Toggle sidebar

Bad News For People Who Hate Good News (economy added 243,000 jobs in January)

  • HELLO AGAIN, Guest! We are back, live! We're still doing some troubleshooting and maintenance to fix a few remaining issues but everything looks stable now (except front page which we're working on over next day or two)

    Thanks for your patience and support! MUCH appreciated! --Brett (BamaNation)

    if you see any problems - please post them in the Troubleshooting board!

RammerJammer14 said:
Its just math. The number of people out of work remains the same, but the number of available jobs decreases, resulting in a lower unemployment percentage. The exact same amount of people are still out of work, but shrinking of the job market effectively vaporizes some of those people, mathematically (because there is no longer a job for them to fill). You can't be unemployed for a job that doesn't exist.

I think bamacon is also saying that Obama is taking the resulting decreased unemployment % of a shrinking jobs market while at the same time counting those who were kicked off of unemployment/quit looking as if they were employed.

hope that helped
Click to expand...

There it is. Thanks RJ14. It is a lot easier to see if you put the numbers up. When you look at the figures each month with jobs added, unemployment claims, those dropping out of the pool etc. they never add up. You just keep seeing where overall jobs disappear.
 
bamacon said:
There it is. Thanks RJ14. It is a lot easier to see if you put the numbers up. When you look at the figures each month with jobs added, unemployment claims, those dropping out of the pool etc. they never add up. You just keep seeing where overall jobs disappear.
Click to expand...

Color me confused...I'm not sure how the unemployment rate ever went up to 10-ish percent in the first place if disappearing jobs or fewer available jobs causes the rate to go down. Now, if one were to argue that disappearing jobs causes the unemployed to give up and exit the job market (i.e. no longer looking for work, no longer taking unemployment, or suddenly becoming "disabled"), I could see where the official unemployment rate would come down. I don't believe the number of available jobs is part of the actual unemployment rate calculation.
 
Something's not jiving with Obama's numbers. With all the new employment we're gloating over, wouldn't some of those newly employed be taken off the food stamp rolls?

I don't believe there has been a decline in those receiving food stamps while the new Obama economy roars right along.
 
ValuJet said:
Something's not jiving with Obama's numbers. With all the new employment we're gloating over, wouldn't some of those newly employed be taken off the food stamp rolls?

I don't believe there has been a decline in those receiving food stamps while the new Obama economy roars right along.
Click to expand...

Maybe he's counting jobs he's created and saved. ;)
 
cbi1972 said:
How the Government Measures Unemployment

Unemployment figures measure the number of unsuccessful job seekers as a percentage of the labor force, NOT friction in filling open jobs. If the number of available jobs somehow became zero, unemployment would be 100%, not 0%.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking that available jobs = labor force. So the labor force has "shrunk" mathematically, dropping unemployment.

Now, I'm not sure what is true one way or the other and I take all of those numbers with a grain of salt. Was just trying to explain the math (I thought thats what you were confused about) :)
 
RammerJammer14 said:
I'm thinking that available jobs = labor force. So the labor force has "shrunk" mathematically, dropping unemployment.

Now, I'm not sure what is true one way or the other and I take all of those numbers with a grain of salt. Was just trying to explain the math (I thought thats what you were confused about) :)
Click to expand...

Labor force includes those who are employed, and also those unemployed who are looking for work. It has nothing to do with available jobs.
 
February jobs report is out . . .

U.S. employers added 227,000 jobs in February to complete three of the best months of hiring since the recession began. The unemployment rate was unchanged, largely because more people streamed into the work force.

The Labor Department said Friday that the unemployment rate stayed at 8.3 percent last month, the lowest in three years.

And hiring in January and December was better than first thought. The government revised those figures to show 61,000 an additional jobs.

The economy has now generated an average of 245,000 jobs in the past three months. The only stretch better since the recession began was in early 2010.
Click to expand...

http://www.npr.org/2012/03/09/148288478/u-s-economy-added-227-000-jobs-in-february
 
cbi1972 said:
Labor force includes those who are employed, and also those unemployed who are looking for work. It has nothing to do with available jobs.
Click to expand...

That was what I meant to say earlier. I caused the confusion. Sorry. The number is dropping just because the 99ers drop off the unemployment rolls i.e. give up looking. When they do that it drops the number overall. Both sides do this but it's the same reason they do seasonally adjusted...count census workers etc.
 
Mamacalled said:
You got the rosey picture. I read an article yesterday from NY Times that was adjusted for seasonal workers and it reflected an unemployment rate of 9.1%.
Click to expand...

That is the Gallup #. It is higher because they do not do a "seasonal adjustment". They just factor the raw numbers.

Ragrdless of which is used it is a sucky number and America could and should be doing better.
 
In my neck of the woods, the economy is showing real signs of improvement. In real terms, all of my friends are fully employed again. But I believe that the Keynesian solution proved to be a huge failure. We are exactly where both parties said that we would be at this point if they did nothing. Yep - they warned America that, without the bailouts, we would lose 10 million jobs, and we would still be 5 million jobs short of a complete recovery in 4 years. Guess what - they got their bailout, and we are still 5 million jobs short.

So, either everyone drastically underestimated the severity of the problem 4 years ago, or Hayekians have been fully vindicated.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Government drove the stupid train.

Banks were either forced to be stupid or did so with government partnership.

Borrowers could never have acted on their existing stupidity if the government had not created the cheap money and relaxed standards.
Click to expand...
Yeah, repeal of Glass Steagall allowed the inmates to take control of the asylum.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Government drove the stupid train.

Banks were either forced to be stupid or did so with government partnership.

Borrowers could never have acted on their existing stupidity if the government had not created the cheap money and relaxed standards.
Click to expand...

And now we are expected to accept $5/gal gas and 8+ percent unemployment as being "good" and "normal".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back