Unemployment

[Iriemon]

The lack of correlation suggests to me that the MW has not had a significant effect on teen unemployment relative to other factors, like the economy.

your post suggests to me that you have no business looking at any sort of data.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion. I presented the data. Maybe you see correlations I don't. Folks can make their own conclusions about it.

 

[Old Rocks]

Oh, so they're saying unemployment is 8.5%?

Okay, then the real rate of unemployment is probably around 17% or so.

Yeah, judging from what I'm seeing, I'd say that's about right...17%.

FYI, this appears to me to be worse than it was in the early 80s.

While the unemployment rate is getting higher, an even bigger problem is underemployment. There are many who are working but who have taken pay cuts as they have had to take on lower paying jobs or are only working part-time instead of full-time.

As far as I know, I am the only millwright still getting 40 hrs where I work. Everyone else has been cut to 32, with a week off once a month. And I have been invited to a lunch tomorrow. With the bosses. Hmmmm........ Oh well, six months unemployement, segueing right into SS. Might be in the wind. LOL

 

[Zoomie1980]

Oh, so they're saying unemployment is 8.5%?

Okay, then the real rate of unemployment is probably around 17% or so.

Yeah, judging from what I'm seeing, I'd say that's about right...17%.

FYI, this appears to me to be worse than it was in the early 80s.

Maybe in Michigan.... Kansas City, Omaha, Des Moine and Minneapolis currently sitting a combined 4.6%. Unemp in Nebraska (Omaha-Lincoln) actually went DOWN .1% last month. It;s almost like the recession has bypassed the heartland....

Depends on where you are......

 

[Zoomie1980]

This table shows the teen unemployment rate compared to the inflation adjusted MW rate in $2000 (calculated based upon the GDP inflation factor used by the Bur. Econ. Analysis):

Year - Unemp. rate - MW 2000$
1948 9.2 2.44
1949 13.4 2.45
1950 12.2 4.54
1951 8.2 4.23
1952 8.5 4.16
1953 7.6 4.11
1954 12.6 4.07
1955 11.0 4.00
1956 11.1 5.16
1957 11.6 4.99
1958 15.9 4.88
1959 14.6 4.82
1960 14.7 4.75
1961 16.8 5.40
1962 14.7 5.33
1963 17.2 5.73
1964 16.2 5.65
1965 14.8 5.55
1966 12.8 5.39
1967 12.9 5.86
1968 12.7 6.42
1969 12.2 6.12
1970 15.3 5.81
1971 16.9 5.53
1972 16.2 5.30
1973 14.5 5.02
1974 16.0 5.76
1975 19.9 5.53
1976 19.0 5.72
1977 17.8 5.38
1978 16.4 5.79
1979 16.1 5.85
1980 17.8 5.74
1981 19.6 5.67
1982 23.2 5.34
1983 22.4 5.14
1984 18.9 4.95
1985 18.6 4.81
1986 18.3 4.70
1987 16.9 4.58
1988 15.3 4.43
1989 15.0 4.26
1990 15.5 4.66
1991 18.7 5.03
1992 20.1 4.92
1993 19.0 4.81
1994 17.6 4.71
1995 17.3 4.61
1996 16.7 5.06
1997 16.0 5.40
1998 14.6 5.34
1999 13.9 5.26
2000 13.1 5.15
2001 14.7 5.03
2002 16.5 4.94
2003 17.5 4.84
2004 17.0 4.70
2005 16.6 4.56
2006 15.4 4.42


Same data in chart form:

The real MW has not changed dramatically since the 50s, varying between about $4.00 and $6.00 an hour in 2000 dollars. Yet the teen unemployment rate fluctuated widely. The lack of correlation suggests to me that the MW has not had a significant effect on teen unemployment relative to other factors, like the economy.

The Minimum Wage is, AT BEST, a marginal factor on business and the economy. Such a tiny percentage of the ADULT working world makes that so as to be negligible. The only people making it are teenagers and the mentally handicapped... ( lot of overlap there, of course).

 

[edthecynic]

Oh, so they're saying unemployment is 8.5%?

Okay, then the real rate of unemployment is probably around 17% or so.

Yeah, judging from what I'm seeing, I'd say that's about right...17%.

FYI, this appears to me to be worse than it was in the early 80s.

After Reagan's 1981 tax cuts, unemployment soared from 7.5% in Jan 1981 to 10.8% by Dec 1982. GDP for 1982 was down -6.8%

 

[Agnapostate]

I'm surprised neurosport hasn't at least made an attempt to refer to Brown, Gilroy, and Cohen.

 

[KittenKoder]

Editic demonstrated the huge flaw with unemployment rates, they are based on who is collecting unemployment and neglect those who can no longer collect because it runs out. Even the media admitted it once ... once, they had to in order to sensationalize it a bit (I almost passed out, honesty in media).

 

[DamnYankee]

the real question is how many people have MARKET JUSTIFIED and PRODUCTIVE jobs ?

government jobs are not productive

jobs created by stimulus packages, low interest rates, bailouts etc are not market justified

so of the people that DO have "jobs" a very large percentage of them aren't REAL jobs

if you work for GM or if you're in the construction industry or if you get one of them Obama Green jobs - consider yourself one of the unemployed. what you're getting is not salary - its unemployment insurance.

That was a rather a blanket indictment of government workers/jobs, although it is true that there is an "overload" and, indeed, some of those workers are counter-productive.

Government Workers Less Productive?

By: Richard Rahn
Washington Times
December 24, 2002


Which group of workers contributes most to the gross domestic product? One could have a lively debate about this question. As one who is a firm believer in small and limited government, I argue that two of the most productive workers are elementary school teachers, who teach children basic reading and math skills, and honest and wise judges.

It is hard to see how we could have a productive civil society without those who provide the basic training for our citizens, and those who enforce contracts and property rights. Most of the people who hold these positions are government employees.

It is also obvious that some of the least productive people, and in many cases counterproductive people, are also government employees. Examples include Immigration and Naturalization Service employees for letting in and failing to monitor the whereabouts of some of the September 11 hijackers, who were ineligible to be in the United States at that time. Despite possibly causing the deaths of several thousand Americans because they failed to do their jobs properly, none have been fired.

Other examples of government employees who do great damage are Internal Revenue Service officials who promulgate regulations that unnecessarily drive needed foreign investment out of the United States or who write regulations in such an incomprehensible manner that millions of man hours are wasted trying to decipher them. These actions cost the economy hundreds of billions of dollars, thus making all Americans a bit poorer.

For several decades Housing and Urban Development employees so poorly designed and mismanaged government housing programs that they quite literally created slums rather than eliminating them, causing millions to have inferior lives.

It is not just federal government employees who cause great economic damage. State and local government workers do as well. For instance, schools and universities are extremely inefficient. New technologies that could greatly increase the productivity of learning are resisted. As a former college professor and administrator, I saw first hand how the incompetent were protected and students suffered as a result. Just one small example, in most universities students are herded into large lecture halls where they can barely see the teacher let alone have any interaction with him or her. Would not students who are studying economics be far better off receiving the "lecture" portion of their courses from great classroom performers like Milton Friedman and Walter Williams through video feeds?

Millions rather than hundreds of students would then benefit from the extraordinary lucidity of their explanations, rather than listening to many mumbling incompetents who pretend to teach economics. Yes, this would reduce the employment of some who teach economics, but more would learn to everyone's betterment. The examples are almost infinite.

The private sector also has infinite examples of incompetent and corrupt behavior, as we have seen with the recent corporate scandals. The difference between private and government sectors is that people who perform poorly in the private sector usually lose their jobs eventually, whether they be top management or workers at the bottom end of the wage scale. Companies that don't root out the incompetent and the wasteful are driven out by competition.

Government has no equivalent self-correction mechanisms. Civil service unions and civil service regulations have made it almost impossible to fire incompetent workers. In 2001, only 434 civilian federal government workers, out of a workforce of approximately 3 million, were fired. This is a firing rate of only 0.02 percent, or approximately 1 in 5,000.

The inability to get rid of poor performers has a debilitating effect on the vast majority of workers who do an adequate or superior job, and undermines the public's respect for government workers in general. The inability to fire or adequately punish poorly performing employees, or sufficiently reward outstanding employees, greatly limits management's ability, hence the lower productivity levels normally found in government vs. the private sector.

The solution is to realize that most of the legitimate functions of government do not have to be done by government employees. Most government functions can be performed by private companies who compete on the basis of competency and cost effectiveness. Expansion of educational voucher programs would enable us to adequately reward great teachers and get rid of the incompetent. Simplification of the tax code would allow tens of thousands of IRS workers to find productive and meaningful employment in the private sector rather than being a dead-weight loss on the economy. Almost every area of government is capable of being simplified and contracted out. The problem is not "the government worker"; it is the system under which "government work" is done.

The Bush administration has announced a program to greatly expand the amount of "government work" contracted out, particularly in the Defense Department. This is a good first step, but the challenge to every elected official is to think outside the box about how to get the desired results from every legitimate government program without creating the damage that comes from socializing the work force.

Richard W. Rahn is a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute and an adjunct scholar of the Cato Institute
Discovery Institute - Article Database - Government Workers Less Productive?


Do you feel that your local government workers (building, public works, police, fire, health department) are all non-productive?

 

[editec]

Employment down, incomes down, purchasing power down.

Any way you look at it, the working classes are in trouble.

 

[Iriemon]

the real question is how many people have MARKET JUSTIFIED and PRODUCTIVE jobs ?

government jobs are not productive

jobs created by stimulus packages, low interest rates, bailouts etc are not market justified

so of the people that DO have "jobs" a very large percentage of them aren't REAL jobs

if you work for GM or if you're in the construction industry or if you get one of them Obama Green jobs - consider yourself one of the unemployed. what you're getting is not salary - its unemployment insurance.

That was a rather a blanket indictment of government workers/jobs, although it is true that there is an "overload" and, indeed, some of those workers are counter-productive.

Government Workers Less Productive?

By: Richard Rahn
Washington Times
December 24, 2002


Which group of workers contributes most to the gross domestic product? One could have a lively debate about this question. As one who is a firm believer in small and limited government, I argue that two of the most productive workers are elementary school teachers, who teach children basic reading and math skills, and honest and wise judges.

...

Richard W. Rahn is a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute and an adjunct scholar of the Cato Institute
Discovery Institute - Article Database - Government Workers Less Productive?


Do you feel that your local government workers (building, public works, police, fire, health department) are all non-productive?

I've suggested they cut the military for years. I wonder why that non-productive government endeavor was absent from the article. But what do you expect from Cato?

 

[editec]

But what do you expect from Cato?

CATO is the apologist thinktank for the superwealthy.

What I expect from them is more supply-sider apologist bullshit and they never disappoint me

 

[Iriemon]

But what do you expect from Cato?

CATO is the apologist thinktank for the superwealthy.

What I expect from them is more supply-sider apologist bullshit and they never disappoint me

I see all the time people post what are essentially op-ed pieces from blatantly biased sources, and then expect it to be persuasive to an argumet.

 

[Indiana Oracle]

The lack of correlation suggests to me that the MW has not had a significant effect on teen unemployment relative to other factors, like the economy.

your post suggests to me that you have no business looking at any sort of data.

Neuro --
Where on your site is the data you refer to?

 

[eots]

look it is eimply..


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99Dzdc1H0wM]YouTube - Vintage pro-inflation propaganda[/ame]

 

[neurosport]

The lack of correlation suggests to me that the MW has not had a significant effect on teen unemployment relative to other factors, like the economy.

your post suggests to me that you have no business looking at any sort of data.

Neuro --
Where on your site is the data you refer to?

i was talking about HIS data. in my view you can't conclude that there is no correlation from looking at it as he did.

perhaps if the chart started before the minimum wage was instituted and was normalized for overall unemployment rate we could draw conclusions ...

 

[editec]

your post suggests to me that you have no business looking at any sort of data.

Neuro --
Where on your site is the data you refer to?

i was talking about HIS data. in my view you can't conclude that there is no correlation from looking at it as he did.

perhaps if the chart started before the minimum wage was instituted and was normalized for overall unemployment rate we could draw conclusions ...

ACtually that has been done many timesm Neuro.

There is not a statstically significant corrleation between miniumum wage increases and unemployment.

Part of the reason for this is that so few people actually make minimum wage, so a change effects few businesses.

And the other reason is that a minimum wage law effects all businesses who pay that hourly rate equally, hence it does NOT disadvantage any minimum wage paying business any worse than their minimum wage paying competition.

What does force businesses to lay off workers is having to compete with businesses hiring workers in nations which do not protect their workers' wages.

Odd that you don't understand a concept so simple to grasp as that is.

 

[Agnapostate]

His analysis would be sound if perfect competition and information existed in labor markets. Inasmuch as they do not, it becomes fundamentally unsound.

 

[neurosport]

editec you need a lobotomy ...

agna you're a pseudointellectual poser ...

ed you can't "protect" wages. you don't protect anything by treating symptoms.

minimum wages are an example of FDR ( the president ) logic - logic of people who can never see more than one side of any problem at a time.

 

[Agnapostate]

I guess we can't all deal in that accursed argument format, can we?

 

[editec]

i guess we can't all deal in that accursed argument format, can we?

lol.