Skip to comments.CBS: Chronic unemployment worse than Great Depression
Posted on 06/06/2011 9:34:07 AM PDT by Justaham
The media began the weekend making unfavorable comparisons between Barack Obamas economy and the Great Depression, and now theyre beginning the week with another one and this ones more accurate. CBS delved into the jobless numbers and discovered that the percentage of unemployed who have been out of work for more than six months now exceeds that of the 1930s economic collapse:
There is an unfortunate adage for the unemployed: The longer folks are out of a job, the longer it takes them to find a new one.
CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy reports that the chronically unemployed face the hardest road back to recovery, and that while the jobs picture may be improving statistically on a national level, it is not for them.
About 6.2 million Americans, 45.1 percent of all unemployed workers in this country, have been jobless for more than six months a higher percentage than during the Great Depression.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Oops, the honeymoon is over. You know this is not going to sit well with King Ego.
The longer you are unemployed the longer you are likely to stay that way>
I wonder how much apathy enters into that.
Obama = FDR.
I remember a saying that went something like “You have to have a job to get another job” (I’m paraphrasing). I wonder if some companies, businesses etc... look more favorably toward an applicant that is currently employed vs one (maybe with better qualifications) that is currently unemployed?
We had better talk nice to the Chinese.
Those in a long time secure position had better start watching their backs at this point.
This is a shot across Obama’s bow. The MSM needs a new set of marching orders.
Really good job search sites:
State (and territories) Job Banks
Companies DO look more favorably towards those job seekers who are currently employed. This has been common the business world for years, unrelated to the current economic downturn.
The thinking, rightly or wrongly, is as follows:
Businesses hiring for any but an entry-level type of job seek those who have experience in that area. The ideal job candidate will be someone who is currently working in the field.
And related to that, the thinking is that if a job candidate is such a great candidate, that he/she would not be out of work for long. The thinking is that if he/she were laid off, that he/she would find something else soon if he/she was a top notch candidate.
And, related to layoffs and downsizing, the thinking is that if one were such a great worker,that he/she would not have been laid off; that he/she would have been among those kept when a business went through a merger/reorganization/downsizing.
Bottom line — business people think that top notch job candidates will find work fairly quickly if they are unemployed involuntarily for any reason. That may not be fair, but that’s how many business people look at it.
I guess the saying is true then? In a way it is sad because a very good applicant can be right there. I guess he or she could explain why they are out of work. That could possibly help. I mean if an entire business shut down, it had no reflection on that employee. If they were the top 10% newest hired, and the company got rid of that %.... it makes sense. Here is a question that I have wondered: let’s say a person was let go and is an accountant (fill in any sort of job). They can’t find an accounting job right away so they get a job at Home Depot (fill in any other sort of job). Would they still look hirable as an accountant or have they forfeited that job experience because of the Home Depot association?
UHOh is the MSM starting to report the truth about their guy? If so he is in deep deep do do with no boots.
Take the banner and Barry and overlay it on a shot of those waiting in an unemployment line or old soup lines from the ‘30’s. :>
When the store is in trouble you don’t go get a starry-eyed kid out the toy aisle to turn things around, especially when the kid is as screwed up as Obama.
It all depends how long someone worked at Home Depot or some other place like that. If they worked at Home Depot for just a few months, to earn money and make ends meet, that would not be held against them. But if the time at Home Depot stretched out to nine months, let’s say, then unfortunately some employers would think, why didn’t this person find work at an accountant yet, in this example.
So shorter term temporary working at some random job so you can pay the bills won’t be held against you. But if that period of time stretches out to long term, then questions will arise as to why you still haven’t found work in the field in which you have the experience.
It is often a problem with the potential employer saying the prospective employee has been unemployed for too long a period or that they are “too old” or the potential employee’s expectations for pay and advancement will be too high or the position is below their experience level and they won’t do well with a lesser job or they have had only partime jobs for the last few years so they are unreliable. Those attitudes often leads to apathy. There are a lot of people out there trying, repeadedly, to find any job and who are honest, hard workers with a wide range of skills and experience but too many employers have set up hiring rules that exclude potential employees who might be the best choice.