[RunD1987]

About 410 people loss job's in CT in the month if October and one business was closed.

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73

The UE stat has been beaten to death. Unless one has been living under a rock since 2009, one knows that after one falls off the unemployment rolls (as a long term unemployed person) he/she is no longer counted as unemployed.

I maintain a "whazzup" correspondence with eight former colleagues and neighbors, all in their fifties. Five of the eight left the state for TX, Atlanta and Huntsville (a terrific engineering town). I'll call them the emigres.

Three out of the five emigres left without jobs in hand (ca. 2010-2012), calculating that they could live on the bone longer "there" than "here". The other two emigres got jobs before they left by virtue of using relatives' local addresses, and partaking of relative's shared accommodations while dashing down for interviews. They are - all five colleagues - now gainfully employed. Don't know about spouses, and didn't ask. Longest job search was six months. Shortest was ten weeks. All five say they are better off having left. These five colleagues would have fallen off CT UE stats long before they left, thereby improving the CT UE stats.

The three remaining colleagues are - in fact - members of the LT unemployed cohort, stuck in CT. Thankfully for them, their spouses maintain income continuity via state employment. They will be in a world of hurt if the spouses get fed up. They, too, have fallen off the CT UE stats, thereby improving CT's numbers.

Despite your anecdotes that somehow all the people you know in CT are unemployed, we've tracked UE numbers the same way for decades. I only seem to hear this explanation of falling UE numbers during Democratic administrations. I wonder why... There is no doubt that many are underemployed and, in their 50's many find their skills incongruent with the job market, but these are trends that predate the current economy and administration.

I actually live here. No one in my circle is involuntarily unemployed. Maybe you have a particularly unemployable set of friends....

I'd ask others who actually live here (as opposed to those who complain from afar) how many unemployed people do you know?

It's amazing that when the same people who decry UE stats as fraudulent, have no mercy for the poor and hold them fully responsible for their underemployment-- but when it's your friends and neighbors it's the governments fault....

[RunD1987]

Isn't the number like 100,000 people in the state are unemployed

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by RunD1987

Isn't the number like 100,000 people in the state are unemployed

\


Labor Market Information - State of Connecticut Labor Situation

98,651

[Henry10]

Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73

The UE stat has been beaten to death. Unless one has been living under a rock since 2009, one knows that after one falls off the unemployment rolls (as a long term unemployed person) he/she is no longer counted as unemployed.

I maintain a "whazzup" correspondence with eight former colleagues and neighbors, all in their fifties. Five of the eight left the state for TX, Atlanta and Huntsville (a terrific engineering town). I'll call them the emigres.

Three out of the five emigres left without jobs in hand (ca. 2010-2012), calculating that they could live on the bone longer "there" than "here". The other two emigres got jobs before they left by virtue of using relatives' local addresses, and partaking of relative's shared accommodations while dashing down for interviews. They are - all five colleagues - now gainfully employed. Don't know about spouses, and didn't ask. Longest job search was six months. Shortest was ten weeks. All five say they are better off having left. These five colleagues would have fallen off CT UE stats long before they left, thereby improving the CT UE stats.

The three remaining colleagues are - in fact - members of the LT unemployed cohort, stuck in CT. Thankfully for them, their spouses maintain income continuity via state employment. They will be in a world of hurt if the spouses get fed up. They, too, have fallen off the CT UE stats, thereby improving CT's numbers.

Who says that Houston, Atlanta, and Huntsville dont count the unemployed the same as CT?

Who says that these 3 cities have a better REAL unemployment rate than Stamford for example. If Houston, AtLanta and Hunstville are booming, then it's meaningful to compare with e booming CT city, and not a ****hole.

Who says that motivation to find a job for the three CT friends is the same as the departed ones?

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

Despite your anecdotes that somehow all the people you know in CT are unemployed, we've tracked UE numbers the same way for decades. I only seem to hear this explanation of falling UE numbers during Democratic administrations.

The big deal recently is the decline in the percentage of the population in the workforce (the article isn't new but nothing has changed much since it was written):

Why are people leaving the workforce? - CBS News

The official count is only of people actively seeking work, not 'discouraged job seekers':

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

Some argue U-6 is a better measure than U-3 (the official rate). But even U-6 doesn't count some people who "retired" when they were going to lose their jobs anyway. And I'm pretty sure it doesn't count people officially listed as disabled, which is a number that keeps increasing.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Henry10

Who says that Houston, Atlanta, and Huntsville dont count the unemployed the same as CT?

Who says that these 3 cities have a better REAL unemployment rate than Stamford for example. If Houston, AtLanta and Hunstville are booming, then it's meaningful to compare with e booming CT city, and not a ****hole.

Who says that motivation to find a job for the three CT friends is the same as the departed ones?

The methodology for determining unemployment rates is the same across the country. Just like the problem of underemployed people. I know of no data saying it is a worse problem here. Jay

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

Despite your anecdotes that somehow all the people you know in CT are unemployed, we've tracked UE numbers the same way for decades. I only seem to hear this explanation of falling UE numbers during Democratic administrations. I wonder why... There is no doubt that many are underemployed and, in their 50's many find their skills incongruent with the job market, but these are trends that predate the current economy and administration.

I actually live here. No one in my circle is involuntarily unemployed. Maybe you have a particularly unemployable set of friends....

I'd ask others who actually live here (as opposed to those who complain from afar) how many unemployed people do you know?

It's amazing that when the same people who decry UE stats as fraudulent, have no mercy for the poor and hold them fully responsible for their underemployment-- but when it's your friends and neighbors it's the governments fault....

Same here. I know a couple of people in their 50's that lost their jobs in the recession but have all found employment. Only one was for a period longer than a couple of months. Two found jobs immediately. Go figure. Jay

[JayCT]

Lockheed Martin has completed its purchase of Sikorsky and appears to be committed to remaining in Stratford. Good news for Connecticut though I am sure there will be some who have something negative to say about it. Jay

Lockheed Martin commits to Sikorsky future in Stratford - Connecticut Post

[RunD1987]

Heard the state overall this year has cut $240 million dollars to hospitals in the state!!!

http://stopthecutsnow.org/