According to this information, I wonder who is benefiting from the "roaring economy" other than a very few who never have to worry about being one of these statistics that speak volumes:
Pre-Recession Unemployment Rates
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/srgune_02292008.pdf
The annual average U.S. jobless rate was 4.6 percent in 2007 unchanged from 2006, while the national employment-population ratio was essentially unchanged at 63.0 percent."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take a look at the Unemployment Rate from the start of the recession December 2007/2008 to present day in your state (California for example here):
California unemployment rates 1976-2011
Year Labor Force Employed No-Work U3 U6
2011 18,103,800 15,974,800 2,129,000 11.8 16.2
2010 18,176,200 15,916,300 2,259,900 12.4 16.6
2009 18,204,200 16,141,500 2,062,700 11.3 16.7
2008 18,191,000 16,883,400 1,307,600 7.2 10.8
2007 17,928,700 16,970,200 958,500 5.3 8.4
California unemployment statistics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California Unemployment 2012
Unemployment Rate December 2012 Month/Month Year/Year
National 7.8% 0.0 -0.7
California 9.8% 0.0 -1.4
California State Unemployment Rate and Total Unemployed | Department of Numbers
California Unemployment History
January 2013 7.9% — —
December 2012 7.8% 9.8% 1,804,922
November 2012 7.8% 9.8% 1,806,090
October 2012 7.9% 10.1% 1,848,357
September 2012 7.8% 10.2% 1,876,533
August 2012 8.1% 10.6% 1,935,572
July 2012 8.2% 10.7% 1,962,259
June 2012 8.2% 10.7% 1,974,131
May 2012 8.2% 10.8% 1,994,056
April 2012 8.1% 10.9% 2,006,458
March 2012 8.2% 11.0% 2,031,074
February 2012 8.3% 10.9% 2,012,350
January 2012 8.3% 10.9% 2,019,491
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 Summary by City shows the REAL UI Rate Story:
Metropolitan Area Unemployment Rates | Department of Numbers
Bakersfield, CA 13.2% 0.0% 50,523 88
Chico, CA 11.7% -0.2% 11,766 -76
El Centro, CA 27.2% -0.3% 21,037 -130
Fresno, CA 14.4% 0.0% 64,090 206
Hanford, CA 14.4% -0.2% 9,024 -62
Los Angeles, CA 9.4% 0.0% 609,054 3,368
Madera, CA 13.5% 0.0% 8,803 -12
Merced, CA 16.8% -0.1% 18,394 5
Modesto, CA 14.9% 0.0% 34,896 5
Napa, CA 7.4% -0.1% 5,621 -39
Oxnard, CA 8.6% 0.0% 37,726 48
Redding, CA 12.3% -0.3% 10,456 -75
Riverside, CA 11.4% -0.1% 206,077 -661
Sacramento, CA 9.9% 0.0% 103,191 -189
Salinas, CA 10.8% -0.1% 25,130 -86
San Diego, CA 8.4% -0.1% 135,085 -654
San Francisco, CA 7.7% 0.0% 177,255 -574
San Jose, CA 7.9% -0.1% 75,451 -241
San Luis Obispo, CA 7.4% -0.1% 10,483 -94
Santa Barbara, CA 7.4% 0.0% 17,115 -14
Santa Cruz, CA 10.1% -0.1% 15,919 -20
Santa Rosa, CA 7.9% 0.0% 20,697 -3
Stockton, CA 14.1% -0.1% 42,823 20
Vallejo, CA 9.5% -0.1% 20,785 31
Visalia, CA 15.1% -0.2% 31,608 -218
Yuba City, CA 16.7% -0.2% 11,743 -4
2012 State Unemployment Rate examples showing that still most have at least 10% Unemployment Rate difference, when compared to the 2008 recession start
State Unemployment | Department of Numbers
Alabama 7.1% -0.4 152,638 -9,531
Alaska 6.6% -0.1 24,152 -279
Arizona 7.9% 0.1 238,343 1,982
Arkansas 7.1% 0.1 96,173 223
California 9.8% 0.0 1,804,922 -1,168
Colorado 7.6% -0.1 208,176 -1,274
Connecticut 8.6% -0.3 160,469 -6,223
Delaware 6.9% 0.2 30,500 859
District of Columbia 8.5% 0.2 31,068 701
Florida 8.0% -0.1 748,874 -11,796
Georgia 8.6% 0.1 413,942 4,742
Hawaii 5.2% -0.1 33,523 -439
Idaho 6.6% -0.2 50,846 -1,508
Illinois 8.7% 0.0 576,612 1,710
Indiana 8.2% 0.2 259,765 7,327
Iowa 4.9% 0.0 79,964 -268
Kansas 5.4% 0.0 80,401 -510
Kentucky 8.1% -0.1 169,754 -819
Louisiana 5.5% -0.3 114,838 -5,103
Maine 7.3% 0.1 51,395 81
Maryland 6.6% 0.0 206,719 2,722
Massachusetts 6.7% 0.1 234,302 4,204
Michigan 8.9% 0.0 412,576 391
Minnesota 5.5% -0.1 164,836 -3,153
Mississippi 8.6% 0.1 115,407 2,499
Missouri 6.7% 0.0 200,899 -1,512
Montana 5.7% -0.1 29,239 -299
Nebraska 3.7% 0.0 38,540 357
Nevada 10.2% -0.6 138,772 -8,855
New Hampshire 5.7% 0.1 42,031 435
New Jersey 9.6% -0.1 443,802 -720
New Mexico 6.4% 0.2 59,561 2,076
New York 8.2% -0.1 786,795 -6,757
North Carolina 9.2% 0.1 438,864 6,997
North Dakota 3.2% 0.1 12,653 457
Ohio 6.7% -0.1 387,673 -3,341
Oklahoma 5.1% -0.1 93,321 -822
Oregon 8.4% 0.0 163,973 -1,371
Pennsylvania 7.9% 0.1 516,658 4,333
Rhode Island 10.2% -0.2 57,799 -857
South Carolina 8.4% 0.1 180,032 3,211
South Dakota 4.4% 0.0 19,488 -116
Tennessee 7.6% 0.0 235,675 -195
Texas 6.1% -0.1 771,287 -10,784
Utah 5.2% 0.1 70,982 1,382
Vermont 5.1% -0.1 18,037 -733
Virginia 5.5% -0.1 238,155 -3,492
Washington 7.6% -0.1 262,475 -6,307
West Virginia 7.5% 0.2 59,709 1,092
Wisconsin 6.6% 0.0 202,174 -453
Wyoming 4.9% -0.2 14,893 -488
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Unemployment Rate 2003-2013 (NOT the U6 measurement for discouraged workers and other factors...see below)
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 9.0 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.3
2011 9.1 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.9 8.6 8.5
2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.1 7.8 7.9 7.8 7.8
2013 7.9
The government says the recession "ended" in June 2009 when the Unemployment Rate was 9.5%, but it later peaked to 10% nationally in October of 2009 and has not moved down far enough to be close enough to the "pre-recession/crisis/downturn" numbers. One of the main reasons unemployment numbers are going down is not because new jobs have been added, it is because people have stopped looking for work because they cannot find any or enough to survive (and their benefits usually have run out as well):
The Unemployment Report Wasn’t Rigged, but It’s Not Accurate, Either
U.S. Unemployment Rate Blind Spot: Discouraged Workers Muddy the Stats | TIME.com
"All this back and forth underscores the fact that the unemployment rate is not the cut-and-dried, authoritative statistic that the media often portray it to be. The so-called discouraged worker is one factor that muddies the data, for example. The Labor Department determines the unemployment rate by surveying 60,000 households and asking respondents a series of questions to determine their employment status. If a citizen is out of work but hasn’t looked for a job in the past four weeks, he isn’t considered employed or unemployed; he simply isn’t counted as part of the labor force."
"The reason for this is simple: a retired person, say, or a parent who voluntarily stays home to raise his children shouldn’t be considered unemployed. The problem is that, using this methodology, someone who becomes so discouraged by the state of the job market that he gives up looking for work won’t be counted as unemployed either, even though logic says he should be. Ideally, you want to have a measure that eliminates people who are obviously not in the labor force, like stay-at-home parents, but includes people who want work but can’t get it, like discouraged workers."
"It turns out that tracking the discouraged-worker population is only one of the difficulties in measuring the unemployment rate. To mitigate these kinds of problems and give the public a better understanding of the total employment picture, the Labor Department issues six different measures of employment, with the official rate being just one of the six. The most inclusive measure, called U6, classifies discouraged workers (as well as those who are working part time but would like to work full time) as unemployed. In a sluggish economic recovery the U6 rate may be a better barometer for the state of the economy. And by this measure, the economy is improving at a slower pace than the official rate indicates."
Portal Seven | U6 Unemployment Rate
Unemployment Rate - U6
2006
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
8.4 8.4 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.0 8.2 8.1 7.9
2007
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
8.4 8.2 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.8
2008
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
9.2 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.7 10.1 10.5 10.8 11.0 11.8 12.6 13.6
2009
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
14.2 15.1 15.7 15.9 16.4 16.5 16.5 16.7 16.7 17.1 17.1 17.1
2010
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
16.7 17.0 17.0 17.1 16.6 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.8 16.7 16.9 16.6
2011
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
16.2 16.0 15.8 16.0 15.8 16.1 16.0 16.1 16.3 16.0 15.5 15.2
2012
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
15.1 15.0 14.5 14.5 14.8 14.8 14.9 14.7 14.7 14.5 14.4 14.4
"Recovery" extended unemployment benefits:
EB Program "triggered OFF" 2012+. EUC08 program has been extended to the end of 2013.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portal Seven | U6 Unemployment Rate
These are the "real" unemployment numbers that some speak of and look to, showing the "discourage workers" and the workers who are not working full time compared to their pre-recession levels (above).
What is U6 unemployment rate ?
The U6 unemployment rate counts not only people without work seeking full-time employment (the more familiar U-3 rate), but also counts "marginally attached workers and those working part-time for economic reasons." Note that some of these part-time workers counted as employed by U-3 could be working as little as an hour a week. And the "marginally attached workers" include those who have gotten discouraged and stopped looking, but still want to work. The age considered for this calculation is 16 years and over.
Is the economy "roaring"?
Related Petitions
https://www.change.org/petitions/de...re-robbing-the-unemployed-out-of-recovery-aid
https://www.change.org/petitions/co...nt-benefits-program-look-back-trigger-anomaly
