LA Unemployment hits 9.9% - LA Times (Los Angeles, Needles: job market, calculated, statistics)

[NickelDime]

California unemployment rate jumps to 9.3% - Los Angeles Times

[buckeyenative01]

9.9% is abysmal, but there's what, 38 million people in California? I'd be a helluva lot more concerned if California had Michigan's [dwindling] population and a 9.9% unemployment rate...

[timelesschild]

Why is that, Buckeyenative?

[buckeyenative01]

Because Michigan has about a fourth of California's total population and a shrinking job market. While this is a crappy time to look for a new job anywhere, its not like there's a dearth of opportunities (even though most new job openings pay terribly) in California compared to what's happening in the rustbelt, where there aren't any employment opportunities. 9.9% of a state with 38 million people is lot better (statistically speaking) than 9.9% of a state with 8 million people. That's not to say 9.9% unemployment is a terrible number, but in comparison to what other states are experiencing in this recession, it could be a lot worse for California.

8% of Arizona is unemployed right now, and the state has a population of about 5.5 million. Needless to say, there's a lot of panicking in Arizona right now.

[JTGJR]

Originally Posted by buckeyenative01

9.9% is abysmal, but there's what, 38 million people in California? I'd be a helluva lot more concerned if California had Michigan's [dwindling] population and a 9.9% unemployment rate...

The 9.9% is LA County only. California, as a whole, is at 9.3%.

[buckeyenative01]

Originally Posted by JTGJR

The 9.9% is LA County only. California, as a whole, is at 9.3%.

Christ, that was stupid of me.

[timelesschild]

Originally Posted by buckeyenative01

Because Michigan has about a fourth of California's total population and a shrinking job market. While this is a crappy time to look for a new job anywhere, its not like there's a dearth of opportunities (even though most new job openings pay terribly) in California compared to what's happening in the rustbelt, where there aren't any employment opportunities. 9.9% of a state with 38 million people is lot better (statistically speaking) than 9.9% of a state with 8 million people. That's not to say 9.9% unemployment is a terrible number, but in comparison to what other states are experiencing in this recession, it could be a lot worse for California.

8% of Arizona is unemployed right now, and the state has a population of about 5.5 million. Needless to say, there's a lot of panicking in Arizona right now.

OK, fair enough. I was taking it from the other direction, thinking that 9.3% of 38M = 3,534,000 unemployed people, which is enough to populate an entire state = scarier than 440,000 unemployed people [8% of 5.5M].

If LA County has roughly 10,000,000 residents, I wonder how many of them are considered to be unemployed? Surely not 990,000? All those babies and old people don't count. How are unemployment numbers calculated? Anybody happen to know? Charles?

[JTGJR]

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

How the Government Measures Unemployment

[SandyCo]

People not in the labor force are excluded from employment/unemployment statistics. This includes stay-at-home parents, retired people, etc. People who were in the labor force but now are looking for work are included in the unemployment number. However, if their unemployment benefits run out, are they still counted? Or do they just fall off the map?

[timelesschild]

Originally Posted by SandyCo

People not in the labor force are excluded from employment/unemployment statistics. This includes stay-at-home parents, retired people, etc. People who were in the labor force but now are looking for work are included in the unemployment number. However, if their unemployment benefits run out, are they still counted? Or do they just fall off the map?

My husband just now explained this to me. Once their unemployment benefits run out, they become invisible.