as minimum wage rules.

BAsically, that report tallied up the costs of regualtions, but left completely 100% unaddressed the benefits. Such as health beneftis from lower pollution.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/regulations-an-economic-burden-to-manufacturers-report-says/2012/08/20/3aa4501a-eb01-11e1-9ddc-340d5efb1e9c_story.html?utm_term=.ee86073352fc

[Watchful]

24 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Wow! research from MAPI which is short for Manufacturer's Alliance for Productivity and Innovation. Clearly an impartial source. The report included cost of regulations such as minimum wage rules.

BAsically, that report tallied up the costs of regualtions, but left completely 100% unaddressed the benefits. Such as health beneftis from lower pollution.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/regulations-an-economic-burden-to-manufacturers-report-says/2012/08/20/3aa4501a-eb01-11e1-9ddc-340d5efb1e9c_story.html?utm_term=.ee86073352fc

Well even the WP quotes my source and pretty much agrees with their findings.

 

Where the WP goes off the rails is using Obama's EPA estimate of the value of the "benefits".  Any guesses on how Trump's EPA will value those benefits?

 

It's BS like this that bureaucratics over the world (including Thailand) use to justify their rules and existence. "Oh there is no question about it.  Our rules are going to save two godzillion $'s over 20 years." 

 

Surely you don't believe this bureaucratic nonsense.  Even if you do, stay tuned, because you'll be getting some new nonsense from Trump's EPA.

 

Edited December 11, 2017 by Watchful

[Watchful]

2 minutes ago, Watchful said:

Deleted duplicate post

 

Edited December 11, 2017 by Watchful

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, Watchful said:

Well even the WP quotes my source and pretty much agrees with their findings.

 

Where the WP goes off the rails is using Obama's EPA estimate of the value of the "benefits".  Any guesses on how Trump's EPA will value those benefits?

 

It's BS like this that bureaucratics over the world (including Thailand) use to justify their rules and existence. "Oh there no question about it.  Our rules are going to save two godzillion $'s over 20 years." 

 

Surely you don't this bureaucratic nonsense.  Even if you do, stay tuned, because you'll be getting some new nonsense from Trump's EPA.

 

You mean in addition to the nonsense that's already coming from Trump's EPA.

And the WP definitely doesn't pretty much agree with that report. As it pointed out, the report gives 0 credit to regulations for benefits. Just compare the state of the USA's air and water before the EPA and now. There are plenty of medical/economic studies to confirm the economic value of regulations.

Even Milton Friedman conceded that in regard to environmental regulations this was the case.