625K People Give Up Looking For A Job

[boedicca]

pinqy:

Which table in the report you provided includes the alternate measures of labor utilization?

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

I am not going to read through 146 pages to find it. If you can't show the courtesy of posting specific data that is responsive to the discussion, I'm not going to do your research for you.

The table at the link I posted was revised in 1994 to eliminate U7 unemployment - U6 plus long term discouraged workers.

And here is the statement at the BLS which notes the change in metholodgy:


October 1995, Vol. 118, No. 10
BLS introduces new range of alternative unemployment measures

John E. Bregger
Assistant Commissioner for Current Employment Analysis (Retired), Bureau of Labor Statistics

Steven E. Haugen
Economist, Division of Labor Force Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Some of the original BLS unemployment indicators, U-1 through U-7, have been retained as part of the new range, U-1 through U-6; several new measures make use of data heretofore unavailable from the CPS. This article provides a brief history of the old range of alternative measures and reviews the impact of the redesigned CPS on the pre-1994 series, before introducing the new set of unemployment measures.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1995/10/art3abs.htm

 

[pinqy]

pinqy:

Which table in the report you provided includes the alternate measures of labor utilization?

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

I am not going to read through 146 pages to find it. If you can't show the courtesy of posting specific data that is responsive to the discussion, I'm not going to do your research for you.

The table at the link I posted was revised in 1994 to eliminate U7 unemployment - U6 plus long term discouraged workers.

And here is the statement at the BLS which notes the change in metholodgy:


October 1995, Vol. 118, No. 10
BLS introduces new range of alternative unemployment measures

John E. Bregger
Assistant Commissioner for Current Employment Analysis (Retired), Bureau of Labor Statistics

Steven E. Haugen
Economist, Division of Labor Force Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Some of the original BLS unemployment indicators, U-1 through U-7, have been retained as part of the new range, U-1 through U-6; several new measures make use of data heretofore unavailable from the CPS. This article provides a brief history of the old range of alternative measures and reviews the impact of the redesigned CPS on the pre-1994 series, before introducing the new set of unemployment measures.

BLS introduces new range of alternative unemployment measures (ABSTRACT) Monthly Labor Review Online, Oct. 1995

I wasn't talking about alternative measures when responding to the claim (from I forget who) that the definition of unemployment changed in 1994. I said that the definition of unemployed did not change in 1994. And it did not (except for people waiting to start work). Adding the U-6 as a measure in no way affected the UE rate. And I did point out that the old U-7, the only measure that included Discouraged, is in no way comparable to the U-6, so it's ridiculous to claim that adding on to the U-6 with an assumption of the number of people who have not looked for work in over a year but claim they are discouraged, is in anyway an historical continuation.

I actually did mean to post that article in this thread...I've posted it before. And I've known Steve Haugen for years. It was he who told me that even when the definition did allow for discouraged workers (pre-1967), it was not systematically used and was at the interviewer's discretion.

The U-6 is NOT a measure of Unemployment...it includes people who are employed.

To clarify....CHANGING ALTERNATIVE MEASURES DID NOT AFFECT THE DEFINITION OF UNEMPLOYED NOR THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE.

I don't know how I can be any clearer. Either you don't get it, don't care, or are deliberately being misleading. I said the change in discouraged workers didnt' affect the UE rate, and you said I was wrong and then went off about the U-6. You can't say I'm wrong about the U-3, which is what was being discussed, by bringing up the U-6.

 

[Paulie]

These are logical results. The cratering of the economy has been felt most deeply in the construction, housing, and related manufacturing industries. I'd add autos, but the government has softened the impact via unwarranted bail outs to unions.

When it comes to all the construction trades, I guarantee you that those who are better than average, to exceptional, at what they do, are still working.

Most guys in those fields are drug addicts and alcoholics looking for a week's paycheck and a fix.

The ones who are good, stay working whenever there's ANYTHING around to be done. There might not be tons of new houses going up, but there's plenty of existing ones that need fixing up. Toilets still break, water heaters still go bad, pipes still bursts, things still need to be built and/or fixed.

and I'll continue to say though, that it is still variable by location. We can't be using Vegas as an example, that's ridiculous.

 

[judyd]

These are logical results. The cratering of the economy has been felt most deeply in the construction, housing, and related manufacturing industries. I'd add autos, but the government has softened the impact via unwarranted bail outs to unions.

When it comes to all the construction trades, I guarantee you that those who are better than average, to exceptional, at what they do, are still working.

Most guys in those fields are drug addicts and alcoholics looking for a week's paycheck and a fix.

The ones who are good, stay working whenever there's ANYTHING around to be done. There might not be tons of new houses going up, but there's plenty of existing ones that need fixing up. Toilets still break, water heaters still go bad, pipes still bursts, things still need to be built and/or fixed.

and I'll continue to say though, that it is still variable by location. We can't be using Vegas as an example, that's ridiculous.

What??? You just insulted thousands of decent hardworking individuals with that ignorant statement. Most guys in construction are NOT drug addicts or alcoholics. They take pride in their work which is pretty backbreaking and dangerous for the most part. They work in the worst weather--either grueling hot or icy cold. My son had his own custom framing company and had a few crews working on the eastern shore of virginia. When the housing market started falling apart, it was a gradual thing--jobs were pushed back, contractors would cut his rate at the same time the price of materials increased. For a year he was working 12 hour days with nothing to show for it after he paid expenses and payroll. He had to start laying some people off, and then more, and when the work finally stopped and no one was pulling permits, he had to sell most of his equipment to pay bills.

He finally did find other work at a convenience store, and has said he will never go into construction again. But he has some beautiful homes that he built and still has a great reputation for quality work and outstanding crews.

 

[Paulie]

These are logical results. The cratering of the economy has been felt most deeply in the construction, housing, and related manufacturing industries. I'd add autos, but the government has softened the impact via unwarranted bail outs to unions.

When it comes to all the construction trades, I guarantee you that those who are better than average, to exceptional, at what they do, are still working.

Most guys in those fields are drug addicts and alcoholics looking for a week's paycheck and a fix.

The ones who are good, stay working whenever there's ANYTHING around to be done. There might not be tons of new houses going up, but there's plenty of existing ones that need fixing up. Toilets still break, water heaters still go bad, pipes still bursts, things still need to be built and/or fixed.

and I'll continue to say though, that it is still variable by location. We can't be using Vegas as an example, that's ridiculous.

What??? You just insulted thousands of decent hardworking individuals with that ignorant statement. Most guys in construction are NOT drug addicts or alcoholics. They take pride in their work which is pretty backbreaking and dangerous for the most part. They work in the worst weather--either grueling hot or icy cold. My son had his own custom framing company and had a few crews working on the eastern shore of virginia. When the housing market started falling apart, it was a gradual thing--jobs were pushed back, contractors would cut his rate at the same time the price of materials increased. For a year he was working 12 hour days with nothing to show for it after he paid expenses and payroll. He had to start laying some people off, and then more, and when the work finally stopped and no one was pulling permits, he had to sell most of his equipment to pay bills.

He finally did find other work at a convenience store, and has said he will never go into construction again. But he has some beautiful homes that he built and still has a great reputation for quality work and outstanding crews.

Don't fucking tell me. I've seen so many fucking pieces of shit in that industry that I've lost a little faith in humanity. Never in my life have I seen so many losers come and go.

Crack pipes brought to work, people still drunk from the night before, sliding off and running up to the beach to bang a needle at lunch time.

Fucking go try and fool someone else. Construction is where life's LOSERS end up. The good ones in the industry are diamonds in the rough. Those are the ones who have the best shot at finding work if they're resourceful enough. Your son's crew members should be out pimping themselves and trying to undercut the established competition. There's work out there, I'm telling you. It's just that now it's reserved only for the best of the best.

I'm not going to argue with you about this. I'm in the industry and I see it everyday.

 

[judyd]

When it comes to all the construction trades, I guarantee you that those who are better than average, to exceptional, at what they do, are still working.

Most guys in those fields are drug addicts and alcoholics looking for a week's paycheck and a fix.

The ones who are good, stay working whenever there's ANYTHING around to be done. There might not be tons of new houses going up, but there's plenty of existing ones that need fixing up. Toilets still break, water heaters still go bad, pipes still bursts, things still need to be built and/or fixed.

and I'll continue to say though, that it is still variable by location. We can't be using Vegas as an example, that's ridiculous.

What??? You just insulted thousands of decent hardworking individuals with that ignorant statement. Most guys in construction are NOT drug addicts or alcoholics. They take pride in their work which is pretty backbreaking and dangerous for the most part. They work in the worst weather--either grueling hot or icy cold. My son had his own custom framing company and had a few crews working on the eastern shore of virginia. When the housing market started falling apart, it was a gradual thing--jobs were pushed back, contractors would cut his rate at the same time the price of materials increased. For a year he was working 12 hour days with nothing to show for it after he paid expenses and payroll. He had to start laying some people off, and then more, and when the work finally stopped and no one was pulling permits, he had to sell most of his equipment to pay bills.

He finally did find other work at a convenience store, and has said he will never go into construction again. But he has some beautiful homes that he built and still has a great reputation for quality work and outstanding crews.

Don't fucking tell me. I've seen so many fucking pieces of shit in that industry that I've lost a little faith in humanity. Never in my life have I seen so many losers come and go.

Crack pipes brought to work, people still drunk from the night before, sliding off and running up to the beach to bang a needle at lunch time.

Fucking go try and fool someone else. Construction is where life's LOSERS end up. The good ones in the industry are diamonds in the rough. Those are the ones who have the best shot at finding work if they're resourceful enough. Your son's crew members should be out pimping themselves and trying to undercut the established competition. There's work out there, I'm telling you. It's just that now it's reserved only for the best of the best.

I'm not going to argue with you about this. I'm in the industry and I see it everyday.

You're just ignorant then. No CUSTOM builder is going to keep drug users or alcoholics on his payroll. Maybe some of the national builders do because they pay so little and aren't concerned with quality so much as quantity, but a custom builder's work is exact with pinpoint accuracy. They're building the rafters, not just throwing trusses up, and the workers need to be steady and precise. Many of the homes they built were three stories on top of pilings over the water. You need the best people for jobs like that.

There's a huge difference in quality between some cheap Ryan or Centex home and a custom built home. If you were actually in the business you would know the difference.

 

[boedicca]

pinqy:

Which table in the report you provided includes the alternate measures of labor utilization?

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

I am not going to read through 146 pages to find it. If you can't show the courtesy of posting specific data that is responsive to the discussion, I'm not going to do your research for you.

The table at the link I posted was revised in 1994 to eliminate U7 unemployment - U6 plus long term discouraged workers.

And here is the statement at the BLS which notes the change in metholodgy:


October 1995, Vol. 118, No. 10
BLS introduces new range of alternative unemployment measures

John E. Bregger
Assistant Commissioner for Current Employment Analysis (Retired), Bureau of Labor Statistics

Steven E. Haugen
Economist, Division of Labor Force Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Some of the original BLS unemployment indicators, U-1 through U-7, have been retained as part of the new range, U-1 through U-6; several new measures make use of data heretofore unavailable from the CPS. This article provides a brief history of the old range of alternative measures and reviews the impact of the redesigned CPS on the pre-1994 series, before introducing the new set of unemployment measures.

BLS introduces new range of alternative unemployment measures (ABSTRACT) Monthly Labor Review Online, Oct. 1995

I wasn't talking about alternative measures when responding to the claim (from I forget who) that the definition of unemployment changed in 1994. I said that the definition of unemployed did not change in 1994. And it did not (except for people waiting to start work). Adding the U-6 as a measure in no way affected the UE rate. And I did point out that the old U-7, the only measure that included Discouraged, is in no way comparable to the U-6, so it's ridiculous to claim that adding on to the U-6 with an assumption of the number of people who have not looked for work in over a year but claim they are discouraged, is in anyway an historical continuation.

I actually did mean to post that article in this thread...I've posted it before. And I've known Steve Haugen for years. It was he who told me that even when the definition did allow for discouraged workers (pre-1967), it was not systematically used and was at the interviewer's discretion.

The U-6 is NOT a measure of Unemployment...it includes people who are employed.

To clarify....CHANGING ALTERNATIVE MEASURES DID NOT AFFECT THE DEFINITION OF UNEMPLOYED NOR THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE.

I don't know how I can be any clearer. Either you don't get it, don't care, or are deliberately being misleading. I said the change in discouraged workers didnt' affect the UE rate, and you said I was wrong and then went off about the U-6. You can't say I'm wrong about the U-3, which is what was being discussed, by bringing up the U-6.

Hello? I never said that the 1994 defintion affected U-3. I was discussing the broader (more accurate of the real state of the economy) definition of U6.

 

[Paulie]

What??? You just insulted thousands of decent hardworking individuals with that ignorant statement. Most guys in construction are NOT drug addicts or alcoholics. They take pride in their work which is pretty backbreaking and dangerous for the most part. They work in the worst weather--either grueling hot or icy cold. My son had his own custom framing company and had a few crews working on the eastern shore of virginia. When the housing market started falling apart, it was a gradual thing--jobs were pushed back, contractors would cut his rate at the same time the price of materials increased. For a year he was working 12 hour days with nothing to show for it after he paid expenses and payroll. He had to start laying some people off, and then more, and when the work finally stopped and no one was pulling permits, he had to sell most of his equipment to pay bills.

He finally did find other work at a convenience store, and has said he will never go into construction again. But he has some beautiful homes that he built and still has a great reputation for quality work and outstanding crews.

Don't fucking tell me. I've seen so many fucking pieces of shit in that industry that I've lost a little faith in humanity. Never in my life have I seen so many losers come and go.

Crack pipes brought to work, people still drunk from the night before, sliding off and running up to the beach to bang a needle at lunch time.

Fucking go try and fool someone else. Construction is where life's LOSERS end up. The good ones in the industry are diamonds in the rough. Those are the ones who have the best shot at finding work if they're resourceful enough. Your son's crew members should be out pimping themselves and trying to undercut the established competition. There's work out there, I'm telling you. It's just that now it's reserved only for the best of the best.

I'm not going to argue with you about this. I'm in the industry and I see it everyday.

You're just ignorant then. No CUSTOM builder is going to keep drug users or alcoholics on his payroll. Maybe some of the national builders do because they pay so little and aren't concerned with quality so much as quantity, but a custom builder's work is exact with pinpoint accuracy. They're building the rafters, not just throwing trusses up, and the workers need to be steady and precise. Many of the homes they built were three stories on top of pilings over the water. You need the best people for jobs like that.

There's a huge difference in quality between some cheap Ryan or Centex home and a custom built home. If you were actually in the business you would know the difference.

I love it when someone outside of the subject they're speaking about tries to tell someone who's INSIDE what the deal is.

Before the crash, an employer would hire any idiot to get a day's work done. If the idiot couldn't hang, another idiot was hired. Now, only the most capable are being hired.

You have ONE example of someone you happen to know personally that's in the business, meanwhile I'm in the industry and deal with this situation everyday on multiple fronts.

Everyone I know that's good at what they do, is working. Some are working for someone, others have gone off and taken advantage of the fact that a lot of companies went belly up, or can't afford to lower their prices enough to not lose a job to a smaller entrepreneur.

And by the way, the unions around here? They're probably more infested with alcoholics and drug addicts than anyone else. It's so bad that when a contractor calls for manpower on a job that will require a piss test, the union reps notify their selections beforehand and tell them that if they won't pass the test, don't bother coming in because they will be blacklisted if they fail.

Available manpower drops by a large percentage when there's a job that requires a piss test.

Most men can come to work and sneak a day in, maybe a week, even if they're not good at the task. Some get by on just being a laborer, and some simply fake their abilities for a week only to eventually show their true colors. And most of those men are doing so to make a paycheck and get high.

This recession was a fucking kick in the ass to those idiots, because like I said, now only the BEST are staying employed, while the drug addicts are resorting to crime to chase their addictions.

If you can do good work, you can make some money.

 

[pinqy]

Hello? I never said that the 1994 defintion affected U-3. I was discussing the broader (more accurate of the real state of the economy) definition of U6.

Let's follow the thread:

yup thats the real deal also in 94 I believe the bls changed the way( with a little prompting form you know who) they advertise post the figures....the real unemployment rate is much higher absent this fanciful people gave up dodge.

The uniformed sheep are like wow the unemployment rate went down and we lost jobs...what? duh...no, they just make it appear that way by creating their own benchmark purely for their own ( the party at the time) aggrandizement.

He is clearly referring to changes in the official rate, making the claim that changes were made in 1994 that affected the UE rate. so I replied:

You believe wrongly. The only changes to the definition of Unemployment in 1994 was that people waiting to start a job are no longer counted as unemployed unless they looked for work in the previous 4 weeks, and military were removed from the Population (that had the effect of raising the UE rate). Discouraged workers have NEVER been systematically included. Before 1967 it was included in the definition, but only for areas of particular economic hardship and it was up to the interviewer's discretion.

Now, if you want to claim political hijinxs in the rate, go ahead and present your evidence. You won't find any because it doesn't happen. I doubt you even realize what would be involved to try to manipulate the figures.

All of which is true. I was cleary referring to the definition of Unemployment and how there were no significant changes to its definition in 1994. You replied with:

That is incorrect. In 1994, the BLS stopped including Long Term Discouraged Workers to the definition of U6 unemployment. Short Term Discouraged workers are still counted, but not long term.

Which is a non sequitur. That changes were made in the definition of Discouraged doesn't have anything to do with my claim that no significant changes were made in the UE rate. So I have no idea what you thought I said was incorrect unless you were trying to say the definition of Unemployed was changed by the change in definition of discouraged.

Are you seriously claiming that when I'm talking about the definition of unemployment and only the definition of unemployment and you tell me I'm wrong, I'm not supposed to think you're talking about the same subject as I am?