Posted on 06/02/2006 2:33:29 PM PDT by nckerr
Most economists will tell you the number of underemployed or discouraged employment seekers are around another 1 percentage point above the official unemployment numbers during a period of growing GDP AS WE HAVE NOW, and a little more in a recessionary period. Don't try to mitigate good news with deceptive economic information. Economists say it is always typical to have another 1 percentage point beyond the unemployment rate of the chronically unemployed or underemployed. There will always even in the best economy, and this is shaping up to be one of them, going to be a group of people who just can't seem to find steady work. A big part of it is their own lack of education and skills more than anything about the economy itself. This doesn't need to become another tired illegal alien debate. The fact is the US economy is beginning to show signs of labor shortages.
In case you did not see my reply to this same guy, here is something about that comment of his:
Most economists will tell you the number of underemployed or discouraged employment seekers are around another 1 percentage point above the official unemployment numbers during a period of growing GDP AS WE HAVE NOW, and a little more in a recessionary period. Economists say it is always typical to have another 1 percentage point beyond the unemployment rate of the chronically unemployed or underemployed. There will always even in the best economy, and this is shaping up to be one of them, going to be a group of people who just can't seem to find steady work. A big part of it is their own lack of education and skills more than anything about the economy itself. The fact is the US economy is beginning to show signs of labor shortages.
One other point. Unemployment numbers DO reflect people who were fired for cause yet their employers take pity on them and allow them to claim unemployment benefits. This happened to me once and I've seen it happen in other cases. So there are people in those unemployment numbers who lost jobs because of lack of performance or misconduct, not just economic displacement. Also, the "given up" crowd includes people who have started home based business. These in many cases have given people higher incomes than when they were employed by others. I know of several examples just in my own life. But it is also an economic reality business experts and economics gurus have noted as a growing trend stemming out of our Internet culture.
The MSM economists always do this. When they announced 1st quarter GDP it was said to "disappoint." GDP was subsequently updated to 5.3%, an excellent figure by historical standards, but it was said again to "disappoint" because it was anticipated the revision would be 5.6%
I agree. But the one thing the LSM would fail to point out, is that the president, whoever it is at the time, never has a formal budget presented for 6-9 months in office. In other words, if sKerry were in office, there would have been nothing he'd have done that would have been legitimately attributable to him.
Unemployment numbers do, however, count all of the people who are collecting unemployment for one reason or another. Many people choose to collect for the maximum amount of time before they go back to work.
We could reduce unemployment by just shortening the amount of time that benefits would be paid.
The number is actually getting dangerously low--there aren't enough readily available workers to allow new businesses to get in.
Utter made up nonsense. Undocumented, unverified "Claims" about mythical "studies" are merely the screaming of people who simply REFUSE to deal with the Economic facts.
Simple question nukes all this nonsense. How do these people "dropping out of the labor market" live? I would LOVE to "Drop out of the labor market". This is PURE make believe used by Leftist "Economists" to justify their refusal to accurate address the facts because they are to a Republican's credit.
Utter nonsense to make up rationalizations to claim the numbers are "not really as good as claimed". They are the SAME numbers tallied the SAME way the the SAME economists raved about when Clinton was President. How you measure things must be consistent. You cannot use ONE standard when a Democrat is in the WH and another when the Republicans have it. That is intellectually dishonest.
They live with their brother, live with their sister, grandparents, parents, friend, boyfriend, girlfriend, etc. Or they are on food stamps, living in government housing, etc.
But this is only a fraction of the group that I referred to. The largest number are those who are unable to find a full-time job and have to settle for a part-time job with no benefits. Many companies are seeing this as a beneficial way to cut labor costs.
To have such a sustained level of low unemployment along with real wage stagnation is very suspect. It either nukes the existence of real wage stagnation or high levels of full employment.
During the late 90s, real wages rose. There was talk over labor shortages marked with increases in wages/salaries.
That is not happening today. Many job positions that paid "well" in the 1980s and 1990s, now pay near minimum wage: security guard, janitor, construction worker, meat packing industry jobs, etc. If there is such a high demand for labor, why have these wages decreased?
This is a fantastic report. The good news on inflation will reduce pressure on the Fed to keep bumping interest rates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.