U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-19-2009, 06:28 PM
 
925 posts, read 2,295,754 times
Reputation: 529

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by actinic View Post
Take a look at the metro areas with the lowest unemployment rates.

Unemployment Rates for Metropolitan Areas

Why do their rates remain so low? Wouldn't unemployment jump with the migration of new people there? Sure, their rates have gone up somewhat but definitely no more than high unemployment regions.

Some folks are unable to move but does that fully explain it? Could there be other factors such as plain *unwillingness* to move, fostered by an economic system which provides unemployment benefits, thus less incentive to move?

I see a lot of chatter here about places people wouldn't move to. Do they really have the choice?
It's called having fewer free-loaders who decide to get a job instead of claiming unemployment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-19-2009, 08:36 PM
 
1,604 posts, read 3,508,901 times
Reputation: 1527
Quote:
Originally Posted by actinic View Post
For the mobile segment like recent college grads you would think they would be flooding these areas but the stats aren't showing this.
That's because unlike the good ol' days (any time during the 90s), us 2009 college grads aren't being blessed with a crap load of job offers from these companies that are located at these cities of low unemployment (like many of you probably did when you graduated from college). And it isn't like we're not looking.

Trust me, many college grads including myself would be more than willing to move if we were guaranteed the jobs at those locations.

Last edited by Do a Barrel Roll; 06-19-2009 at 09:03 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 06:43 AM
 
Location: Western North Carolina
4,966 posts, read 7,905,457 times
Reputation: 10490
I do not believe these low employment states necessarily have a lot more jobs to offer. I think there is a much smaller population in those states that is seeking and competing for the jobs that are available.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 07:59 AM
 
Location: Orange, California
1,573 posts, read 5,661,206 times
Reputation: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by actinic View Post
While I agree with this it leads to the inescapable conclusion that the unemployment rates are less grim that the statistics suggest. Why? Because a portion of the unemployed remain unemployed as a matter of choice.

Can't be all that bad if they the financial means to stay put.
I think it is just the opposite. Unemployment, and also underemployment, are worse than the statistics suggest. The US Department of Labor keeps statistics on the ranks of the unemployed. But if someone has been unemployed for six months or more, they stop counting you on the assumption that you are no longer looking for work. While some people may indeed give up on work after a significant period of unemployment, I think there are huge numbers of people out there that have been out of work for six or more months and are still looking for jobs. Presently, these people are not counted as unemployed. To compound the employment problem, the statistics also do not count as unemployed the white collar bank worker who is now "underemployed" and waiting tables or serving coffee at a coffee shop.

As for why more people aren't relocating. I think that having a network and/or family in their current town is important, and they would rather preserve that network than take a risk in moving to a town that some magazine says has better employment opportunities, but might not have as rosy of a job picture when you put your feet on the ground there. Also, it costs money to relocate. You cannot discount this financial cost for people who are currently unemployed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 11:19 AM
 
56,960 posts, read 81,305,553 times
Reputation: 12593
Quote:
Originally Posted by City Fanatic View Post
It's called having fewer free-loaders who decide to get a job instead of claiming unemployment.
Actually, you can still work and collect benefits due to requirements.

Also, corporate welfare might actually have a bigger impact than individuals or familes that collect "welfare", considering most don't even stay on it that long. Here are some myths in regards to "welfare": Five Media Myths About Welfare

Welfare to Work: Myths

Eight Great Myths About Welfare

Myths and Facts (http://hcom.csumb.edu/welfare/resources/myths_facts.html - broken link)

This also doesn't get into the "working poor" as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 11:22 AM
 
2,097 posts, read 5,883,189 times
Reputation: 918
Rates aren't going to jump with people migrating into a region.. In order for rates to jump, there needs to be JOBS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2009, 01:06 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
34,735 posts, read 33,779,908 times
Reputation: 52021
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoarfrost View Post
But do you really think a person used to New York, LA, Chicago, or Boston is going to adjust to living in such a radically different situation? Do you really think they're going to take the huge paycut even if the COL is lower? You also have to consider the types of jobs that are available.

Life's not all about getting a job and a cheap place to live. Not to everyone, it isn't.
How would one assess that if no one is shilling for anything in the national news media but New York, LA, Chicago, Boston, etc? Every day you are being sold on the wonders and the specialness of living where the national news media goes/what the national news media talks about/where the national news media lives/what Hollywood depicts. Why do you think, for example, a person who has never left NYC or has never been anywhere but there or their annual touristy vacation spots, wets their pants over living in the southeast or the midwest? It's not because they actually know anything about those places they've never been to before. They believe the bill of goods they're being sold or they don't even think to question it. I know people who have never lived more than 25 miles from where they lived all of their lives on Long Island. Yeah, maybe every once and awhile they go to Disneyworld or skiing in Vermont. Who do you think they get their information from about places in, for example, the southeast or midwest? Those snobs in the NYC media? Hollywood movies/TV shows? People should be asking themselves, "How come I'm not hearing about Iowa City's low unemployment rate?" How can you make an assessment when you aren't getting the whole story about what's out there?

My favorite example of this joke is when there was a hurricane coming for Louisiana, either last year or the year before. The national news media went to New Orleans. When they found out the hurricane was going to direct hit somewhere in Louisiana west (I think) of NO, they stayed in New Orleans and we got 24/7 news coverage of rain drops in a puddle and location footage of what could have happened if it hit particular spots in New Orleans. They were such urban elitists they couldn't manage to pick themselves up and go 20 to 40 miles down the road to report on what happened in the small town where the hurricane actually made a direct hit. It's actually pretty disgusting when you think about it.

Last edited by LauraC; 06-21-2009 at 01:16 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2009, 09:35 AM
 
10,630 posts, read 23,458,110 times
Reputation: 6703
^ Of course many people living in the cities you mention are from other places originally, and do in fact know what their alternatives are.

For every big city person who doesn't want to live in a smaller place there is someone in a smaller town also similarly refusing to move to a big city for a job. It goes both ways.

I do agree that there are many city snobs on here (not necessarily on this thread, but on the forums in general) who do seem to have seldom, if ever, visited the areas they like to bash, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2009, 10:08 AM
hsw
 
2,144 posts, read 6,361,314 times
Reputation: 1523
Complex question raised by OP; most humans aren't rational creatures in either their career or personal life choices, and many jobs require skill sets that many jobless lack

Saw a stat recently (?in Harv Crimson) that ~40% of Harvard's '09 undergrad class is unable to secure a job offer by graduation; step back and think about that....these people spent 4 yrs and ~$250K to get a piece of paper that's unable to help them obtain a job in today's economy: IMO, a sad commentary on career relevance or economic value of Harvard undergrad

Would argue it's a failure of parents and one's choice of a liberal arts college (such as Harvard) for one not to be prepared for inevitability of business cycles/bubbles/busts and to not choose to obtain a college degree from the best possible college w/highest possible grades in a job-relevant major like computer science or finance, etc, not "murky", non-quant lib arts majors like English, poli sci, Asian studies, blah-blah

Can imagine that rates of un/underemployment are even greater among other college grads from less prestigious colleges w/similarly useless majors....employers can (and should) be quite picky about whom they hire in a difficult economy when profits are under stress and many smart, hungry, skilled workers are available (and willing to relocate)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2009, 07:21 AM
 
1,426 posts, read 2,598,346 times
Reputation: 828
Quote:
Originally Posted by hsw View Post
Can imagine that rates of un/underemployment are even greater among other college grads from less prestigious colleges w/similarly useless majors....employers can (and should) be quite picky about whom they hire in a difficult economy when profits are under stress and many smart, hungry, skilled workers are available (and willing to relocate)
Which brings up a whole different topic about WHY colleges offer such useless majors and continue to raise tuition without apology during a recession. The economy is rapidly making universities, at least at current numbers, a white elephant while vocational training offers a far better bang for the buck in this day and age.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top