The boot keeps stomping us, but we don't bite.
Posted on 06/18/2012 5:28:27 AM PDT by SJackson
(CNSNews.com) – The unemployment rate for foreign-born workers in the United States is lower than the unemployment rate for native-born workers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
The BLS’s non-seasonally adjusted data show that unemployment among foreign born workers in May 2012 was 7.4 percent, while for native-born workers it was 8.0.
See Unemployment Rate Among Foreign Born.xls
See Unemployment Rate Among Native Born.xls
The data further show that while the working-age immigrant population in the United States has increased since Barack Obama became president in January 2009, immigrant participation in the labor force has declined.
The BLS derives its unemployment statistics from what it calls the civilian non-institutional population. This includes all people 16 years or older who are not on active duty in the military, or in a prison, a nursing home or a mental hospital.
According to BLS, in January 2009, there were 35,007,000 million foreign-born people in the civilian non-institutional population of the United States. By May 2012, that number was 37,504,000, an increase of about 2.5 million.
However, during the same time period the percentage of immigrants participating in the labor force declined. In January 2009, 67.2 percent of immigrants in the civilian non-institutional population were in the labor force. By May 2012, that had dropped to 66.3 percent.
People are considered in the labor force if they are part of the civilian non-institutional population and they either currently have a job or have actively sought a job in the last four weeks. If they do not have a job, and have not sought one in four weeks, they are not considered part of the labor force.
Today, there are about 12,625,000 foreign-born people in the civilian non-institutional population who are not in the labor force. Back in January 2009, there were about 11,466,000. That means there are approximately an additional 1,159,000 immigrants in the United States today who are not working, or trying to find work, than there were three and a half years ago, when President Obama was inaugurated.
BLS economists told CNSNews.com that BLS's data on the foreign born population does not distinguish between people who are in the United States legally and people who are here illegally.
The BLS does not produce "seasonally adjusted" statistics for foreign born workers. While the "seasonally adjusted" national unemployment rate in May 2012 was 8.2 percent, the non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rate was 7.9 percent.
The BLS neglects to mention that LEGAL immigrants ARE RETURNING TO MEXICO, because the ILLEGALs are UNDERCUTTING THEIR WAGES!!!
The boot keeps stomping us, but we don't bite.
And does that include the Illegal Aliens...oops, my bad, "Undocumented Visitors?" Personally, I think the BLS is full of BS!!!
Same is true for illegals, with or without papers.
Were illegals not here, American ingenuity would develop machines to do the manual labor on the cheap.
These machines would provide jobs in design and manufacturing - jobs that pay far more than farm labor.
This is the beauty of the invisible hand of the market. It is being thwarted by crooked politicians.
People are considered in the labor force if they are part of the civilian non-institutional population and they either currently have a job If they do not have a job, and have not sought one in four weeks, they are not considered part of the labor force.
How do they know who has sought a job in the last four weeks and if they haven't found one why aren't they still considered unemployed? Looking for a job should not make uou statistically employed. Also, by considering those people to not be part of the labor force they lower the labor pool and statistically increase the employment rate.
Just like figuring inflation by excluding the cost of food and fuel this is more government deception.
Co's are bringing in more Hb-1 employees.
Who is surprised that immigrants have a lower unemployment rate than native born Americans? We have denser urban inner cities full of native born Americans who never had a job in their life while most immigrants I’ve known have worked their asses off, and often at more than one job at a time.
I’m not at all surprised by this.
And yes, I understand that the inner city bums don’t count toward unemployment because they aren’t looking for jobs. My greater point is simply that most immigrants hustle and will do anything. A good portion of native born Americans will just make excuses. I don’t have half the hustle as most immigrants I’ve worked with.
They use sampling and people literally go and interview houses and they ask the question.
The BLS surveys 60,000 (if I recall correctly) households to get a statistical sample. They group people as employed, unemployed and outside of the labor force. If you don't have a job and haven't sent a single resume, filled a single application or talked to a single employer in four weeks (a pretty darn low hurdle in my opinion) the BLS counts you as outside of the workforce instead of unemployed, just the same as if you are retired or a student who isn't available to work right now. I guess you have to have somewhere to count my bum cousin who has worked in the past, but it interfered too much with his life for him to do much of it.
Just like figuring inflation by excluding the cost of food and fuel this is more government deception.
Both the full CPI and "core" CPI are calculated and published every month. The main question is who chooses which one to focus on in news reports? Strange that when fuel and food prices go up the "core" is focused on, but when they go down the full CPI is repeated on the news.
I hate to say this, but from what I see of our native borns (at least the the younger ones) this is likely because they’ve become INCREDIBLY LAZY!
Thanks for the details. As a SS recipient it is irritating to be losing purchasing power every month while the COLA is determined by the core method. Food and fuel are a large part of my budget.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/latestCOLA.html
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/cpiw.html
Is the CPI-W (for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers) an accurate measure of real price increases? Like most it is probably aimed low to benefit the government with lower COLAs and inflation adjusted bond yields, but it is the one the COLA is based on by law.
... so the COLA was 0% in 2009 and 2010.
That must be what is affecting my thinking because I haven't seen any movement in quite a long time despite increasing costs across the board.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.