Sorting Out Job Numbers

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ^ | April 11, 2004 | JON E. HILSENRATH

[sarcasm]

The unemployment rate seems to indicate the job market isn't all that bad. At 5.7% in March, it is just a notch above its average of 5.6% for the past half century.

But many economists believe the unemployment rate can be misleading and that an obscure indicator called the employment-to-population ratio is more accurate.

[stylin19a]

GWBush is President. So let's change the formula. NOW it's Bush's fault. .....

[Congressman Billybob]

As I wrote in my column two weeks ago, the "drop out" rate -- those who have left the work force because they are discouraged -- is NOT an unknown. It stands at 0.30% now. During the Clinton interregnum, it stood at 0.23%. The difference amounts to 91,000 extra unemployed but unreported people.

The indirect statistics in this article come from an economics professor on the same faculty as Paul Krugman. Need I say more?

Congressman Billybob

Click here, then click the blue CFR button, to join the anti-CFR effort (or visit the "Hugh & Series, Critical & Pulled by JimRob" thread). Please do it now.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

In the past year, the number of people who were "not in the labor force" rose by 1.4 million. They're leaving for different reasons. Some are going back to school. Some are retiring early.

All signs of a prosperous economy that allows people to improve themselves or enjoy their accumulated wealth.

At 62.1% in March, the employment-to-population ratio is hovering near its lowest level in a decade.

I wonder how this compares within a longer historical perspective and how much of that is due to mothers having the ability to stay home with their children.

[OkiMusashi]

Wouldn't this proposed new-fangled method yield goofy results over time as the big wave of Baby Boomers retire?

Please disregard if the artile addresses the question ... I plan to read the rest of it after this post.

(BTW, Great article the other day, Congressman Billbob! Do it some more!)

[Peach]

Under Clinton, the discouraged worker drop out rate was 0.23%.

Under Bush, the discouraged worker drop out rate is 0.30%.

A distinction without a difference.

This was discussed on CNBC and in an article by the Heritage Foundation last week. I do not have a link to that article or I'd place it here.

[OkiMusashi]

I owe that last post a "Y". Here it is:


y

[fedupjohn]

Here it comes, now that the job creation is starting to happen, they have to find a way to lose that info...so create some new way to make everything look bad. I can here it now, new talking points.. the employment-to-population ratio is hovering near its lowest level in a decade.

[Too_Bad]

A growing number of people, however, effectively have stopped looking for work. When this happens, people who might otherwise be counted as unemployed are instead counted as not in the labor force, helping to hold down the unemployment rate.

In the past year, the number of people who were "not in the labor force" rose by 1.4 million. They're leaving for different reasons. Some are going back to school. Some are retiring early. Some are too discouraged to even look for a job.

Others who are no longer in the labor force are those who have become "professional investors", i.e. those who live on the income from their assets such as stocks, bonds, trust funds, annuities, real estate and other investments. These individuals are out of the defined labor force by choice.

[Always Right]

In the past year, the number of people who were "not in the labor force" rose by 1.4 million. They're leaving for different reasons. Some are going back to school. Some are retiring early. Some are too discouraged to even look for a job.

Self-employment has grown about by 1 million, so that is the #1 reason and it is not even mentioned. Can't WSJ find someone smart enough to really examine this and not leave out important factors.

[Go Gordon]

Self-employment has grown about by 1 million, so that is the #1 reason and it is not even mentioned.

I thought the same thing. Isn't it better when people are self-employed and own their business versus being dependent on a company that makes 8-track tapes, earth shoes or leisure suits?

[ETERNAL WARMING]

Isn't it better when people are self-employed and own their business

That's why the bankruptcy rates are at an all time high. Self employment needs a market. The wages are so low, people can't afford goods and services. Hence, bankruptcy.

[Congressman Billybob]

Glad you liked my last article. I think you will like the next one just as much. Please help me move up from arguing politics in the abstract, and putting the same thinking to work in the Congress of the US. Check the address with my signature.

Cordially,

John / Billybob

[Ronaldus Magnus]

You're right, that's exactly what they are doing.

[fedupjohn]

Since I'm new to posting...been lurking since '98 how do you change the script to itallic. I tried to import from Word but it changed it to regular.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

Welcome to posting. Basically, formatting on the web uses a type of programming called Hyper-Text Markup Language (HTML). It is very easy and can be practiced in the FreeRepublic HTML Sandbox where you can learn to format text, post links, and insert pictures.

To answer your specific question, put a "<i>" in front of the text you want italicized and a "</i>" after it. Also, insert a <p> for new paraghraphs and a <br> for line breaks.

[ex-snook]

"GWBush is President. So let's change the formula. NOW it's Bush's fault. ..... "

This is all just history. How can we expect this President to act unless he knows specifically when and where job layoffs are going to occur?

[fedupjohn]

Welcome to posting. Basically, formatting on the web uses a type of programming called Hyper-Text Markup Language (HTML). It is very easy and can be practiced in the FreeRepublic HTML Sandbox where you can learn to format text, post links, and insert pictures.

Thank you very much....