Skip to comments.Why 6.7 percent unemployment isn't good news: We Keep Ignoring Those Who Have Stopped Looking.
Posted on 01/10/2014 7:32:36 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The US unemployment rate dropped to the lowest level since 2008, partly because many unemployed have stopped looking for work. Only 74,000 new US jobs were created in December.
Yes, a scant 74,000 jobs in December, the fewest in three years. The disappointing figure ends 2013 on a weak note and raises questions about whether the job market can sustain its recent gains.
The Labor Department said Friday that the unemployment rate fell from 7 percent in November to 6.7 percent, the lowest level since October 2008. But the drop occurred mostly because many discouraged Americans stopped looking for jobs. Once people without jobs stop looking for one, the government no longer counts them as unemployed.
It's unclear whether the sharp hiring slowdown might lead the Federal Reserve to rethink its plan to slow stimulus efforts. The Fed decided last month to pare its monthly bond purchases, which are designed to lower interest rates.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
I’ve looked for the yearly numbers on total population, working age population, and the number of people employed but have had a tough ie finding them. the labor dept’s numbers are fishy and I’d like to use the IRS for the number of people working/submitting tax returns
know where I can get such data for the last 20+ years?
RE: I can’t forget how 5% was REALLY BAD under Bush.
And even then, did we ignore those who have stopped looking and dropped out of the workforce?
And when it was 4.5% during Bush the media made it out to be catastrophic.
It’s a total lie. That’s what it is.
It’s to allow them to ram amnesty and massively increased H1B visas down our throats. They couldn’t do that if the numbers were truthful.
They ignore those that are long term, didn’t qualify for unemployment, those underemployed. Heck, the MSM and Govt. has been ignoring inflation. Bring back the Misery Index while this Occupant is still in the White House.
130 MILLION AMERICANS are out of work... DC wants to extend unemployment payments out for another 12 months... from the present 99 weeks... they are paying these people not to work so that the unemployment rate goes down. When no one has a job... we will all be on unemployment and we will be at 0% unemployment. Does anyone see something drastically wrong with this thinking?
I have never counted.
I graduated over three years ago with a physics and business degree, and I’ve only been able to work seasonal retail ever since.
It’s depressing to think about, really. I’m 25 now. All I want is to provide for my family and work hard, and I can’t find an opportunity to do so.
Good Lord, you must be living in some area of the country that is totally depressed.
Have you ever thought to moving to where the jobs are?
It’s actually funny today to listen to the spin from the MEDia
Obama - reducing unemployment by reducing jobs!
SOURCE: BUREAU OF LABOR AND STATISTICS
The worst news comes in the workforce numbers. Those not in the workforce increased by 525,000 in December (91.808 million), after a one-time drop in the figure for November (91.283M from 91.756M in October). Thats a big exodus of people from the workforce, dwarfing the meager number of jobs added in the economy. Part-time work remained essentially constant at 7.8 million, so the exodus points to an ugly, ugly trend.
study up on entrepreneuers and how they got started
then get started on your own and work for yourself
start something small, or several somethings
a young couple here started a business called “Doody Calls’ and contract themselves to clean up dog crap from yards, apartments and condos. It’s not rocket science but bet they make more money than you do.
someone like you ought to be running a tutoring service for the public, or for businesses whose workers need to improve their math, business and English skills
And here's the really great news. The unemployment rate has dropped below 6.9%!
|But the stock market is doing
Any unemployment numbers released by the Obama administration ought to be at least suspect if not regarded as total fabrication. Remember the cooked unemployment numbers released just before the 2012 election.
Well I’ve been to California and El Paso, not exactly known for their job markets. :-) My husband is also Army so it has its own special challenges..
Just think; with over a million losing their unemployment, they will become part of the reduction of unemployment percentages. Obama can brag about the great reduction in unemployment under his reign.....and the suckers will cheer.
The unemployment rate (the way its calculated) is not affected by whether you start to collect unemployment benefits, continue to collect them, or whether they have expired.
Once these people lose their unemployment, they no longer exist. They are not counted among the unemployed. Unemployment goes down.
Incorrect, incorrect, and not surprisingly, incorrect.
Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment, the Government uses the number of persons filing claims for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under State or Federal Government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.
Other people think that the Government counts every unemployed person each month. To do this, every home in the country would have to be contactedjust as in the population census every 10 years. This procedure would cost way too much and take far too long. Besides, people would soon grow tired of having a census taker come to their homes every month, year after year, to ask about job-related activities.
Because unemployment insurance records relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then. For instance, beginning in 1994, the CPS estimates reflect the results of a major redesign of the survey. (For more information on the CPS redesign, see Chapter 1, “Labor Force Data Derived from the Current Population Survey,” in the BLS Handbook of Methods.)
There are about 60,000 households in the sample for this survey. This translates into approximately 110,000 individuals, a large sample compared to public opinion surveys which usually cover fewer than 2,000 people. The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, all of the counties and county-equivalent cities in the country first are grouped into 2,025 geographic areas (sampling units). The Census Bureau then designs and selects a sample consisting of 824 of these geographic areas to represent each State and the District of Columbia. The sample is a State-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each State. (For a detailed explanation of CPS sampling methodology, see Chapter 1, of the BLS Handbook of Methods.)
Every month, one-fourth of the households in the sample are changed, so that no household is interviewed more than 4 consecutive months. This practice avoids placing too heavy a burden on the households selected for the sample. After a household is interviewed for 4 consecutive months, it leaves the sample for 8 months, and then is again interviewed for the same 4 calendar months a year later, before leaving the sample for good. This procedure results in approximately 75 percent of the sample remaining the same from month to month and 50 percent from year to year.
Each month, 2,200 highly trained and experienced Census Bureau employees interview persons in the 60,000 sample households for information on the labor force activities (jobholding and jobseeking) or non-labor force status of the members of these households during the survey reference week (usually the week that includes the 12th of the month). At the time of the first enumeration of a household, the interviewer prepares a roster of the household members, including their personal characteristics (date of birth, sex, race, Hispanic ethnicity, marital status, educational attainment, veteran status, and so on) and their relationships to the person maintaining the household. This information, relating to all household members 15 years of age and over, is entered by the interviewers into laptop computers; at the end of each day’s interviewing, the data collected are transmitted to the Census Bureau’s central computer in Washington, D.C. (The labor force measures in the CPS pertain to individuals 16 years and over.) In addition, a portion of the sample is interviewed by phone through three central data collection facilities. (Prior to 1994, the interviews were conducted using a paper questionnaire that had to be mailed in by the interviewers each month.)
Each person is classified according to the activities he or she engaged in during the reference week. Then, the total numbers are “weighted,” or adjusted to independent population estimates (based on updated decennial census results). The weighting takes into account the age, sex, race, Hispanic ethnicity, and State of residence of the person, so that these characteristics are reflected in the proper proportions in the final estimates.
Best source of economic statistics in the world.
RE: A lot of it is structural driven by demographics (baby boomer retirements).
We really need a more accurate indicator to tell us how good or how bad the employment situation is.
For those who aren’t in the workforce, we should also weed out those that are RETIRED ( i.e. on social security ). These aren’t discouraged workers ( people who we should take into account in the data ) anymore.