MIXED EMPLOYMENT REPORT ISSUED

From The New York Times:

Two distinctly different views of the economy emerged today in a single report: the crucial employment survey issued by the Labor Department.

The economy added 166,000 jobs in October, the fastest pace in five months, according to employers. Payrolls grew at a pace more than twice what analysts had predicted, led by a sharp increase in the service sector.

But a survey of consumers showed that fewer Americans were employed last month over all. The labor force shrank by 211,000 jobs, and 465,000 Americans said they were no longer working.

The mixed employment report underscores the uncertainty on Wall Street, as analysts insist the fourth quarter will include a broad slowdown in growth and spending even as some recent reports suggest a sunnier outlook.

“You’ve got what’s good and what’s scary about this economy in this one report,” said Jared Bernstein, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute.

The estimate of job growth, which beat even the highest estimates, follows a downwardly revised 96,000 gain in September and a 93,000 gain in August, the Labor Department said. Still, payrolls are increasing at the slowest annual rate since June 2004.

The unemployment rate held steady at 4.7 percent in October, the highest rate since August 2006, but only because the survey found that more people stopped looking for work and were therefore not counted by the government as unemployed.

Manufacturing and retail jobs dropped sharply in October, underscoring analysts’ expectations that consumer spending and business activity will slow in the fourth quarter as problems in the housing market affect the broader economy.

Wages ticked up 0.2 percent, to $17.58, slightly below expectations, and are up 3.8 percent compared with those a year earlier. The length of the average workweek stayed flat at 33.8 hours.

Adding to the uncertainty about the report, most of the job gain — 103,000 of the 166,000 net new jobs — came from an estimate that the Labor Department makes each month about how many jobs were added by new businesses. The Labor Department did not actually find evidence of these jobs; it assumed they were created based on historical patterns.