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.
If someone drops out of the labor force, is it due to retirement? Afterall, babyboomers are hitting retirerment. Also, does it mean these people are no longer collecting unemployment?
800,000? I think half of them live in my town. Thing is that they still have money to spend. I find it difficult to find a parking spot at Home Depot and Walmart any day, any hour. And there's always lines at McDonald's, Burger King and Wendy's. And they all have a phone stuck on their ear, so I guess there's money left over for a monthly phone bill.
Obama has also improved the employment rate by pushing unemployed workers off the unemployment rolls and onto the disability rolls where they don’t count as “unemployed”. Government now spends more on disability payments than food stamps and welfare combined.
And the Obama lovers think this was a wonderful report?
Yes, the 288K number and upward revisions of previous nonfarm payrolls numbers were good. The data from the household survey (a separate survey from which the UE rate is derived) was mainly horrific, despite the lower UE rate. According to the household survey, 73,000 fewer Americans actually have jobs.
Unfortunately, the unemployment rate only counts people collecting benefits. When you run out of benefits, you just don't count anymore. I know too many people who have given up on ever finding work again. My BIL ended up going on social security at 62 after years of not being able to find work. I've been looking for an engineering job for over two years now. I'm employed teaching high school math and science and thankful to have any job but I'm now seriously underemployed. I have another friend who hasn't had work since 2009. Fortunately, he had a side job teaching flying and makes enough doing that that he didn't have to go on SS early.
Obama has also improved the employment rate by pushing unemployed workers off the unemployment rolls and onto the disability rolls where they don’t count as “unemployed”. Government now spends more on disability payments than food stamps and welfare combined.
Good points.
Obama's whole presidency is an illusion. Hope and change was BS. They changed how they calculated GDP to fudge it higher. They changed how they calculate inflation to fudge it lower. Etc.
They've been calculating unemployment the same way for 20 years. Only now do the Bushbots complain.
When was the last time we saw a situation where hundreds of thousands of people ran out of UI benefits that have been extended beyond a year and were unable to find work? The reason people are changing the way the numbers are calculated is because the situation is different. We have people dropping off of the unemployed count not because they found work but because they ran out of benefits and they should be counted among the unemployed. I can personally name three people who are not counted because they ran out of benefits. Two of them decided to start drawing SS as soon as they turned 62 not because they wanted to retire but because it meant they had some income coming in. They would much rather be working but can't find work. Why do you think people who have run out of benefits shouldn't count in the unemployed figure?
If someone drops out of the labor force, is it due to retirement? Afterall, babyboomers are hitting retirerment. Also, does it mean these people are no longer collecting unemployment?
Numbers are flawed either way you calculate them. The official UE number doesn't count the unemployed who have run out of benefits or those who have gone on SS early because they simply cannot find work like my BIL and a friend have done. The UE number is much higher than what is being reported but the percent not in the labor force includes people who simply retired which gives a false high. So one number gives a false low and the other a false high. The real number is something between the two.
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.
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.
I know too many people who have given up on ever finding work again. My BIL ended up going on social security at 62 after years of not being able to find work. I've been looking for an engineering job for over two years now. I'm employed teaching high school math and science and thankful to have any job but I'm now seriously underemployed. I have another friend who hasn't had work since 2009. Fortunately, he had a side job teaching flying and makes enough doing that that he didn't have to go on SS early.
We have people dropping off of the unemployed count not because they found work but because they ran out of benefits and they should be counted among the unemployed. I can personally name three people who are not counted because they ran out of benefits. Two of them decided to start drawing SS as soon as they turned 62 not because they wanted to retire but because it meant they had some income coming in. They would much rather be working but can't find work. Why do you think people who have run out of benefits shouldn't count in the unemployed figure?
