625K People Give Up Looking For A Job

[KissMy]

The Real Employment situation keeps getting worse!

 

[mascale]

Usual summer school stopped in 2009 in many, many school districts. If those are still gone, and the teacher isn't looking, then the labor force is less. The Retirees at the Census are less. Then there are the Gulf Coast impacted who notice that "help wanted' no longer exists, and they know why. So employment to them is filing for the settlement monies, but that is not employment.

There are six months of establishment data gains. Construction was a negative in June, and so there is the Summer Stimulus of contruction-related projects--Getting Started. Summer starts more in July.

There were job losses starting many months ago. Now there are gains. That is not a symptom of zero or negative job growth.

Others used to know that. The retiree with the the job is now the retiree without the job. That skews a ratio. The Gulf Coast impacted, who now has a check but used to have a job, is now the the Gulf Coast impacted who used to have job, but now has no job. That skews a ratio. The Teacher Who Caused It All, who used to have a summer school job, now has no such job. That is poetic justice, but that skews a ratio.

The Teachers refused to do payroll, pay raise arithmetic properly. The teachers are the cause--along with anyone supportive of them!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(The Colonies have their arithmetic problems, certain!)

 

[mascale]

The Employment Situation data actually provide the better understanding of what has been going on since April

Employment-population ratio:

April--58.8
May--58.7
June--58.5

Some jobs created have been temporary, and some have been temporarily shut down in the Gulf, and for some it is poetic justice.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred"
(The teachers do teach the Manzanar Concept, of the basic civil right to a pittance--and fervor and gusto, saying: "See! That's the life for me and the little critters in my classroom!" Presumably adults all know this. They Ivy league clearly knows this. The Schvartz Ivy League, possibly, even know this, "Nearer, My God(!), To Thee!")

 

[topspin]

Unemployment will stay bad for unskilled for a long time. College grad unemployment is under 5 percent.

 

[pinqy]

U this and U that. It is all crap. If you go to the Universities that conduct independent surveys, you will find that they consistently tabulate that the DOL numbers are a total fabrication. The actual number of unemployed in the United States is well over 30 million and rising.

We've been waiting for you to post a link and back up that claim for a long time now, yet you never do. So we'll just have to file it with Bigfoot and UFO sightings. You can claim anything you want, but if you never produce any evidence to back it up, there's no reason to believe you.

And you never address the fact that the independent Gallup poll consistantly matches the BLS numbers. Are you claiming Gallup is in conspiracy with the Government, or is it an independent conspiracy that coincidentally matches the BLS figures.

Of course you're going to call me a liar, without saying what I'm lying about. Try to do so for once. The only possible lies I could make in this post would be if you have shown your evidence (which you haven't) or if the Gallup numbers don't match BLS (which they do, within a small margin of error).

 

[jeffrockit]

Zero chance of double dip. 85,000 private sector jobs and May revised up 15,000.

The 83,000 jobs added by the private sector was a better performance than in May, when private job creation nearly stalled. But it fell far short of what the economy needs – at least 200,000 jobs a month – to bring down the unemployment rate.
Unemployment Rate Dips Slightly, But U.S. Economy Sheds 125,000 Jobs In June

No where close to the numbers needed to avoid a DD recession. I would say that shows better than a zero chance.

 

[sparky]

the real problem?

Congresscritters need to acknowldge American labor as the numero uno economic foundation, and wall street as the numero uno enemy of it

terrorism isn't just about C4 vests

a populace can be humbled into submission via economics of pure treason

~S~

 

[pinqy]

Available (but not obvious) on the BLS website is an experimental series: Data flows for the CPS that gives a much better look at what's happening. In May, there were 14,369,000 Unemployed. 2,459,000 found jobs. 3,075,000 stopped looking (undetermined why or if they still wanted a job) and 4,000 left the population (died, joined the military, went to prison, left the country). And 9,436,000 stayed unemployed. At the same time, 2,248,000 went from Employed to Unemployed. 2,925,000 who hadn't been working or looking for work (Not in the Labor Force) started looking, and 14,000 joined the population as unemployed (graduated from school, turned 16, left prison or the military, immigrated).

The main reason for the change in Not in the Labor Force comes from the Employed category... 3,632,000 people left/lost their jobs but did not look for work in the period between the May and June surveys.

 

[sparky]

There's plenty of work out there.

really Paulie?

i remain somewhat dubious of that claim

i just don't belive 3 million Americans (or whatever the #) are too lazy, gave up, said screw it , etc here

THAT canard needs to end

the truth is, our Congress sold out to the free traitors, and nothing gets made in America anymore

even the service industry is drying up now

question> how many of you posting here had to actually actively look for employment in the last year or so?

~S~

 

[Neubarth]

I have four adult children living at home right now. Two have had the same jobs for the past five years or longer and two can not find work and do not have unemployment benefits. The two that are looking for work were honor students in high school and college, and apply to anything that is viable, but have not had an interview in three years now. I would say that there is a scarcity of jobs in southern California.

One, the validictorian of her high school class and a top honor graduate from college is about to give up and move to Seattle to see if there are any jobs up there. Actual unemployment in California is well over 25% and growing. The government, of course, says that it is half that.

Lies, lies, and more lies from government.

The government says that 14 to 15 Million are out of work. The reality is nationwide that well over 30 million are out of work. Anybody who claims that the government numbers are accurate is a damned lying sack of shit.

 

[Trajan]

Nice try blaming conservative pundits for including discouraged workers in the unemployment figures, but the Bureau For Labor statistics counts such workers in U4 through U6 definitions of unemployment.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics measures employment and unemployment (of those over 15 years of age) using two different labor force surveys[59] conducted by the United States Census Bureau (within the United States Department of Commerce) and/or the Bureau of Labor Statistics (within the United States Department of Labor) that gather employment statistics monthly. The Current Population Survey (CPS), or "Household Survey", conducts a survey based on a sample of 60,000 households. This Survey measures the unemployment rate based on the ILO definition.[60] The data are also used to calculate 5 alternate measures of unemployment as a percentage of the labor force based on different definitions noted as U1 through U6:[61]

* U1: Percentage of labor force unemployed 15 weeks or longer.
* U2: Percentage of labor force who lost jobs or completed temporary work.
* U3: Official unemployment rate per ILO definition.
* U4: U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.
* U5: U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or "loosely attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently.
* U6: U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but cannot due to economic reasons (underemployment).

Unemployment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

 

[Neubarth]

Double dip is negative. GDP will be positive and 6 month average on jobs is over 100,000

What?

 

[B. Kidd]

Unemployment will stay bad for unskilled for a long time. College grad unemployment is under 5 percent.

WHAAAAT!
Hey constantspin.
College grad unemployment, even in 2007, was not under 5 percent. Try 5.4 percent.
Currently, it hasn't quite doubled, but close, as it stands at 9.0 percent.
If you plan on retiring in 5 years, better start using real figures, other wise, see ya' in 10-15 years in the retirement ranks .

 

[boedicca]

Double dip is negative. GDP will be positive and 6 month average on jobs is over 100,000

30K below the required rate to keep up with inflation growth. It takes more than meagerly positive economic growth to create sufficient private sector jobs.

 

[Bullfighter]

I have four adult children living at home right now. Two have had the same jobs for the past five years or longer and two can not find work and do not have unemployment benefits. The two that are looking for work were honor students in high school and college, and apply to anything that is viable, but have not had an interview in three years now. I would say that there is a scarcity of jobs in southern California.

One, the validictorian of her high school class and a top honor graduate from college is about to give up and move to Seattle to see if there are any jobs up there. Actual unemployment in California is well over 25% and growing. The government, of course, says that it is half that.

Lies, lies, and more lies from government.

The government says that 14 to 15 Million are out of work. The reality is nationwide that well over 30 million are out of work. Anybody who claims that the government numbers are accurate is a damned lying sack of shit.

Get your chidren to tan up and practice broken English. Then have them go to a LA RAZA office because the US is helping only LATINOS in getting jobs in healthcare and other areas.
WELCOME TO LA MERICA!

 

[pinqy]

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.

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.

 

[boedicca]

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.

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.

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.

Shadow Stats adjusts for this methodological change, which results in real unemployment of close to 22%.

 

[judyd]

If you can use your hands and hammer nails, push a paint brush, fix a toilet, etc...

There's plenty of work out there. Maybe not plenty in ALL locations in the country, but there are people looking to get deals on that kind of work and those who know how to do it can undercut the established competition in the area.

It's my belief that a man should learn those skills regardless of what his career is, but there's too many pussies out there.

Suck it up, folks. There's way more bitching and crying going on in this country than there needs to be. We've truly become a nation of spoiled rotten BITCHES.

You're a bit out of touch there. You obviously have not been looking for work, or you would know that even for house cleaning and laborers, employers are looking for RECENT experience. If you think that a contractor is going to hire a computer programmer close to 40, who has no construction experience, you couldn't be more wrong. Even if someone has a lot of experience though, the older worker will still be passed over. Even if he (or she) is in good shape and has been healthy and fit all of his life.

Most of the people who are unemployed HAVE tried to get employment in other areas--jeez, any area! There just aren't nearly enough jobs to go around, and when 200 people apply for the same job, the odds of you getting it, are extremely slim.

And don't go pointing to all of the jobs on craigslist, like so many like to do. THEY AREN'T REAL JOBS!! Try applying to a couple and you will see that you'll get an instant response requiring you to pay for a credit background search. They're mostly scams with maybe one or two legitimate jobs among them.

 

[Neubarth]

It is very easy for the Government to lie like hell on the Unemployment Numbers. All they have to do is start off with a Labor Pool that is deficient about 15 Million people. As my friends in the DOL say with a smile, "If they aren't in the pool to start with, you never have to count them."

Such unbelievable corruption!

 

[Trajan]

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.

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.

what defines a 'discouraged worker'?