An unemployment number you can believe (unemployment rate, wages, Reagan, Clinton)
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.
The study includes underemployed workers in the "jobless" heading, which is misleading.
If you take a look at the real jobless rate based on people who have quit looking and/or fallen off the unemployment benefits due to timing, and people who go back to school because they can't find work, it is likely around 15%+.
30% or more is just ludicrous. About 30% of the US is eligible to be in the workforce which means there's a pool of about 100 million workers in the USA. About 8 million lost their jobs since 2006 and about 2 million more have become disenfranchised since then, so with a pre-2006 unemployment rate of about 5%, tack on another 10% and you have about 15% unemployment.
Like it or not, the Fed was probably the only thing that prevented outright Depression II since they decided to become a lender of last resort. They remember what happened in the first Depression when fiscal conservatives wanted to tighten monetary policy ... it just dried up the credit markets even more and millions went out of business and bankrupt. The last thing we need is to tighten it up again.
I'm not happy about it because the Fed's balance sheet has swelled to a ridiculous level, but it's better than the alternative. I'd rather have stagnation than Depression, and let's hope it doesn't take another World War to boost our industrial output again.
The YSU study also includes the underemployed - people who aren't able to get full-time jobs due to the economy; people on sick leave or early retirement; recipients of government aid, such as a low-wage worker getting Earned Income Tax Credits, or prison and jail populations.
So it seems like the 30% is a little bit of a high estimate.
In general, sounds like those wealthy people that we give all them tax cuts to aren't creating all the jobs that the tax cuts were supposed to help them create......
People actually believe that employment will go down significantly sooner or later?
No. It will continue to go up and there is no stopping it. When the economy improves executives and those working will get even higher raises to themselves. They won't hire more people because a) they are simply NOT needed as we have enough production already and b) they have access to millions of foreigners that can work for near slave wages.
It is going to be a "fun" future to say the least.
Of course it's unmitigated drivel. Why on earth would convicts be counted as unemployed??? And they double-count marginally-attached workers who also apply for SS.
And yet their resulting fantasy-land rate is only 50% higher than it was in 2007. The real unemployment rate is 80% higher than 2007. So their premise that the UE rate is being understated is patently ludicrous.
If you allow that the term "un/under employed" includes every healthy adult between 18 and 65 who isn't self supporting from ONE forty hour per week job let alone those qualified for and capable of doing more than they are...
The study includes underemployed workers in the "jobless" heading, which is misleading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by C.C
Of course it's unmitigated drivel. Why on earth would convicts be counted as unemployed??? And they double-count marginally-attached workers who also apply for SS.
And yet their resulting fantasy-land rate is only 50% higher than it was in 2007. The real unemployment rate is 80% higher than 2007. So their premise that the UE rate is being understated is patently ludicrous.
Um, look, people, at one time convicts were counted as unemployed.
If you don't believe me, just ask Jimmy Carter.
What you are looking at is the way unemployment was calculated up until I think it was June of 1979, so to suggest is that it is "unmitigated drivel" is absurd.
Carter was successful in getting convicts removed, but not the military.
Reagan was successful in getting the military removed. At that time all military members were counted as "unemployed" even though they volunteered for service and even though many re-enlisted. Reagan just threatened to fire the DOL people if they didn't stop counting the military.
And so that's how unemployment was calculated up until 1994 when Clinton changed the formula to hide the fact that unemployment was climbing so he could win the 1996 Election and wouldn't have to worry about "It's the Economy, stupid!" being thrown back in his face.
You need to look at that information, because it gives you a true picture of what is happening to your economy.
So now why don't one of you big brains ask a stupid question like, "When is the housing market going to pick up?
Um, look, people, at one time convicts were counted as unemployed.
If you don't believe me, just ask Jimmy Carter.
What you are looking at is the way unemployment was calculated up until I think it was June of 1979, so to suggest is that it is "unmitigated drivel" is absurd.
Carter was successful in getting convicts removed, but not the military.
Reagan was successful in getting the military removed. At that time all military members were counted as "unemployed" even though they volunteered for service and even though many re-enlisted. Reagan just threatened to fire the DOL people if they didn't stop counting the military.
And so that's how unemployment was calculated up until 1994 when Clinton changed the formula to hide the fact that unemployment was climbing so he could win the 1996 Election and wouldn't have to worry about "It's the Economy, stupid!" being thrown back in his face.
You need to look at that information, because it gives you a true picture of what is happening to your economy.
So now why don't one of you big brains ask a stupid question like, "When is the housing market going to pick up?
Probably a few months after Super Bowl LVII
So you think it makes perfect sense to count convicts??? And I suppose we should give them UE benefits too??? Not to mention the "marginally attached" who really really really want a job so bad it hurts, just not bad enough to spend 5 minutes filing even one online application once in the last month???
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.