Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: Latest Unemployment Numbers

  1. #1
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Latest Unemployment Numbers

    I am going to try extra hard to keep this apolitical but something does NOT add up. According to the latest numbers we added 120,000 net new jobs in November.Unemployment went down from 9 % to 8.6 %. BUT the number of people ( 315,000 ) who left the labor market went UP. And 120,000 is a lot lower than the 200,000 minimum jobs necessary just to keep pace with population growth. Some say we really need 250,000 new jobs per month.

    One theory is that a LOT of people are seeing their 99 weeks of Unemployment benefits run out. Meaning they stop being counted and become sort of "non-persons". At least as far as the DOL statisticians are concerned. A related theory is that unemployment is counted using "base line" rather than "zero base " statistics.

    The labor participation rate is DOWN to 64%. Long term unemployed are up 43%. Wages are only up 1.5% for 2011 meaning that REAL wages are down.

    Lastly, these are Payroll Survey numbers AND pick up large payroll SEASONAL hiring ( large retail ; UPS; Federal Express etc. ). Let's see what the numbers are for January and February after all the Dept. Store Santas hang up their red suits and go back to the home.

    I am very curious to see if the Household Survey ( which tracks small business and self-employment ) shows similar type "increases" in employment.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    There are a few things being missed in this and the mosy important is that most of the jobs being created are temp holiday jobs, jobs that will disappear by mid January.

    I am seeing many new quality jobs but most of them are specific skilled jobs. Personally, I noticed something interesting once I switched my field concentration and that is I am finding more jobs specific to me, but I switched from PR/Marketing, which is very youth orientated and mostly hires recent college grads to instructional design, which requires specific skills most don't have (namely Captivate or Articulate and Flash). Also, unlike pr/marketing which is low paying and very competitive, instructional design is high paying and not as competitive.

  3. #3
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    a LOT of people are seeing their 99 weeks of Unemployment benefits run out
    this seems to be a 'top secret' statistic, but the independent numbers tend to indicate that the number of 99ers falling off the unemployment rolls is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30,000 per month. This obviously doesn't explain a departure of 315,000 unemployed Americans from the latest official monthly unemployment statistics ( they certainly didn't find jobs but merely disappeared from the 'official labor force' ).


    most important is that most of the jobs being created are temp holiday jobs, jobs that will disappear by mid January.
    very true ... with the addition of 'low paying service oriented' in regard to those temp holiday jobs.


    There is also something very 'fishy' going on with the most recent numbers ... from

    (snip)"Payrolls climbed 120,000, after a revised 100,000 increase in October, with more than half the hiring coming from retailers and temporary help agencies, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington. The median estimate in a Bloomberg News survey called for a 125,000 gain.

    The unemployment rate, derived from a separate survey of households, was forecast to hold at 9 percent. The decrease in the jobless rate reflected a 278,000 gain in employment at the same time 315,000 Americans left the labor force.

    “You’d like to see the unemployment rate coming down when people are coming into the job market, not disappearing,” James Glassman, senior economist at JP Morgan Chase & Co. in New York, said in a radio interview on “Bloomberg Surveillance” with Tom Keene. "(snip)

  4. #4
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    but perhaps most important of all from a 'real world' perspective ... from


    (snip)"Secondly, 120,000 new jobs is well below the necessary job creation level to return the country to full, healthy, emplyment. I say "healthy employment" because technically if enough people fall off the rolls into the category of "discouraged worker", where they are no longer counted, we could have a much lower unemployment rate - it just won't be a good thing.(snip)


    The above comment makes reference to the inconvenient fact that, on an annualized basis, about 150,000 ( varies with different sources ) NEW jobs needed to be created per month in order to 'absorb' new entrants into the US labor force and therefore stop the 'real world' unemployment rate from rising. This means that, on the average, 150,000 new high school / college graduates, legal immigrants, etc. come into the US labor pool every single month. While the reported 120,000 net jobs created last month was an improvement over the previous month's 100,000 net job creation number, both still fall short of breaking even in terms of 'real world' US employment levels.

    In order to establish the existance of a trend that the US unemployment problems are actually improving, that economic growth is actually taking place, etc., 200,000+ net new jobs need to be added every month. Even with last month's 'seasonal' hiring surge, we're not even close to achieving that level. And as pointed out by others, it's to be expected that a fair number ( 50% per Bloomberg ) of those finding jobs last month ( i.e. the seasonal / temporary workers ) will again show up as unemployed a couple of months down the road.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 12-03-2011 at 04:08 AM.

  5. #5
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    I went looking for more specific info and found this analysis by Tim Wallace at


    (snip)"In the entire history of the labor force data, only in 1951, 1961, 1964, and 2009 did the labor force "shrink". It also "shrank" in 2011 off 2010. Also note that from 1964 to 2007, only in 1991 at 631,000, 1995 at 723,000 and 2002 at 801,000 did the labor force fail to add more than 1,000,000 people.

    However, in 2008 the labor force only expanded by 776,000. This was followed by a loss of 826,000 in 2009, a trivial gain of 155,000 in 2010 and a loss of 67,000 in 2011.

    If you look at the average labor force growth from 1948 to 2007 of 1,579,000 the labor force should have expanded by 6,316,000 2008-2011. Instead the labor force expanded by a mere 38,000!

    Thus, 6,278,000 people are unaccounted for in the unemployment numbers
    based on historical averages.


    The final graph takes the adjusted data and calculates the unemployment number off the adjusted workforce and those that actually have jobs. The unemployment numbers using this historical trend method show the following numbers for November in these years:

    Unemployment Rate Adjusted for Population Growth

    2007 4.7%
    2008 7.3%
    2009 11.7%
    2010 12.4%
    2011 12.2%



  6. #6
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Here is another very troubling statistic : Only 7 % of formerly unemployed people who found new employment report getting a job that pays the same or more than the last permanent job they had. Meaning that most people are taking lower paying jobs than what they originally had.

  7. #7
    God/dess cherryblossomsinspring's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,244
    Thanks
    2,454
    Thanked 4,800 Times in 1,707 Posts
    My Mood
    Angelic

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Does this count for people who may have two or more jobs? Also people that are not working "on the books"?

  8. #8
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Also people that are not working "on the books"?
    That's actually a trick question. People working 'off the books' but who are still claiming unemployment insurance benefits at the same time are included in the official statistics as 'unemployed'. People working 'off the books' but not claiming unemployment insurance benefits fall into the 6,278,000 statistic that are unaccounted for ( and thus not counted as unemployed )

  9. #9
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    455
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 175 Times in 109 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    The new normal includeds many who are under employed......... This number is way up I'm guessing.
    The country has been looted.

  10. #10
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Quote Originally Posted by mikef View Post
    The new normal includeds many who are under employed......... This number is way up I'm guessing.
    No need to "guess". Underemployed are counted just like unemployed. Especially in the Household Survey. If you add unemployed and underemployed and then add discouraged workers you get a REAL unemployment rate of around 20%.

  11. #11
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Fair is fair. Both new and existing unemployment claims are down for November. For now. History says that we won't know for sure until about three months from now after the DOL makes all their revisions and adjustments.

    Given the busy Christmas shopping season ( which is already slowing down dramatically btw ) it will be important to see how many "new" hires are permanent and how many are "seasonal".
    Last edited by Eric Stoner; 12-08-2011 at 11:38 AM.

  12. #12
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    ^^^ but fair is only fair if all the numbers are counted. Existing unemployment claims have been dropping by ~10,000 per month or whatever in recent months due to the 99 weeks of 'extended' unemployment benefit eligibility finally running out ... which in turn drops those long term unemployed people into the 'black hole' of no longer being 'officially' unemployed but not actually being employed either ( joining with the 6.2 million Americans who have already fallen into that 'black hole' ). Rising levels of food stamp recipients and social welfare benefit recipients seem to corroborate that a fair number of the '99-ers' are exchanging unemployment checks for welfare checks not paychecks ... which is contrary to the 'obvious conclusion' that falling existing unemployment numbers are due to unemployed Americans finding jobs !!!

  13. #13
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Um yeah, BUT, new claims are also down. All I am saying is that things APPEAR to be stabilizing and that unemployment APPEARS to have stopped worsening.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Not to mention that not all unemployed Americans even qualify for welfare programs.

  15. #15
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    OK I'll bite ! Where are the increasing number of food stamp recipients coming from if the number of Americans with jobs is actually increasing ( as the recent unemployment statistics would 'logically' imply ) ? Or to be factually correct, that the rate of US job loss is slower now than in in previous months ( going back to the 150,000 new jobs per month needed to offset new high school grads / college grads / legal immigrants entering the US work force every month on the average )

    I'll concede one possibility ... that as the long term unemployed are losing their 99 weeks of unemployment checks, they are finally being forced to accept jobs at 'globally competitive' pay rates that are low enough to still make them eligible for social welfare benefits / food stamps. However, this isn't a net positive development where the US economy is concerned ... IMHO at least ... given that such low pay rate workers and their families consume far more tax revenue than they generate. But such low paying jobs DO reduce 'official' unemployment.

    I'll concede another possibility that was already the subject of a 'caveat' ... that the addition of 'seasonal' employees for the Thanksgiving through Christmas 'shopping season' ( retail sales jobs, delivery jobs etc. ) significantly skewed the most recent unemployment statistics upward, but will soon skew unemployment statistics in the opposite direction !

    However, before I can seriously entertain the assertion that 'things are getting better', somebody needs to show me actual net job gains in excess of the 150,000 per month 'break even point' for at least a couple of consecutive months. The revised numbers for 3Q inched up towards 140,000 per month ... which is less 'negative' but still not 'positive'. And, besides the issue of seasonal hiring, that was also skewed by the fact that state and local gov'ts are continuing to pay public sector workers using 'borrowed' money ... something that will eventually have to balance out i.e. reduced tax revenues = reduced public sector employment levels ( since no public sector employee union has been willing to accept pay cuts so far ). Without additional comment I'd point you towards .
    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 12-08-2011 at 02:28 PM.

  16. #16
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    455
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 175 Times in 109 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Um yeah, BUT, new claims are also down. All I am saying is that things APPEAR to be stabilizing and that unemployment APPEARS to have stopped worsening.
    Stabilizing maybe...... But total employement is more than 5.5 million below pre crash levels....... And 1.5 million below levels just as the recession officially ended...... In order to get back to a 5% unemployment rate, the US needs to create over 150 million jobs...... That's not happening.
    The country has been looted.

  17. #17
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Quote Originally Posted by mikef View Post
    Stabilizing maybe...... But total employement is more than 5.5 million below pre crash levels....... And 1.5 million below levels just as the recession officially ended...... In order to get back to a 5% unemployment rate, the US needs to create over 150 million jobs...... That's not happening.
    Please check your numbers. "150 million" jobs ? Our population is just over 300 million.

    I agree with you and Mel that new job creation is far too low to have any positive impact. All I am saying is that the numbers MIGHT be indicating that unemployment has stopped increasing. Maybe. We will see what the next few months bring. Regardless of what the numbers really are and really mean we still have a long, long way to go.

    Mel is also correct that we have more people on Food Stamps ( now called SNAP btw for "Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program " ) than at any time in our history. But, you don't have to be unemployed to qualify. You DO have to work at low wages.

    Btw, household wealth declined for the second straight quarter.

  18. #18
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    we have more people on Food Stamps ( now called SNAP btw for "Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program " ) than at any time in our history. But, you don't have to be unemployed to qualify. You DO have to work at low wages.
    I conceded this possibility in conjunction with the fact that unemployment checks are no longer coming in for some ~10,000 unemployed Americans per month who have crossed the 99 week limit. Indeed some of these Americans now have little choice but to accept jobs paying $8-10-12 an hour ( which net of payroll taxes is lower than their former unemployment checks ). But from a national economy viewpoint, people working for these low wages ( and paying zero income taxes ) while collecting SNAP benefits, medicaid benefits, housing and utility assistance benefits etc., are still exerting a large and arguably permanent negative economic burden. Thus the fact that formerly unemployed Americans who were creating a temporary economic burden ( collecting unfunded extended unemployment benefit checks ) are transitioning to low wage workers who are now creating a permanent economic burden ( via SNAP, medicaid, other social welfare benefits ) is NOT a positive development where the national economy is concerned.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    I have to agree with the fact that job creation is way too low. I am noticing a trend though and that is employers are paying way below a set wage for jobs. For example my field generally pays $50,000+ being it's a technology field. However I am seeing a lot of wages around $30,000 which is way too low for the field. Why? because of the economy and because some of these jobs can be done overseas.

    Like I said up thread everyone is saying that many of these people are getting assistance and that's not completely accurate. Sure, there are many more on assistance I agree with that. However, not everyone qualifies for assistance even if they have no money. In Illinois if you have no kids all you can really qualify for is a low amount of food stamps, if that. So in fact many people are not getting any money and no assistance. Also, many of these poverty wage jobs do not hire overqualified people so if you are overqualified they will not hire you. I don't know the stats, but I'm willing to bet the majority of those receiving assistance are those who were in unskilled fields.

  20. #20
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    455
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 175 Times in 109 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Please check your numbers. "150 million" jobs ? Our population is just over 300 million.

    I should have not used the word create....... We need over 150 million total jobs to bring the US to full employment....... Defined as an Unemployment Rate of 5%
    The country has been looted.

  21. #21
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    455
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 175 Times in 109 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellydancer View Post
    I have to agree with the fact that job creation is way too low. I am noticing a trend though and that is employers are paying way below a set wage for jobs. For example my field generally pays $50,000+ being it's a technology field. However I am seeing a lot of wages around $30,000 which is way too low for the field. Why? because of the economy and because some of these jobs can be done overseas.

    Like I said up thread everyone is saying that many of these people are getting assistance and that's not completely accurate. Sure, there are many more on assistance I agree with that. However, not everyone qualifies for assistance even if they have no money. In Illinois if you have no kids all you can really qualify for is a low amount of food stamps, if that. So in fact many people are not getting any money and no assistance. Also, many of these poverty wage jobs do not hire overqualified people so if you are overqualified they will not hire you. I don't know the stats, but I'm willing to bet the majority of those receiving assistance are those who were in unskilled fields.


    The squeeze is certainly on.
    The country has been looted.

  22. #22
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Quote Originally Posted by mikef View Post
    I should have not used the word create....... We need over 150 million total jobs to bring the US to full employment....... Defined as an Unemployment Rate of 5%
    That makes a lot more sense. Thanks for clarifying.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    Quote Originally Posted by mikef View Post
    The squeeze is certainly on.
    It really is. There are a lot of people falling through the cracks who can't get assistance and can't get a job. This is going to get really nasty very soon if this continues.

  24. #24
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    I found some 'under the hood' November statistics at


    (snip)Quick Facts on Unemployment Rate

    •In the last year, the civilian population rose by 1,726,000. Yet the labor force fell by 67,000. Those not in the labor force rose by 1,793,000.

    •In November, those "Not in Labor Force" rose by a whopping 487,000. If you are not in the labor force, you are not counted as unemployed.

    •Were it not for people dropping out of the labor force, the unemployment rate would be well over 11% (snip)


    The fairly obvious point here is that these gov't 'adjustments' to the official labor force number vastly overshadow the actual number of jobs / unemployment claims being reported.


    There are a lot of people falling through the cracks who can't get assistance and can't get a job. This is going to get really nasty very soon if this continues
    Going back to my earlier point, the payment of 'extended' unemployment benefits takes place on the 'federal' dime. However, once those 99 weeks of checks stop coming, and the unemployed person attempts to apply for social welfare benefits, those social welfare benefits are predominantly funded at the 'state' and 'local' level. This leads to a fairly obvious conclusion that states which have above average unemployment rates and generous social welfare benefits are going to see their budget deficit problems growing even worse than they already are !!!

    Also asserted that, for unemployed single persons without children, expiration of their 99 week unemployment benefits plus limited eligibility for social welfare benefits does create strong leverage for them to ( finally ) accept $8-10-12 an hour jobs. But this in turn creates a ripple effect which will eventually depress other US wage rates, as has already been pointed out. And of course, if that single person happens to be female, strong leverage also exists for her to become pregnant - which will in turn lead to much more 'generous' social welfare benefit eligibility ( although this is a topic for a different thread ).

    I would also assert that expiration of their 99 week unemployment benefits will also prompt some number of long term unemployed to finally decide to physically relocate to other states and cities where economic opportunities are better. Circumstantial evidence of this can be gleaned from the following stock chart for U-Haul ...

    Last edited by Melonie; 12-10-2011 at 04:29 AM.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Latest Unemployment Numbers

    But here's the thing and that is many of those jobs you mention do NOT hire overqualified. So basically in this scenario it's better to be a high school grad versus a college grad and more likely to be hired. So many of the college grads are forced to move in with relatives and they may struggle. That's what I am seeing. Plus at least in Illinois those with college degrees are not eligible for job retraining but those with high school are.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 02-07-2012, 09:57 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-10-2011, 05:48 AM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-16-2011, 02:10 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-18-2010, 04:24 AM
  5. Playing with unemployment numbers
    By Deogol in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-22-2009, 11:48 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •