David Stockman Shock Blog: The Real Unemployment Rate Is 42.9%

Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | June 30, 2015 | Rush Limbaugh

[zeugma]

42% is a bit on the high side. YOu really do need to take into account things like full time mothers and whatnot. Just from personal observation, I'd put it closer to 25%-35% unemployment. Given the way welfare works, I doubt we'll ever see it below 15%, because there is a large segment of our population that simply is unable to actually hold a job. They've never had one, never wanted one, and never will.

Personally, I can't relate to that as I've had a job as full time as I could be since I was 10 years old, but definitely I see it. Even of the percentage of folks who are actually 'employed' at once job or another, what percent of those are just basically vampires sucking the life out our country, like bureaucrats, and other government leeches? Being extremely generous to the leeches, I'd tack on another 10-15% that is nothing but a drain on the productive citizens.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

According to the U.S. Census Bureau Statistical Abstracts from 1931 to 1939 the U.S. Nonfarm Unemployment Rate averaged 29.2% with a peak of 37.6% in 1933. By 1939 it was still 25.2%. This was a result of the "stimulus" economic measures enacted by Presidents Hoover and Roosevelt, which included much higher taxes, much more regulation, huge increases in government spending, and a tremendous expansion of government (sound familiar?). The consequent malaise lasted right through WWII until the end of the 1945 recession, with hyper-inflation in 1946, and a falling GDP until 1947. (Liberals like Paul Krugman today insist that the war stimulated the economy – except that the malaise in non-war sectors of the economy persisted and the war ended with the whole economy in a recession, as do most wars. Living standards under war rationing and price controls had still not returned to the level of the late 1920s.)

As a comparison, following the 1920 Depression (which was deflationary and worse than the Great Depression), President Harding responded with austerity measures of drastically reducing taxes, regulations, government spending and the size of government. The depression was over in less than two years. From 1923 to 1929 unemployment averaged 5.5%.

Using a similar unemployment measurement standard today results in an average rate since the 2008 financial crisis above 14%. It would be much higher, except that unlike then, today there are many government entitlement programs.

You can read more about it here.

[stilloftyhenight]

There isn’t a “depression” in DC. DC is booming. There isn’t a depression in the upper 15%.

It’s the rest of us, thus they deny that it is taking place.

I am now part of the working poor, having my hours slashed. I work hard for my money. I’m thankful that I have a job, even though I struggle to make ends meet.

Where I live, I don’t find that high number surprising. The truth of it is, it’s getting very dangerous in the streets. Desperate people do terrible things. The crime rate is soaring.

[SaveFerris]

It’s at least 35%. Just the numbers above show it. I accept the higher number because of underemployed who are not working jobs like they did in the 1990’s.

[Arthur McGowan]

"Productivity is so much higher now than in 1933, you don’t need as many workers, due to automation, robot factories, better production techniques, that sort of thing."

A common, primitive economic fallacy.

You don't need as many workers, PROVIDED your goal is to MAINTAIN THE STANDARD OF LIVING OF 1933.

[jocon307]

Yeah, it’s high, higher than the “official” number, but it ain’t 42%, that’s nonsense.

If the unemployment level were even 1/2 of that my commute to work would be dreamy, as it is, it’s hell.

Those aren’t job seekers or welfare recipients clogging the Jersey roads each and every gosh darn day.

[unsycophant]

The taxpaying public would be outraged if they knew the true dollar amounts being funneled to the “disabled” — anywhere from a 1000.00 to 250,000 per person, per year. (I’m not talking about people with obvious physical or mental disabilities).

HIPAA laws were enacted to prevent the public (mostly those on the Right) from seeing the actual dollars being doled out by the left to entice voters to keep the money flowing by voting Dems each and every time.

The amount of money being spent, is staggering.

[Georgia Girl 2]

I have no doubt its true. Simple math tells you that 5.6% is gross lie.

[CodeToad]

Unlike the Great Depression we don’t have Soup Lines, we have Food Stamps, SNAP. 46 million or so in the soup line of today.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

There were two rates used during the Roaring Twenties and the Dirty Thirties, with the Nonfarm rate being the official rate. New measurement methods were implemented in 1940, the U-1 to U-7. In 1994 they were revamped again into U-1 to U-6. Despite the similar labels there were many methodological changes.

What makes today's rate measures seem so different from the rate measures in the recent past (like the low unemployment rates during the middle part of the Bush 43 administration), is that the number of people who have dropped out of the workforce completely is so much higher today. So at a 5.5% rate during the Bush years there was a much higher proportion of the population employed than at a 5.5% rate today with a much lower proportion of the population employed.

The Nonfarm Unemployment Rate used for the Roaring Twenties and the Dirty Thirties is somewhat similar to the U-6 rate today, with less caveats. The current U-3 official rate is 5.5%, while the current U-6 rate is 10.6%.

It is also an interesting comparison between how Canada measures unemployment and the U.S. If America used Canada's method, the result today would be close to 9%. Canada's current rate using their methodology is at 6.8%. So when comparing numbers, the official rates (apples and oranges) for each country shows that unemployment is lower in the U.S. than in Canada, but when similar methodologies are used (apples to apples) U.S. unemployment is much higher than in Canada. This is hardly surprising, since Canada was one of the only western nations that went through the 2008 financial crisis relatively unscathed, because there was no real estate bubble bust (they had virtually no subprime mortgages or corresponding derivatives market). There is no Obama malaise in Canada.

[Georgia Girl 2]

I just look at the statistics of approx. 141 million people of working age and 92 million people out of work. Whatever the real number it is as bad as the Great Depression or worse. It sure is not 5.6%

If we did not have SS, 2 yrs of unemployment insurance, food stamps and welfare people would be starving in the streets right now. The soup kitchen lines would be a mile long.

Sadly as long as BHO is in office nothing will get better.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>Sadly as long as BHO is in office nothing will get better.<<<

Too true.

>>>If we did not have SS, 2 yrs of unemployment insurance, food stamps and welfare people would be starving in the streets right now. The soup kitchen lines would be a mile long.<<<

The irony is that if there never were SS, 2 yrs of unemployment insurance, food stamps and welfare, and these things were instead left to the free market and charities, along with no mandated subprime mortgages and Obama's total failure of a stimulus plan, the American economy would probably be leading the world in the midst of a technology and energy boom.

All one has to do is look at history. The Roaring Twenties proves that austerity works to produce incredible prosperity. The Dirty Thirties illustrates without a doubt that stimulus economics and bigger government produces malaise.

[iowamark]

interesting

[DeprogramLiberalism]

The new official unemployment rate came out today, down to 5.3% from 5.5% last month.

 

 

Don't be impressed. Here's why:

Jobs Report Disappoints, Participation Rate Falls to Lowest Since 1977

 

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

And Stockman will be the first to tell you, “Statistics are malleable.”

[ForYourChildren]

When unemployment was 25% in 1932-33, there were NO federal transfer payments. People really FELT unemployment, and had to line up at soup kitchens, flop houses, etc.

With all the welfare in various forms, it’s easy to believe we have 42% unemployment without visible soup kitchens, apple sellers, etc.

---

Exactly.

I had a friend of mine a couple of years ago, after I told him this depression is worst than the great depression, ask me in a condescending way why he doesn’t see any soup lines just like the great depression. My response was just like yours. And I asked him if he had ever seen someone at the store with ebt cards. He said yes. I said, there are the soup lines, they have ebt cards, etc. He said he got it..

[Arthur McGowan]

What things like automation mean is that employment, ON AVERAGE, requires more education. Of course, there are many openings for people with a third-grade education, but not as many.

Of course, the diabolically evil people running our society are making sure that many high school and college graduates DO have a third-grade education.

Higher productivity SHOULD mean greater wealth for everybody. What the diabolically evil people making our tax policy, regulations, etc., are doing is making sure that a small number of people are productive enough to keep society sort-of functioning, while huge numbers of people are being aborted, and destroyed intellectually and physically after birth, incapable of being mothers and fathers, etc., etc.

[MUDDOG]

Thanks! I feel better about my post now.

[Pajamajan]

Bookmark

[DoodleDawg]

Between 16 and 68, there are 210 million Americans, and 93 million -- 40% -- of them, are not working.

Of that 93 million, how many are high school or in college and not working for that reason? How many are over 63, retired and drawing Social Security? How may cannot work for medical reasons? How many are not working out of choice, stay at home moms and the like?