Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsFriday, November 6, 2009
News / Economy Unemployment: Worse than You Thought!
Posted by Unpaid Intern on Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Post by news intern Garrett McCulloch
The national unemployment rate cracked 10 percent for the first time in 26 years, as noted in Slog's patented Morning News. But it's really a lot worse than that. When you count people who have given up looking for jobs or have settled for part time jobs, the rate jumps to 17.5 percent, the worst since the government began tracking the broader numbers in 1994. The New York Times has an interesting couple of interactive diagrams of the statistics.
In "glimmer of hope" unemployment news, President Obama signed a bill granting a federal extension for as much as 20 further weeks of unemployment benefits this morning, boosting the maximum benefits possible to just over two years.
1
One thing to watch for is that as people become more hopeful they will more from the given-up group and into the job seeking group. At that point we may see a bump up in the base number and a decrease in the broader measure.
While breaking ten is not good, the pace of job loses has slowed dramatically. Employment is a trailing indicator and usually peaks a few months or more after the end of a recession. If the current good numbers coming out are part of a trend we could see that number start to come down by the end of the year or first part of next.
While breaking ten is not good, the pace of job loses has slowed dramatically. Employment is a trailing indicator and usually peaks a few months or more after the end of a recession. If the current good numbers coming out are part of a trend we could see that number start to come down by the end of the year or first part of next.
2
@ 1 - giffy
Seriously, dood, if you believe the statistics, which are wondrously manipulated downward, you are truly and unfortunately naive!
A BLS study (Bureau of Labor Statitics) published in the NY Times and their blog about a month ago, crunched the real numbers and concluded that the Private Sector had effectively created zero jobs, I repeat, ZERO JOBS, from the period of July 1999 to July 2009.
This is due to Corporate America having reached CRITICAL MASS with regard to the offshoring of jobs. They have created plenty of jobs overseas, but effectively zero here!
The pace of real job loss hasn't slowed dramatically, as you so claim, we are actually in the cascading downward spiral when those "service jobs" dependent upon all the offshored jobs are now dissolving. (This is known as the "multiplier effect" in economics, which works both ways.)
And if you truly believe the hype about "the recession being over" --- I suspect you may be harboring a crush on the Tooth Fairy still (or the Easter Bunny?). Real economic indicators are still negative and sinking.....the growth in the GDP is directly related to the monetizing of debt (printing of money) which results in upward pricing of commodities (both oil/energy, and "soft" commodities such as foodstuffs, etc.) and the growth in actual debt, which is always recorded as growth in the GDP numbers.
Over the preceding 10 years, from 1999 to the present, if the growth in real debt is subtracted from the GDP stats, the American economy has been steadily shrinking.
Your optimism is based upon zero data, simply sound bytes from the pop culture media.
Seriously, dood, if you believe the statistics, which are wondrously manipulated downward, you are truly and unfortunately naive!
A BLS study (Bureau of Labor Statitics) published in the NY Times and their blog about a month ago, crunched the real numbers and concluded that the Private Sector had effectively created zero jobs, I repeat, ZERO JOBS, from the period of July 1999 to July 2009.
This is due to Corporate America having reached CRITICAL MASS with regard to the offshoring of jobs. They have created plenty of jobs overseas, but effectively zero here!
The pace of real job loss hasn't slowed dramatically, as you so claim, we are actually in the cascading downward spiral when those "service jobs" dependent upon all the offshored jobs are now dissolving. (This is known as the "multiplier effect" in economics, which works both ways.)
And if you truly believe the hype about "the recession being over" --- I suspect you may be harboring a crush on the Tooth Fairy still (or the Easter Bunny?). Real economic indicators are still negative and sinking.....the growth in the GDP is directly related to the monetizing of debt (printing of money) which results in upward pricing of commodities (both oil/energy, and "soft" commodities such as foodstuffs, etc.) and the growth in actual debt, which is always recorded as growth in the GDP numbers.
Over the preceding 10 years, from 1999 to the present, if the growth in real debt is subtracted from the GDP stats, the American economy has been steadily shrinking.
Your optimism is based upon zero data, simply sound bytes from the pop culture media.
3
To any and all who read this article, I would recommend you attend the Town Hall talk by Nomi Prins, author of "It Takes A Pillage" - the best and most honest book out there about the bailouts, bonuses, and existing financial situation, which takes place on Thursday, December 3rd, at 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM, Seattle Town Hall.
She was also the author of the outstanding book which presaged our present financial circumstances, "Other People's Money: The Corporate Mugging of America."
She was also the author of the outstanding book which presaged our present financial circumstances, "Other People's Money: The Corporate Mugging of America."
6
Extending unemployment benefits to Two Years isn't a "glimmer of hope".
It's a resigned surrender to despair.
It's a resigned surrender to despair.
8
Are recent college grads considered part of these statistics, or just people who had jobs and lost them?
9
And the right-wing idiots who populate much of my shitty Florida town still rant and rave about how everyone on unemployment drives Cadillacs and own plasma TVs and are simply too lazy to get jobs.
10
I wonder how much of a statistical blip was caused by the extension of unemployment benefits to 99 weeks, since our system only counts those people as unemployed who have benefits and are actively looking for work ...
11
JOURNALISM FAIL:
Wouldn't it be important to note that Seattle's own Jim McDermott sponsored this Bill? Every time I look at the Stranger, I'm reminded why I switched to reading Publicola.
Wouldn't it be important to note that Seattle's own Jim McDermott sponsored this Bill? Every time I look at the Stranger, I'm reminded why I switched to reading Publicola.
14
@8 recent college grads are not counted in either number. Also not counted are those that retired because they could not find another job. Also not counted are those who lost their jobs and never filled for unemployment.
The real number is closer to 20%
The real number is closer to 20%
16
To #8 (with the intelligent question): The answer is NO.
To #10 (with the statistics-challenged inquiry): The answer is NO.
To further explain reality to #1: For some peculiar reason, people of your ilk believe THE ECONOMY to be some magical, whimsical entity. It is not.
Especially in America, where we no longer possess an economy. We simply exist in a "financial engineering" bubble, for at least a little while longer. We are presently living through the Great Financialization as they have disassembled the economy over the previous thirty years or so.
This was performed by those debt-financed billionaires, also known as greedsters, greedheads and banksters.
Once again I repeat for the hard of hearing, there is NO ECONOMY in America, simply people passing money back and forth until that too completely collapses.
And with regard for those fallacious and artificial unemployment stats, if there was any true or real correlation between the various categories such as payroll and unemployment beneficiaries and farm, non-farm employment, etc., then they might appear accurate -- but since the continues to be numerous variances, it suggests they are fudged and contrived.
Likewise, a number of the components which make up such stats involve voluntary reporting compliance, which means they are bullshit! Also, the politicians pull various stunts to make the stats appear better.
During Ronald Reagan's administration, I shared a house with a BLS statistician just before he moved out to get married and take on a new mortgage. Reagan didn't like the reality-based unemployment stats the BLS statisticians were reporting, so he cut their number in half.
My former roommate and I went through the layoffs to ascertain any pattern --- what Reagan had done was only keep the half with recently acquired mortgages, i.e., those who were the most economically vulnerable and therefore the easiest to dissuade from negative statistics reportage.
More...
To #10 (with the statistics-challenged inquiry): The answer is NO.
To further explain reality to #1: For some peculiar reason, people of your ilk believe THE ECONOMY to be some magical, whimsical entity. It is not.
Especially in America, where we no longer possess an economy. We simply exist in a "financial engineering" bubble, for at least a little while longer. We are presently living through the Great Financialization as they have disassembled the economy over the previous thirty years or so.
This was performed by those debt-financed billionaires, also known as greedsters, greedheads and banksters.
Once again I repeat for the hard of hearing, there is NO ECONOMY in America, simply people passing money back and forth until that too completely collapses.
And with regard for those fallacious and artificial unemployment stats, if there was any true or real correlation between the various categories such as payroll and unemployment beneficiaries and farm, non-farm employment, etc., then they might appear accurate -- but since the continues to be numerous variances, it suggests they are fudged and contrived.
Likewise, a number of the components which make up such stats involve voluntary reporting compliance, which means they are bullshit! Also, the politicians pull various stunts to make the stats appear better.
During Ronald Reagan's administration, I shared a house with a BLS statistician just before he moved out to get married and take on a new mortgage. Reagan didn't like the reality-based unemployment stats the BLS statisticians were reporting, so he cut their number in half.
My former roommate and I went through the layoffs to ascertain any pattern --- what Reagan had done was only keep the half with recently acquired mortgages, i.e., those who were the most economically vulnerable and therefore the easiest to dissuade from negative statistics reportage.
17
@ 14,
And don't forget minors. They don't count minors who lost their jobs, because minors are considered dependents of their parents and their income is considered 'disposable', whether that is true or not.
And don't forget minors. They don't count minors who lost their jobs, because minors are considered dependents of their parents and their income is considered 'disposable', whether that is true or not.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Liveblogging the Washington State House Debate and Vote
onIN FAVOR OF GAY MARRIAGE by Eli Sanders -
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
Required Listening: Howard Stern on Ellen, JC Penney, Bullied Gay Kids, Rosie, Santorum, Bachmann, et al by Dan Savage
-
It's Not Over Until We Say It's Over by Dan Savage
-
Jeff Bezos' Racist, Pro-Life, Anti-Evolution, Rape-Apologist Search Engine by Goldy
-
Yesterday's Best Arguments Against Gay Marriage by Eli Sanders
-
SL Letter of the Day: Tower of Label by Dan Savage
-
Which Kind of Bus Person Are You? by Megan Seling
-
Santorum Wins Colorado by Paul Constant
-
"Let me be the first one to say: My business will refuse to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony," by Republican Representative Matt Shea of the Spokane Valley by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (17) RSS