Jobless Rate Worse Than the Headlines Say

azcentral.com ^ | 9-22-03 | Justin Bachman

[riri]

An analysis of the latest government monthly economic data suggests the unemployment situation is worse than the headlines portray.

August numbers from the Department of Labor found a 6.1 percent unemployment rate, or about 8.9 million people out of work. But in its analysis of other monthly data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc. reported the real unemployment rate was 9.1 percent.

[JeanLM]

Man, I thought I knew all the BLS series but I've never seen a U-6. Most have LNS or LNU numbers. Know the girl who runs the web site so I'll ask her.

Don't agree with the 30 year "falling wages" claim either. What's the basis?

Sure more families have 2 wage earners today, but is it by necessity or personal choice? I think the latter, but what's a necessity today was a luxury 30 years ago, so it's impossible to say

[1rudeboy]

Blaming free-trade for 3 million lost jobs is a ssttrreettcchh.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

I have had much the same experience (at 47) as you F-I-L has had at 55. I have applied for stuff that pays less than what I made in my first job out of grad school in 1980. But employers will not even give me the time of day for those jobs: They assume (rightly) that I'll leave the moment something else (better) comes through. So the idea of getting a "hamburger flipper" job with graduate degrees and decades of senior management experience is just some kind of urban legend: You can't get hired for those jobs with all those qualifications.

So you have to keep trying and working to find something appropriate...and you get one interview per month (if you're lucky). Those aren't good odds.

I still have 2 and a half months of UI left -- then who knows? I could start eating away the pensions that I've saved up over the years. I suppose after being unemployed long enough, my qualifications will deteriorate to where someone will hire me to be a "delivery boy."

[hedgetrimmer]

Your commute is getting worse because the people who run your local government do not want you to drive your car. So they do not maintain the infrastructure, they do not invest in growth. They are densifying existing urban areas(claiming they want to stop urban sprawl) so there are more and more people living on less and less land in your area, therefore adding to the crowding on the roads. They are probably giving densification bonuses to developers and landowner so they no longer build single family homes but instead build 2 3 or 4 family structures on what was once home to a single family. They are probably only allowing permits to build on transit corridors (which increases the amount of people that use your highways) and they are probably building the soviet dream, transit hubs, where the shops are the main floor and there are 3 to 6 stories of apartments(not condos) on top of that. Transit hubs are located next to mass transit, and in some places your pledge to use mass transit instead of cars gets you lower rent or access to rent the apartment. They are implementing Agenda 21. They are recreating the lifestyle of the former soviet union and most Americans have no idea its happening.

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

I like harpseal's list of ideas posted here (and on his profile page):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/984169/posts?page=337#337

FYI, historically, the Republican Party platform included a strong support of protective tariffs; just as the first 200 years of our nation's history included the use of protective tariffs. I'm sure tariffs can be misapplied, but as they are only 2 of the 13 ideas on harpseal's list, they are only a small part of the answer. A level playing field is the goal.

[Living Free in NH]

Your commute is getting worse because the people who run your local government do not want you to drive your car. So they do not maintain the infrastructure, they do not invest in growth. They are densifying existing urban areas(claiming they want to stop urban sprawl) so there are more and more people living on less and less land in your area, therefore adding to the crowding on the roads. They are probably giving densification bonuses to developers and landowner so they no longer build single family homes but instead build 2 3 or 4 family structures on what was once home to a single family. They are probably only allowing permits to build on transit corridors (which increases the amount of people that use your highways) and they are probably building the soviet dream, transit hubs, where the shops are the main floor and there are 3 to 6 stories of apartments(not condos) on top of that. Transit hubs are located next to mass transit, and in some places your pledge to use mass transit instead of cars gets you lower rent or access to rent the apartment. They are implementing Agenda 21. They are recreating the lifestyle of the former soviet union and most Americans have no idea its happening.

Wow! That's about all the doom-n-gloom I can handle for the day. Actually, I live in New Hampshire, but my commute sends me about 25 miles into the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts. They're about 2.5 years into a 3 year project to widen the entire 25 mile highway and they're doing a pretty good job, too.

[fso301]

Another behind-the-headlines figure concerns young workers. More than half of those ages 16 to 19 are unemployed and have abandoned their job hunt.

Most likely due to summer vacation being over and kids returning to school. Ignoring for a moment the GED/dropout group, half of those 16 to 19 presumably would be attending high school.

[Bob J]

His problem is he is over qualified. In other words over 55.

That would be over quantified.

[JNB]

The median, not average mind you, family income has been going down in relation to the cost of a home. About a month ago I gave the URL for two tables, one with the median price of a home compared to the median family income, and the ratio of annual median family income to cost of home went from 2.8 in 63 to 3.75 last year, and keep in mind that a far higher percentage of familes are dual income now compared to 63.

Sorry, but the luxury arguement only goes so far, most familes that have both parents working because they are required to work to make the house payments. As for the U-6 unemployment rate, take a look at U-6, the old way unemployment was tabulated till the 90s.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

That said, the way that BLS tabulates its stats are often a big joke, and often have a limited relation to reality, especially when it comes to productivity numbers.

[JNB]

The trade policy is a RAW deal for all but the top 15 to 20% of wealthiest Americans. As for the correction in oil, that will only go so far, despite what the WSJ may say.

[JohnSmithee]

"So the idea of getting a "hamburger flipper" job with graduate degrees and decades of senior management experience is just some kind of urban legend: You can't get hired for those jobs with all those qualifications."

Simple, just don't put those qualifications on your resume. Problem solved.

[JohnSmithee]

"There's always decent money in driving an 18 wheeler"

Isn't 2004 supposed to be when Mexican drivers have free access to our highways as truck drivers? I would think this might drive the rates down.

[Jim Cane]

Blaming free-trade for 3 million lost jobs is a ssttrreettcchh.

You're right. It's more the fault of nanny government interference in the market. Creating special loopholes for corporations to get around immigration laws, and insuring corporations that move overseas with both taxfunded monetary and military muscle.

Buncha wuss @ssed companies suckling at Uncle Samantha's teat for protection on their get-rich-quick scams.

[meyer]

This method of rigging the unemployment figures was brought to you by the Clinton administration. They used it, along with their special accounting "methods", to show a booming economy even when the job market/stock market started to slide. They are to blame for this whole damn mess, and if they hadn't been in office, my brother-in-law would still have a job.

I'm curious as to how it was done in the past when compared to how its done now. I wasn't aware that the methodology for determining the rate had changed.

[dandelion]

See post Post 49 - he's got a great link to a Dept of Labor page which explains the different levels... they were changed in October of 1995, I believe. Prior to that, they went by the "U6" reading, I think...

[meyer]

The median, not average mind you, family income has been going down in relation to the cost of a home. About a month ago I gave the URL for two tables, one with the median price of a home compared to the median family income, and the ratio of annual median family income to cost of home went from 2.8 in 63 to 3.75 last year, and keep in mind that a far higher percentage of familes are dual income now compared to 63.

To be fair though, a lot of the increase in housing costs has been a result of larger homes, anti-sprawl regulations in many areas, and other regulatory costs due to government. I'm not trying to take away from your point, but just wanting to temper it a bit with some additional information.

[meyer]

See post Post 49 - he's got a great link to a Dept of Labor page which explains the different levels... they were changed in October of 1995, I believe. Prior to that, they went by the "U6" reading, I think...

Thanks - I replied too early, before I had read the entire thread. I'd like to see an expanded version of that chart.

[pctech]

And what about the people who aren't looking for jobs cuz there aren't any more?

[grania]

His problem is he is over qualified. In other words over 55.

He's not alone. I substitute to supplement a small pension and am okay with it. But there are people out there substituting in their mid '50s to early '60s who have lost their pension to bankrupt companies and/or the market decline, remortgaged to tap that money for survival, and have to hang on until they are eligible for Social Security. Those that were contract work never even showed up as an unemployment statistic.

Others are working in malls and grocery stores. I would be surprised if the percentage that don't have real careers isn't more than 20%.